Least popular subjects at top universities
Moderators: Section Moderators, Forum Moderators
Re: Least popular subjects at top universities
That wasn't my meaning at all - it was just an anecdote to illustrate that not all Oxbridge classicists become high-flying city dealers.... It is a minority interest, but each to his own: certainly not an "easy" option.dinah wrote: I also take issue with the poster who said they knew a Classicist who became a Classics teacher as if this was somehow a second rate job.
Indeed I'm sure a high proportion of Oxbridge maths graduates become teachers too: of my peer group that I know about one is definitely a secondary teacher, one an accountant/ actuary, one in the Scottish Office and one in local government finance (at least until the cuts bite....)
Re: Least popular subjects at top universities
I said in earlier post that you had to be extremely clever to get onto a Natural Sciences course at Cambridge and even cleverer to come out the other end of it, but I don’t think you can extrapolate from that that they work harder than most. There isn’t necessarily a direct correlation between intelligence and hard work, is there?if you spend time there you will find that the general consensus is that NatScis work harder than most.
Re: Least popular subjects at top universities
Hope notRob Clark wrote: There isn’t necessarily a direct correlation between intelligence and hard work, is there?
mad?
Re: Least popular subjects at top universities
My husband went to Cambridge to read Natural Sciences and swapped to medicine after a year.
Definitely a triumph of intelligence over hard work, as far as I can remember he did virtually no work at all, being constantly on the river.
Works quite hard now though.
Definitely a triumph of intelligence over hard work, as far as I can remember he did virtually no work at all, being constantly on the river.
Works quite hard now though.
Re: Least popular subjects at top universities
it depends what you mean by hard work.
Certainly sciences have a very high number of hours spent in lectures/practicals etc. I think mine was 26 hrs a week. Humanities students have fewer contact hours but spend a lot of their time with background reading etc. they have to be self-motivated.
It would be a boring world if we were all the same!
Certainly sciences have a very high number of hours spent in lectures/practicals etc. I think mine was 26 hrs a week. Humanities students have fewer contact hours but spend a lot of their time with background reading etc. they have to be self-motivated.
It would be a boring world if we were all the same!
Re: Least popular subjects at top universities
Its interesting that the rowers, in DCs College at least, are mostly Natscis & Engineers - the Arts students dont fancy breaking the ice on the Cam at 6 am!
I'll leave it up to you to decide if the Arts students are more intelligent or just dont want to get outof bed
Absolutley agree yoyo, that differences should be celebrated. University would be boring if everyone was studying the same subject!
I'll leave it up to you to decide if the Arts students are more intelligent or just dont want to get outof bed
Absolutley agree yoyo, that differences should be celebrated. University would be boring if everyone was studying the same subject!
Re: Least popular subjects at top universities
I had about 4 hours a week doing my BA but spent many days in the library which my scientist friends only visited when they were looking for me Vive la difference.Humanities students have fewer contact hours but spend a lot of their time with background reading etc. they have to be self-motivated.
On a slight tangent, though, not sure I’d be happy about DCs paying £9K a year for a handful of tutorials and the odd suggestion of where to go for further reading. Can’t help wondering whether universities have fully considered what the quid pro quo of much higher fees might prove to be…