王偉雄：College 和 University的區別

elbar

自從我寫過阿樂會入讀 Williams College 後，有些朋友問我 college 和 university 的分別，有些甚至以為 college 不是大學。有見及此，決定寫一篇短文略為解釋。


首先，美國人說「上大學」一般只說 「go to college」 而不是 「go to university」，例如 「My daughter will go to college next year」；此外，大學教育一般的說法是 「college education」，大學學位是 「college degree」。


雖然 college 是大學，但 college 和 university 還是有分別的。Liberal arts colleges (可以譯作「文理學院」，另一較造作的翻譯是「博雅教育學院」)幾乎全是私立的，規模較小，只有一二千學生，大多只提供本科教育，少數有碩士課程，但一定沒有研究院。


還有，liberal arts college 著重通才教育，包括體育、德育、思辨能力、領導才能等，不只是傳授知識，更不會提供偏重職業技能的課程(例如會計) 。


University 分研究型和教學型，前者規模很大，有不同的研究院；頂尖的研究型大學裏，研究生的人數可以比本科生多(例如 Columbia University)。


教學型大學大多是公立的，沒有研究院，但很多都有碩士課程；教學型大學的規模比研究型的小，但比起 liberal arts college 則仍然大很多，學生至少過萬，提供的課程也較多樣化，而且肯定會包括偏重職業技能的課程。


這樣的解釋好像很清楚了，可是，不要以為名字是「university」的一定是 university，名字是 「college」 一定是 liberal arts college。長春藤聯盟裏的 Dartmouth College 是 university，另一名校 College of William & Mary 也是 university；Wesleyan University 是 Little Three 之一(另外兩間是 Williams College 和 Amherst College；Big Three 是 Harvard , Yale, 和 Princeton) ，名為 university，卻是一間不折不扣的 liberal arts college！


還有一點容易令人混淆的，是 university 可以由不同的 colleges 組成，例如 college of natural sciences 或 college of humanities and fine arts；有些研究型大學則將整個本科教育部份稱為 college，例如 Harvard University 裏的 Harvard College --- 在哈佛大學本科畢業，可以說 「graduated from Harvard College」。


以上講的只是美國的情況，其他英語國家裏，college 和 university 的分別並不一樣。例如加拿大的 colleges 很多是職業先修學校，只頒文憑，不授學位；就算是頒授學位的，也會被認為比 university 低級。假如你在美國讀 liberal arts college，即使是最顯赫的，你那些對美國教育制度不熟悉的加拿大姨媽姑姐也可能會認為你連大學也讀不上！

SorTo

slamai 發表於 15-6-11 12:52
回覆 永遠的零 的帖子

Maybe you are very good in Maths and want to discuss logic.  However, you have ...

That's why I said Oxford is lying according to these two guys who just choose to ignore the fact that the phase "in general" is often omitted from general statements in our daily language. According to the philosophy department of hku, in statements like"「人死不能復生。」,「人不為己，天誅地滅。」, 「男兒志在四方。」...我們對這些述句屬全稱述句(universal propositions) 還是特稱述句(particular propositions)可能並不太清楚。" If we want the readers to be sure we are making a universal proposition, we will add a determiner like "all" or "every"; this is syllogism 101. As you have not used the word "all" or "every", clearly it is only you as the writer who has the right to clarify whether you are making a universal statement or not.

However I suggest you quit a discussion you can never win with opponents who are not interested in a reasonable discussion.

slamai

回覆 永遠的零 的帖子

Maybe you are very good in Maths and want to discuss logic.  However, you have totally missed the point.  What you are querying my generalised statement applies similarly to what Oxford says in their website.  Take a look at what SorTo quoted in his post #22.  

I have explained that my statements, which also happen to most of us, may be incomplete due to generalisation.  How come you said I didn't "承認那statement未夠精準"?  Have you gone through the relevant posts carefully?  The quality and validity of your comments is doubtful.

slamai

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Ha! Ha!  Do you really think that I didn't know the discrepancies in your previous statements/posts?

Don't divert attention! Sounds familiar?  You haven't answered my questions!

