2

"Educated at university" seems to be a British English expression. I wonder does it necessarily mean that someone "educated at university" or "educated at Oxford University" (for example)...

(a) necessarily graduated from/received a degree at the named university,
(b) can it only imply the person graduated from the named university,
(c) can it mean that the person studied there and left (either to another uniniversity or simply dropped out), without having graduated,
(d) can it mean a current "undergraduate" or "graduate" student (or their BrE equivalents) at said university?

Also, the expression can apparently be used for "University High School, Melbourne." Is this because the name of the high school begins with "university," or can the expression "educated at" apply to any high school? And whatever the case with high schools, I've the same 4 questions about a student "educated at high school" as I do above for "educated at university."

  • 1
    educated at is a participle phrase. You may view people educated at ... as a reduced version of people who were educated at .... You might also find this answer helpful. – user1513 Jun 12 '14 at 6:36
  • Additional context might be useful. A similar phrase, for example is 'university-educated'. This is typically used to refer to people that have obtained a degree as in this example from the Guardian. I would say the implication is usually that they have graduated, not dropped out and not currently studying, although I would argue that distinction is rarely important since the main idea to give a sense of people's level of education. Finally, not sure I understand the difference between (a) and (b)... – Jon Nov 25 '14 at 23:53
  • Your concern is addressed. – Maulik V Dec 2 '14 at 0:21
2
+300

"Educated at university" isn't a special expression; at university is simply a spatial modifier showing where the education happened.

It's the same as saying something like "made in China" or "bought at the mall".


(a) [does it mean they] necessarily graduated from/received a degree at the named university,

It implies it, unless further information has been given to suggest they didn't. He was educated at Oxford is taken to mean He has a degree from Oxford University. I suspect the assumption is that if you didn't complete your education or didn't pass your final exams, you don't count as being "educated" there.

Note what I said about "unless further information has been given to suggest they didn't". Context is everything, and you could of course say something like, He was educated at Oxford for the best part of a year before the stress got to him and he returned to driving taxis.

Like with a lot of other constructions, you can also deliberately mislead people: He was educated at Oxford could mean that he didn't get his degree, or that he got it from Oxford Brookes University (rather than The University of Oxford, which is the big prestigious one), or even just that he went to secondary school there.

The deception arises from the fact that you would be using the literal definition and the fact that the literal definition is not how the phrase is normally understood.

(b) can it only imply the person graduated from the named university,

(c) can it mean that the person studied there and left (either to another uniiversity or simply dropped out), without having graduated,

Answered these in part (a).

(d) can it mean a current "undergraduate" or "graduate" student (or their BrE equivalents) at said university?

It would help if you provided a full sentence as your example, rather than just a phrase. If you say he was educated at UniversityName, you mean that his education there has finished.

You could theoretically say he is being educated at UniversityName to suggest an undergraduate. However, I'm not sure I've ever seen this phrase used in this way; it would tend to suggest something along the lines of corrective education (because of the passive tense - compare it to he is learning Subject at UniversityName) and so you'd be more likely to see it referring to primary or secondary education.

Postgraduate study tends to be even more self-taught so in you would be even less likely to see the passive phrase being used in that way. In my opinion saying "he was educated" to refer to postgrad study would be extremely unusual if not outright wrong.

  • This does address the four situations I was curious about. Thanks. – user6951 Dec 2 '14 at 0:58
5

Thanks for allowing me to ponder over this topic!

Your question is valid. I searched some authentic sources and found out something which is useful.

The first point: educated at university does not necessarily mean that someone has completed their studies/degrees.

An example:

Berkeley University of California -

A former Oxford don educated at Harvard and Oxford, and a dropout from both, he explored mainly music, classics, math, linguistics, some law, a little medicine, a lot of mountain photography, and a parallel track in physical sciences, then started diversifying his learnings.

On the other hand, mentioning what someone obtained by studying at 'X' university is a common practice.

Example:

Leinster -

Fearghal was educated at University College Dublin where he graduated with an Honours degree in Physiotherapy.

I found the phrases 'educated at Harvard', 'educated at Oxford' and 'educated at Cambridge' on authentic sources (including COCA) and learned that in many places, 'what happened next' is described. Said that, depending on the context, you need to clarify whether someone studied somewhere finished their studies or simply left. A small introduction of someone like he's educated at Oxford may provoke the listener to play a prank, Okay, but did he complete? :)

Nevertheless, broadly, educated at 'X' university sounds that someone has studied and completed whatsoever degree course mentioned -at least, I'd think that way unless someone whispers the truth of 'dropped out' in my ears!

