"Knowing stuff is easy... analysing problems is difficult." YES. And at the end of the day Oxford is interested in teaching people to think, and not just having them know things. I am surprised by how many potential applicants fail to grasp this.
‘Describe this flag’ In the few seconds that exercise lasted I realised yet one more thing about myself. My answer was proceeding along the lines of ‘this is a rectangle. Inside of it there is another rectangle. Is it the same rectangle but smaller? (tilting my head sideways) hm the smaller rectangle seems to be half in height than the other. And it divides the bigger one in two. It actually divides the stripes on the bigger rectangle in 2 groups I had never noticed that’ Then you sir said that a common answer would be ‘that’s the American flag’ . It made me smile. I remember getting frustrated (really frustrated) in school when my peers would give such quick, obvious answers. Unfortunately many schools and thus teachers value performance in all the quantitive terms. And I did good in the quantitive terms , but I had to detach from the part of me that wanted to isolate and break apart and study each part of a sentence to make sense of it (a really dizzying spiral I have to say) for a long time. Now I am finally at peace. System 1 and 2 are getting along , and I have fun answering questions like these. I do really feel like a child (‘why’ is my favorite word) . I’d like to thank you sir it was a breath of fresh air to hear you speak. Every thought you exposed on the various topics seemed to add new exciting directions to my owns.
Dear Matt 😃👍 Your videos are extremely valuable sources of information. I cannot thank you more. I appreciate your time so much 😃👍 Please keep doing your work. Have a great day 😃👍 All best wishes, Roman 👍👍👍
Yes that’s how my brains feels happy when I let it function with system 2. Abrupt and spontaneous responses have never satisfied me no matter how “logical” they seem. Thank you Dr Williams for acknowledging ‘my way of thinking’ as a mathematics student. I’m learning a lot from your videos. Thanks again.
@@lucy_with_mehow was it? Also which subject did you apply for? Honestly I'm taking all the stress I would if I had an interview tomorrow when I haven't even given my GCSE's yet! Hehe...
My intial approach to answering such questions is by dismantling the question and analysing its little parts or words which I consider worth a debate . So for instance,I would attempt to answer the question "Does google know us better than ourselves?" by first brainstorming the possible meanings of 'us' . Is it talking about an individual or humanity taken as a collective whole? Google ultimately is not an omniscient philosopher that searches the depths of our soul but it is a platform where several of 'us' come together to answer questions about 'ourselves'. So the question could be reframed as do 'some of us'(those who are posting on google) know the 'rest of us'(the google users) better than ourselves? Then I would go on to discuss the meanings of 'know' and so on . Is this approach useful ? Is it the approach interviewers are looking for ? My fundamental approach is to think the possibilities and the meanings of the question asked , then roughly try to get a sense which possibility seems ' true' or most rational to me (it may not be so for the interviewer) then trying my best to defend my chosen possibility but at the same time being open to other suggestions or possibilities. My great flaw is that I become a bit too passionate or attached to my idea (once I have a rational basis for it) and it is not very comfortable for me to abandon it completely to impress the interviewer. (Although I am receptive to suggestions and alternatives , I still try to defend my point unless it becomes entirely ridiculous ) You said that its not that important to fully 'believe' your answer but to show off your thinking skills . Dosen't it seem a bit hypocritical? .I am afraid I could'nt do it. Could it be a potential hindrance to my interview performance? Which approach do you think would be best:- To analyze the question , skim through the possible meanings and interpretations then defend the one which seems most logical to the best of your ability or try to show off your thinking skills by choosing the most seemingly difficult /impressive/creative argument and defend it?
I can see I would have failed Oxford's flag question. The first thing I would have said is that it has fifty stars. (Yes, I knew that already.) But looking at it fresh for the purpose of the interviewer's question, did I count them just now? Not exactly. I looked at the diagonal rows of stars starting from the top left corner. The first row has one star, the second row has three stars, etc., so we have the sum of the first five odd numbers, doubled, since from symmetry they repeat the diagonal rows in reverse fashion. So we have two times twenty-five stars, or fifty stars in total. Then the thought occurred to me, hey, that means that 100 is four times the sum of the first five odd numbers, something I never noticed before. But when I am doing math, I am not usually using verbal intelligence. I am using either numerical or spatial intelligence, so the verbal gets turned off. So, I would not have been reasoning this out loud. Since the interviewer wants to follow my thought process, I would have flunked for "not showing your work." I guess one may not write at Oxford, "the proof is by inspection." Maybe that's why Ramanujan went to Cambridge and not Oxford? ;)
Loved this. Your videos are as insightful and well-structured as always! For the 'What books are bad for you?' question, how fruitful would this line of argument be? A book may be bad for you, in that a single books advocates (or tears apart) a single worldview. However, 'books' as a plural are not because the essence of literature is diversity. By reading 'books' we learn to be critically independent, which in turn means we don't let books become 'bad' for us.
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571 In your experience are post-graduate interviews within the social sciences set-up in a similar way to undergraduate interviews or are they more interested in your research potential (or is it a mix of both)? Many thanks, love your videos.
Regarding the question about Pi, I honestly think I would just eat it and share it with all the interviewers and make some tea before I answer the number generator audacity. :) Gives time to come up with something. That's my pro-tip for all of you.
I have my law interviews on Monday and Tuesday - thank you for this incredibly useful overview! I’m amazed by the sheer breadth of knowledge you have. In the States, where I’m applying from, professors and teachers generally seem well versed only in the subject they teach. For instance, if I asked a lit professor to answer the question about red blood cells, I don’t think he would know where to start. Also! Are international applicants expected to be somewhat aware of the basic distinctions of a subject between the UK and the country they are applying from (in my case, the US)? Especially for a subject like law - there are significant differences between US and UK law, even if they come from the same legal theories. Would you advise me to brush up on knowledge of the UK system and how parliament works, in case it comes up?
Thank you for your comment! Our law professors typically do not assume any prior knowledge of law, as most applicants have not formally studied it before. They may introduce some information to you, and will expect you to manage that new information, but they wouldn't expect you to know it in advance. For example, they might explain some detail about English law (technically there are four legal systems in the UK -- England and Wales, Scotland, N. Ireland and the UK!!) and see how you manage that new information. So, in answer to your question, it would not likely be necessary to brush up on aspects of English/UK law, although it also won't likely do you any harm. This video may help: th-cam.com/video/Qe5SiqI9YQ0/w-d-xo.html
@@chiarathompson9958 Congratulations! :) I’ve heard that so many interviews have been given out, and it’s amazing to see, but also scary as perhaps they’re interviewing more this year?
@@emmajane6446 yeah maybe! I honestly didn’t think I’d get an interview, my LNAT was awful 🥲 getting so stressed about it though! How are you feeling about it?X
No, but the interviewers will help if it looks like you are struggling. It's not a bad thing if the interviewers help, by the way. The questions are designed to be challenging.
Sir, can u please make an informative video on 100% Scholar for Jesus College, just wanna take an idea for indian students as well as for others....u always motivate us , thanking for same !!
Independence of thought is simply a candidate saying exactly what they think, rather than repeating what other people have said. Of course, often our thoughts will be derived from the views of others, but it's important for candidates to be able to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of anything they say, including when it may have come from a different source.
Sir, if we see a question and have absolutely no idea what's it about, how do we approach the situation? Can we make random wild guess about what could be done with the question or should we inform the tutor that we don't know?
Start by breaking down the question into something that you can talk about. Even if you don't understand the question as a whole, there may be some aspect to the question you have thoughts about. If you start there, the tutors will help you build up to answering the main question. I wouldn't take a wild guess, however.
@@circe3586 just found that past papers for the LNAT are rather hard to source, but their random-generated practice questions are generally considered to be accurate to the real thing; lnat.ac.uk/how-to-prepare/practice-test/
"What books are bad for you?" Sir PLEASE read my answer and I would be grateful beyond measure if you could tell me if the anwer would be seen as evading the question. 🙏 My answer to the question was that no books are bad for us. The reason being that all books teach us something. It ultimately all depends on our perspective. A books like Fifty Shades of Grey, where the male protagonist accesses the female protagonist's location without her permission and all the other toxic behaviour of his is justified by the fact that he has been through severe trauma in his childhood, has the lesson about what is wrong. Just because someone has been through severe trauma, they do not have the right to hurt someone else. Also the male protagonist asks the female to stay because SHE is the one who makes him feel better. It sounds and feels quite romantic that he loves the female protagonist so much that she has such healing effects on him. BUT, in reality, it is not our duty heal someone else at our own cost. We should not fall into the trap of feeling like a savior/ being guilt tripped into staying in a relationship that is harmful to our mental/emotional/physical health.
Yes, that's a decent initial answer. During the interview we would develop the conversation further by considering what "bad" means. It could mean, as you've interpreted it, bad in terms of content. But it could also mean stylistically bad, or simply just bad in so far as it wastes our time!
A quite a common situation is the one in which an individual thinks he knows something to be true, but is in fact in error in his belief, because what he thinks he knows is incorrect. Extrapolating from this, it is probable that a candidate for an undergraduate position at a Oxford college may well be harbouring a number of incorrect beliefs. Is the aim [ of both the interview and the expensive education he will receive subsequently as an Oxford student ] then to ensure that smart students [ capable of thinking for themselves ] having passed through the Oxford tutorial system will know less at the end of their three years than they did at the beginning ? Viewers might be tempted to draw the conclusion that children of seven years of age should be admitted to Oxford at that tender age, without having to navigate the school system which teaches a curriculum, rather than teaching students to think for themselves, and in this way avoiding the general stultifying effects of what are laughingly called the primary and secondary levels of education . I believe the GCE system is there to present a curriculum which is tested at O and A level examinations. In my time in the UK system an accepted truism was that O and A exams wanted to test what you did NOT know, and that S level was supposed to find out what you DID know.
This is a very interesting suggestion. We do sometimes find that we need to deprogram students from intellectual over-assurance developed during A-levels. Generally speaking, however, of course we think it's valuable to teach a curriculum that introduces young people to the foundations of public discourse. I would nonetheless prefer if there was a little bit more emphasis on critical evaluation of these foundations so that they can be revealed to be, in many cases, pillars of sand rather than concrete.
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571 I'm pleased that my comment did not fall on deaf ears. Thank you for the courtesy of your reply. I am myself a graduate in engineering from a redbrick university. Engineering is a fact-based discipline, so strict curricula and a certain degree of parrot learning are inevitable. Not having experienced the tutorial system I am both curious and envious, and I think it would be a huge loss if it were ever abandoned. The greatest aim of educators in my view should be to encourage critical and independent thinking. One of the classical methods for accomplishing this I believe is the ' Socratic Method ' in which a master requires the student to answer a string of questions, and such that each question is a result of the previous answer. This of course must be predicated on a one to one master/student ratio. Presumably the Oxford tutorial system is as close to that ideal as may be possible in practical terms. But to return to the redbrick engineering school. In the real world, the actual practice of engineering involves certain basics ; carefully define the problem before looking at a solution ; search out what knowledge is available, including good solutions to related problems ; exercise your own judgment in making decisions in the absence of full information. All are important desiderata. But what did the university really offer ? Looking back on it I see the curriculum as remote from any thing Socratic, and little more than an obstacle course which had to be slogged through. Ten years after graduating and two years on the shop floor, and experience in the rough and tumble of the world of practical high tech, I would have been reluctant to offer any of my former teachers a job on my team. What my university DID give me was self confidence and the self-knowledge that I was at least as good as anybody else ! It also gave me and my confreres a sense of collegiality which persists to this day over sixty years later, even as we one by one become progressively more frail, and fall off the twig.
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
"Knowing stuff is easy... analysing problems is difficult." YES. And at the end of the day Oxford is interested in teaching people to think, and not just having them know things. I am surprised by how many potential applicants fail to grasp this.
‘Describe this flag’
In the few seconds that exercise lasted I realised yet one more thing about myself. My answer was proceeding along the lines of ‘this is a rectangle. Inside of it there is another rectangle. Is it the same rectangle but smaller? (tilting my head sideways) hm the smaller rectangle seems to be half in height than the other. And it divides the bigger one in two. It actually divides the stripes on the bigger rectangle in 2 groups I had never noticed that’
Then you sir said that a common answer would be ‘that’s the American flag’ .
It made me smile. I remember getting frustrated (really frustrated) in school when my peers would give such quick, obvious answers. Unfortunately many schools and thus teachers value performance in all the quantitive terms. And I did good in the quantitive terms , but I had to detach from the part of me that wanted to isolate and break apart and study each part of a sentence to make sense of it (a really dizzying spiral I have to say) for a long time. Now I am finally at peace. System 1 and 2 are getting along , and I have fun answering questions like these. I do really feel like a child (‘why’ is my favorite word) .
I’d like to thank you sir it was a breath of fresh air to hear you speak. Every thought you exposed on the various topics seemed to add new exciting directions to my owns.
Thanks so much for your comment! All best to you.
Dear Matt 😃👍 Your videos are extremely valuable sources of information. I cannot thank you more. I appreciate your time so much 😃👍 Please keep doing your work. Have a great day 😃👍 All best wishes, Roman 👍👍👍
Thanks Roman!
Yes that’s how my brains feels happy when I let it function with system 2. Abrupt and spontaneous responses have never satisfied me no matter how “logical” they seem. Thank you Dr Williams for acknowledging ‘my way of thinking’ as a mathematics student. I’m learning a lot from your videos. Thanks again.
Excellent - thank you Fatima!
Thank you so much for this! Best interview advice I've found -- it really helped clear up my worries ahead of my interviews tomorrow :)
Great. Good luck!
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571Thank you! First one went all right (well, it was fun, anyway) and I have one more tomorrow evening
@@lucy_with_mehow was it? Also which subject did you apply for? Honestly I'm taking all the stress I would if I had an interview tomorrow when I haven't even given my GCSE's yet! Hehe...
Made me think about many things. Thanks for that
That's great to know! Thanks
My intial approach to answering such questions is by dismantling the question and analysing its little parts or words which I consider worth a debate . So for instance,I would attempt to answer the question "Does google know us better than ourselves?" by first brainstorming the possible meanings of 'us' . Is it talking about an individual or humanity taken as a collective whole? Google ultimately is not an omniscient philosopher that searches the depths of our soul but it is a platform where several of 'us' come together to answer questions about 'ourselves'. So the question could be reframed as do 'some of us'(those who are posting on google) know the 'rest of us'(the google users) better than ourselves? Then I would go on to discuss the meanings of 'know' and so on . Is this approach useful ? Is it the approach interviewers are looking for ? My fundamental approach is to think the possibilities and the meanings of the question asked , then roughly try to get a sense which possibility seems ' true' or most rational to me (it may not be so for the interviewer) then trying my best to defend my chosen possibility but at the same time being open to other suggestions or possibilities. My great flaw is that I become a bit too passionate or attached to my idea (once I have a rational basis for it) and it is not very comfortable for me to abandon it completely to impress the interviewer. (Although I am receptive to suggestions and alternatives , I still try to defend my point unless it becomes entirely ridiculous ) You said that its not that important to fully 'believe' your answer but to show off your thinking skills . Dosen't it seem a bit hypocritical? .I am afraid I could'nt do it. Could it be a potential hindrance to my interview performance? Which approach do you think would be best:- To analyze the question , skim through the possible meanings and interpretations then defend the one which seems most logical to the best of your ability or try to show off your thinking skills by choosing the most seemingly difficult /impressive/creative argument and defend it?
Thank you for this very useful video Dr Williams, especially with the change to online interviews this year!
Thank you very much! Glad it's helpful
I can see I would have failed Oxford's flag question. The first thing I would have said is that it has fifty stars. (Yes, I knew that already.) But looking at it fresh for the purpose of the interviewer's question, did I count them just now? Not exactly. I looked at the diagonal rows of stars starting from the top left corner. The first row has one star, the second row has three stars, etc., so we have the sum of the first five odd numbers, doubled, since from symmetry they repeat the diagonal rows in reverse fashion. So we have two times twenty-five stars, or fifty stars in total. Then the thought occurred to me, hey, that means that 100 is four times the sum of the first five odd numbers, something I never noticed before.
But when I am doing math, I am not usually using verbal intelligence. I am using either numerical or spatial intelligence, so the verbal gets turned off. So, I would not have been reasoning this out loud. Since the interviewer wants to follow my thought process, I would have flunked for "not showing your work."
I guess one may not write at Oxford, "the proof is by inspection." Maybe that's why Ramanujan went to Cambridge and not Oxford? ;)
Loved this. Your videos are as insightful and well-structured as always! For the 'What books are bad for you?' question, how fruitful would this line of argument be? A book may be bad for you, in that a single books advocates (or tears apart) a single worldview. However, 'books' as a plural are not because the essence of literature is diversity. By reading 'books' we learn to be critically independent, which in turn means we don't let books become 'bad' for us.
Thanks for your comment! Yes, that's an interesting line of argument. I like your close attention to the question wording in particular.
Hi I need to english class cen you give me training for level 1test
Thank you for all the time and effort you put into these videos and the very useful advice you give. It is hugely appreciated.7
My pleasure! Thank you
Looking forward to these videos every day, love watching these. One question though, Do graduate applicants also have interviews?
Some do. It depends on the course, it should state on the relevant course website.
Thank you for your kind comment!
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571 In your experience are post-graduate interviews within the social sciences set-up in a similar way to undergraduate interviews or are they more interested in your research potential (or is it a mix of both)? Many thanks, love your videos.
Regarding the question about Pi, I honestly think I would just eat it and share it with all the interviewers and make some tea before I answer the number generator audacity. :) Gives time to come up with something. That's my pro-tip for all of you.
Fair enough!
got an interview this week and dis vid changed how I think. thanks lad
Great! Good luck
I have my law interviews on Monday and Tuesday - thank you for this incredibly useful overview! I’m amazed by the sheer breadth of knowledge you have. In the States, where I’m applying from, professors and teachers generally seem well versed only in the subject they teach. For instance, if I asked a lit professor to answer the question about red blood cells, I don’t think he would know where to start.
Also! Are international applicants expected to be somewhat aware of the basic distinctions of a subject between the UK and the country they are applying from (in my case, the US)? Especially for a subject like law - there are significant differences between US and UK law, even if they come from the same legal theories. Would you advise me to brush up on knowledge of the UK system and how parliament works, in case it comes up?
Thank you for your comment!
Our law professors typically do not assume any prior knowledge of law, as most applicants have not formally studied it before. They may introduce some information to you, and will expect you to manage that new information, but they wouldn't expect you to know it in advance.
For example, they might explain some detail about English law (technically there are four legal systems in the UK -- England and Wales, Scotland, N. Ireland and the UK!!) and see how you manage that new information.
So, in answer to your question, it would not likely be necessary to brush up on aspects of English/UK law, although it also won't likely do you any harm.
This video may help: th-cam.com/video/Qe5SiqI9YQ0/w-d-xo.html
hi! how did your interview go? did u get an offer? thanks!
Thanks for this, rlly useful!
Great to know! Thank you
27:30 if you are a radiohead fan 😂
I just got an interview for Law! Your channel has been so helpful in helping me achieve this. Thank you for everything… Any last minute tips? :)
omg same! what college?
@@chiarathompson9958 Hertford :) you?
@@emmajane6446 originally LMH but reallocated to Jesus!! :)
@@chiarathompson9958 Congratulations! :)
I’ve heard that so many interviews have been given out, and it’s amazing to see, but also scary as perhaps they’re interviewing more this year?
@@emmajane6446 yeah maybe! I honestly didn’t think I’d get an interview, my LNAT was awful 🥲 getting so stressed about it though! How are you feeling about it?X
I hope to see a Fine Art interview too
Hi Matt, do they ever test how long it takes you to "answer the question/think out loud?"
No, but the interviewers will help if it looks like you are struggling. It's not a bad thing if the interviewers help, by the way. The questions are designed to be challenging.
Thank you!! This was so helpful ☺️
You're so welcome! Thank you for your kind comments
how would one answer in such a way in an economics interview?
th-cam.com/video/Jk0Drd1I8qY/w-d-xo.html
Sir, can u please make an informative video on 100% Scholar for Jesus College, just wanna take an idea for indian students as well as for others....u always motivate us , thanking for same !!
Thanks! Information on funding is here: www.ox.ac.uk/students/fees-funding/search
Great videos Matt. Please keep them up. It really encourages minority students to apply
And what constitutes independence and autonomy of thought.
That's really nice of you to say. My aim is to encourage more underrepresented students to apply.
Independence of thought is simply a candidate saying exactly what they think, rather than repeating what other people have said. Of course, often our thoughts will be derived from the views of others, but it's important for candidates to be able to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of anything they say, including when it may have come from a different source.
Sir, if we see a question and have absolutely no idea what's it about, how do we approach the situation? Can we make random wild guess about what could be done with the question or should we inform the tutor that we don't know?
Start by breaking down the question into something that you can talk about. Even if you don't understand the question as a whole, there may be some aspect to the question you have thoughts about. If you start there, the tutors will help you build up to answering the main question. I wouldn't take a wild guess, however.
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571 I'll keep that in mind. :)
Is it ok to take a notepad into the interview?,
It would be discouraged, because we want you to engage in conversation, rather than take notes.
how does one practice for the lnat?
past papers are definitely the best way in my opinion!
@@silversmoke4902 would you recommend anywhere to source them?
@@circe3586 just found that past papers for the LNAT are rather hard to source, but their random-generated practice questions are generally considered to be accurate to the real thing; lnat.ac.uk/how-to-prepare/practice-test/
th-cam.com/video/9ENQwTVlhsI/w-d-xo.html
@@silversmoke4902 thanks!
You asked what do you see, but did answer, asking questions does not answer the interviewers question.
No indeed. But asking questions helps deconstruct the interview question, and can help you come to a more sophisticated answer.
54 Stars
"What books are bad for you?"
Sir PLEASE read my answer and I would be grateful beyond measure if you could tell me if the anwer would be seen as evading the question.
🙏
My answer to the question was that no books are bad for us. The reason being that all books teach us something. It ultimately all depends on our perspective. A books like Fifty Shades of Grey, where the male protagonist accesses the female protagonist's location without her permission and all the other toxic behaviour of his is justified by the fact that he has been through severe trauma in his childhood, has the lesson about what is wrong. Just because someone has been through severe trauma, they do not have the right to hurt someone else. Also the male protagonist asks the female to stay because SHE is the one who makes him feel better. It sounds and feels quite romantic that he loves the female protagonist so much that she has such healing effects on him. BUT, in reality, it is not our duty heal someone else at our own cost. We should not fall into the trap of feeling like a savior/ being guilt tripped into staying in a relationship that is harmful to our mental/emotional/physical health.
Yes, that's a decent initial answer. During the interview we would develop the conversation further by considering what "bad" means. It could mean, as you've interpreted it, bad in terms of content. But it could also mean stylistically bad, or simply just bad in so far as it wastes our time!
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571 wow! That sounds fascinating! Thank You so much for taking out time from your busy schedule and going through my answer.
A quite a common situation is the one in which an individual thinks he knows something to be true, but is in fact in error in his belief, because what he thinks he knows is incorrect.
Extrapolating from this, it is probable that a candidate for an undergraduate position at a Oxford college may well be harbouring a number of incorrect beliefs.
Is the aim [ of both the interview and the expensive education he will receive subsequently as an Oxford student ] then to ensure that smart students [ capable of thinking for themselves ] having passed through the Oxford tutorial system will know less at the end of their three years than they did at the beginning ?
Viewers might be tempted to draw the conclusion that children of seven years of age should be admitted to Oxford at that tender age, without having to navigate the school system which teaches a curriculum, rather than teaching students to think for themselves, and in this way avoiding the general stultifying effects of what are laughingly called the primary and secondary levels of education .
I believe the GCE system is there to present a curriculum which is tested at O and A level examinations. In my time in the UK system an accepted truism was that O and A exams wanted to test what you did NOT know, and that S level was supposed to find out what you DID know.
This is a very interesting suggestion. We do sometimes find that we need to deprogram students from intellectual over-assurance developed during A-levels. Generally speaking, however, of course we think it's valuable to teach a curriculum that introduces young people to the foundations of public discourse. I would nonetheless prefer if there was a little bit more emphasis on critical evaluation of these foundations so that they can be revealed to be, in many cases, pillars of sand rather than concrete.
@@JesusCollegeOxford1571 I'm pleased that my comment did not fall on deaf ears. Thank you for the courtesy of your reply.
I am myself a graduate in engineering from a redbrick university. Engineering is a fact-based discipline, so strict curricula and a certain degree of parrot learning are inevitable.
Not having experienced the tutorial system I am both curious and envious, and I think it would be a huge loss if it were ever abandoned. The greatest aim of educators in my view should be to encourage critical and independent thinking. One of the classical methods for accomplishing this I believe is the ' Socratic Method ' in which a master requires the student to answer a string of questions, and such that each question is a result of the previous answer. This of course must be predicated on a one to one master/student ratio. Presumably the Oxford tutorial system is as close to that ideal as may be possible in practical terms.
But to return to the redbrick engineering school. In the real world, the actual practice of engineering involves certain basics ; carefully define the problem before looking at a solution ; search out what knowledge is available, including good solutions to related problems ; exercise your own judgment in making decisions in the absence of full information. All are important desiderata. But what did the university really offer ?
Looking back on it I see the curriculum as remote from any thing Socratic, and little more than an obstacle course which had to be slogged through. Ten years after graduating and two years on the shop floor, and experience in the rough and tumble of the world of practical high tech, I would have been reluctant to offer any of my former teachers a job on my team.
What my university DID give me was self confidence and the self-knowledge that I was at least as good as anybody else ! It also gave me and my confreres a sense of collegiality which persists to this day over sixty years later, even as we one by one become progressively more frail, and fall off the twig.