小小山

What is college ? What is university ?

shadeslayer

永遠的零 發表於 15-6-10 20:31
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

有人連最基本的邏輯辯証原則都未懂，竞然還夠膽出來死撐，枉有高學歷又有乜用， ...

閣下心水清。哈，佢地講咁耐也講不出我這句的弱點，卻比你點中。

shadeslayer

Believe what you want to believe. There is one and only one point in this discussion. There were graduate students hired as tutors to teach undergraduates at a particular college over that period of time in Oxford, therefore the statement "Tutors are not graduate students in Oxbridge" is incorrect.  Anything else is irrelevant and possibly a diversion tactic.

I don't know why I am still spending time on this topic.

slamai

回覆 SorTo 的帖子

Oxford also points out the crux in their website, i.e. "Tutorials are central to study at Oxford."  Bang!

SorTo

Oxford says this in their website, "‘Tutor’ is Oxford’s name for a member of academic staff. They are often world-leading experts in their field, and tutorials are a chance to get individualised teaching from them. "

I feel muggles like us have been lied to for over all these years about the understatement of the name of an oxbridge tutor.

slamai

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Did you say "just tutorials" in your post?  Ever heard of "collections" as I have mentioned in one of my previous posts if you said you'd been to Oxford?  Do you understand what is a sweeping statement?

slamai

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Maybe you have a lot of time to indulge in circumambulating discussion.  Maybe you think mentioning having been to Oxford can increase your credibility.  Maybe you have difficulties in understanding my posts and intention.  But I must explain to you that my posts explaining the tutorial system in Oxbridge are intended for other users of this forum rather than explaining to someone who refuses to open one's mind.

slamai

回覆 SorTo 的帖子

Thank you for your impartial comment.

shadeslayer

SorTo 發表於 15-6-9 15:01
回覆 slamai 的帖子

I feel sorry for you for having to discuss with someone who takes others' genera ...

I don't need to be explained the tutorial system in Oxford because I was there.  But when I saw something inaccurate I need to point that out.

I said "Tutorials are usually students to students"


Slamai replied with "Tutors are not graduate students in Oxbridge".

If you follow the discussion and can't tell which statement is sweeping, definite and inaccurate, I have nothing to say.

SorTo

回覆 slamai 的帖子

I feel sorry for you for having to discuss with someone who takes others' general statements as "sweeping statemens" but his own exception statements as general statements. If someone doesn't want to know the difference between a tutor in oxbridge and a tutor in American colleges, I suggest you let it go.

DreamKid

elbar 發表於 15-6-6 12:46
自從我寫過阿樂會入讀 Williams College 後，有些朋友問我 college 和 university 的分別，有些甚至以為  ...

香港中學都叫 college
亦試過有朋友以為 college 係指 community college

shadeslayer

slamai 發表於 15-6-9 00:17
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Lying is intentional.  I don't think anyone in this forum has any intention ...

Classic diversion tactic. When I point out your specific incorrect statement, you bring it to the general "everybody makes mistake" level. Of course everybody makes mistake. But I am not talking about everybody makes mistakes, I am talking about your specific mistake.

A lie with good intent is still a lie.
An incorrect statement without a malicious intent is still incorrect.

You can argue the mistake is not relevant to the discussion. I say your sweeping statement hurt my credibility when I know I am correct, therefore it is relevant to the discussion.

When my child makes a mistake, I told her to admit it, apologize, learn from it and move on ..... Period.  

slamai

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

Lying is intentional.  I don't think anyone in this forum has any intention to lie which is of no avail.  However, most of us suffer from the disadvantage of inaccurate and/or incomplete information and both of us are no exception. I'd advise you to discuss in a calmer and more harmonious manner ... period

shadeslayer

原帖由 slamai 於 15-06-08 發表
回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

You can go through your previous posts and find generalised statements whic ...

Oh you need to resort to "everybody is sinned so my sin is ok" or "everybody lied before so you have no right to accuse me of lying." kind of argument.

Great one, very strong, universal.

slamai

回覆 shadeslayer 的帖子

You can go through your previous posts and find generalised statements which suffer from the disadvantage of being inaccurate ... period