Lastly, using educated (i.e past tense form) for the student currently studying in 'X' university is out of the list! Unless you use being/getting/having or verbing the like.

  • Thanks for searching for specific examples for me. The first one is especially illustrative. – user6951 Dec 2 '14 at 0:59
3

"Educated at" could be used with any type of educational institution, not just a university. For example, here are Wikipedia articles about People educated at Eton College and People educated at Westminster School.

Typically this is used to refer to someone who previously attended that school or university rather than a current student, e.g. John was educated at Anytown High School and BigCity University. To describe a current student, it would be correct to say John is being educated at Anytown High School, but I don't believe that this would be common usage.

"Educated at" does not specify whether or not the person graduated or completed the whole period at a particular school or university. For example, someone could be educated at Anytown High School and Othertown High School if they moved schools.

2

It literally means studied at but with a university attached is often assumed to be graduated from as well. It isn't used for someone currently studying.

The most (in)famous use in the UK of educated at as studied at rather than graduated from is probably by a UK minister, Iain Duncan Smith, whose biography currently states:

Iain was educated at Dunchurch College of Management, the Royal Military Academy in Sandhurst and the Universita per Stranieri in Perugia, Italy.

Dunchurch College of Management ran short training courses (not a university), and he took a year's worth of language courses at the Universita per Stranieri but didn't actually complete his exams or get any qualifications there, either.

The statement educated at here is not technically false, but it is certainly more vague and open to interpretation in terms of qualifications gained.

To say educated at rather than graduated from or more specific terms is natural, I think, when describing educational history more broadly, for example in this biography.

Lawson was educated at Eton and Balliol College, Oxford where he was awarded a first-class degree in modern history

Here educated at covers both his earlier schooling (Eton) and university studies (Oxford), and awarded is used to specify the degree he got at the end. Instead of was awarded you could also say obtained or graduated with. Note that it is common to see the degree class mentioned like this in the UK - especially if you got a First!

Another note, if you use studied at for university studies you can indicate the subject directly which you can't do with educated at:

He studied history at Oxford.

One that occasionally is used is read, only with a subject specified (read here is past tense). Caution: this tends to be associated with Oxbridge and can sound pretentious if overused. In a formal biography it's fine.

He read history at Oxford.

  • Your answer with the case of Iain Duncan Smith really got to what I was talking about with Situation b, "can it only imply the person graduated from the named university." – user6951 Dec 2 '14 at 1:01
1

Tom was educated at University

This says that the person has been educated to university level - they have graduated/received a degree at an unspecified university. They may have received one degree from one University, several degrees at one University, or several degrees at severel Universities. This sentence is equivalent to

Tom is educated to university level

Tom has a degree

Tom is a graduate

Tom has been educated at university

Tom has graduated from University

Tom is university educated

It does not specify the University


Conversely

Tom was educated at Oxford University

Means the same as the above, but specifically requires that Tom went to Oxford University. He may or may not have received a degree at another University, but he received at least one degree at Oxford.


Now to get to what I believe is the crux of your question: does this necessarily mean that Tom gained a degree from, and graduated from, University (or, if specified, Oxford)?

No, there is some level of ambiguity here - in theory, the following are equivalent

Tom was educated at Oxford University

Tom studied at Oxford University, but did not graduate/gain a degree

However, this would be deliberate ambiguity - akin to lying, and no correct usage would use this format. If someone is using the language in this way, it is a lie of omission. The correct use of the sentence would refer to someone graduating and gaining a degree.

  • This is a good and helpful answer, just not as complete as the others. – user6951 Dec 2 '14 at 0:57
1

I have run into this phrase on more than one occasion while reading British literature as well as phrases like "so-and-so is off at university." The context has always implied to me that the word is being used in a manner similar to how we use the word "college." It's a general term to imply higher education.

Totally unrelated: I'm interested in your user name, doulos. I have this word tattooed on my right forearm. I'd be interested to hear about your philosophical beliefs surrounding this word. I can't seem to send you a personal message though.

  • Well, prolonged discussion of personal beliefs is offtopic, even in chat rooms. But I did start a chat room, which I believe you can access from chat.stackexchange.com – user6951 Jan 28 '15 at 22:12
-1

all you obviously very well educated people, if you say you "educated at university," it implies that you studied at the university level, whereas saying you "were educated at (a) university implies that you received -- and completed -- your education at the university level.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy