<p>with consideation of their educational syztems...which would u consider to be superior? just thought id make this because its so controversial...</p>
<p>On an international prestige level, US schools are definitely superior. In the UK, there's Oxbridge, LSE, and Imperial College that are all excellent, but Oxbridge are the only two schools that are recognized by name immediately. Almost everyone ahs heard of Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc.</p>
<p>Oxbridge has gotten a bit irrelevant in the modern world. For one thing, they don't have insane amounts of alumni donations, like American schools. Because of this, Oxford is cutting down the number of students admitted from the UK and EU and increasing the # of int'l students because they have to pay a lot more. moe int'l students=percieved that it's easier to get into=less prestige.</p>
<p>also, profs in UK are paid insanely low salaries compared to the US, leading many brilliant profs to come over here.</p>
<p>eh, i love england and want to go to school there, but the ug experience here in the states is just a lot better.. hm, what a dilemna</p>
<p>I wouldn't say which one is more superior than the other. Each has its merits and demerits. Both are focused on very different things. The UK systems are more focused on your chosen subject, and you go much deeper into it, whereas the Liberal Arts system goes more for breadth I would say.</p>
<p>"moe int'l students=percieved that it's easier to get into=less prestige."</p>
<p>How did that come about?? :) That's a rather odd statement, imo.</p>
<p>While Oxbridge can go toe to toe with HYPSM for name recognition, they've falled under hard times recently from a funding perspective. It's generally accepted that America has the best higher education system in the world and that its most elite universities are the world's most elite. It's probably part arrogance, part fact.</p>
<p>psychicpies- another typical person who doesnt know what hes talking about. ugrad much better in uk. the level is so much higher because us high school system is the biggest piece of crap ever. basically first 1-2 years us ugrad is just about preparation for best uk unis first year. and remember oxbridge 1,2-1 tutorials/supervisions. search for the old thread - americans views on oxford and cambridge - and see why your wrong. oxbridge still whoops us for undergrad imo. but just read the thread. of course if you want lib. arts us is for you.but its much harder for most us high school diploma students to get into hyp then for uk students into us, so your argument about easier to get into is wrong in general. but see thread.</p>
<p>they are public unis but still have big endowment - wheres the funding crisis?</p>
<p>psychicspies isn't just another typical person who doesnt know what SHE is talking about. </p>
<p>i want to go to cambridge, so ive done A LOT of research on the subject...and it is my OPINION that ug stateside is better, mainly because most of the UG's i've talked to that go to oxbridge (tho more oxford than cambridge) say that there are major underfunding problems, mainly because oxbridge doesn't recieve as much income from alumni donations. </p>
<p>also, many students at oxford complain that they're only stats and that administration doesn't really care about them - hence i personally think that the schools here in the states are better because they're more flexible. altho that does depend on what school you're attending...</p>
<p>it is easier to get into for int'l students - but i think you misunderstood what i meant. it is easier for int'l students to get in NOW compared to before. because of the underfunding issue, oxford is admitting more int'l students, who pay loads more (for more info, guardian.co.uk). and thus- my statement that "moe int'l students=percieved that it's easier to get into=less prestige." a lot of overseas students view it as less prestigious because it seems like any foreigner with money can go (which is an extreme exaggeration, but the point gets across..)</p>
<p>It's been a constant news story how the money they receive by virtue of being public is dropping substantially.</p>
<p>A big problem with UK universities is the lack of flexibility. When we lived in England, I was told that you applied to study a certain subject. Once accepted, you couldn't change your major, without starting over. There are huge debates over who will be admitted to Oxbridge colleges. The pressure is on the schools to take more "public" school children, and not take as many from their elite "private" schools.</p>
<p>Definetely American</p>
<p>The American system and the British system are very different. I prefer the American system, but the British system has its strengths. I personally could have gone to 2 of the top 5 universities in England but chose US universities instead, primarily because I felt British universities lacked campus life, school spirit and academic flexibility. I also did not like the fact that you only have one set of exams each academic year!</p>
<p>if the administration doesnt care about you how come you have 1 to 1 or 1 to 2 tuition with professors for 4 hours every week at oxbridge? I dont see how personalized tuition at oxbridge, in addition to good lectures / classes can be beat by being taught by teaching assistants in huge classes at harvard. This is why oxbridge ugrad is, and will remain, the best in the world. Even if some dont like it on american forums.</p>
<p>And it is definetely not easier to get into oxbridge, dont make me reiterate all the facts about interviews etc. only 3 americans got offers, out of a few hundred who applied to cambridge - how come they didnt just let more in for the money? (see pembroke coll. cam website admission info). its probably easier to get in for intls doing a levels as their system is compatible. otherwise harder. it seems that the "funding crisis" (which i have seen no evidence for) hasnt affected the research rankings - search for world university ranking in google. and anyway thats not the most important thing for undergraduate. "Funding Crisis" is just one of those buzzwords that the people throw around when trying to disparage oxbridge on american forums.
As if Harvard were 4 times better than MIT (endowment about like oxbridge) just because its endowment is 4 times as large.
In case you didnt know there are still some professors who dont do their job for the money....</p>
<p>And if you want to talk "prestige" - which actually means nothing - try saying your going to oxford in the states and watch people practically bow down to you. Stupid and not fact based, like all "prestige", but its more or less true. In the public view - oxford beats harvard.</p>
<p>if you prefer liberal arts, and more regular exams, then by all means go to harvard, but for the best undergraduate education, in my opinion you have to go with oxbridge and its tutorial system.</p>
<p>so to make a long story short - UK for high school, undergraduate. </p>
<p>maybe US grad .</p>
<p>I often find it odd that Instituitions with less "alumni money"/endowments are perceived as providing inferior education. If that's the argument pyschicspies is pinning on, then so be it and there is no point saying anything else.</p>
<p>Fact: While Oxbridge may not have the endowments of Harvard, Princeton, their assets are still substantial and can be compared to the lesser ivies.</p>
<p>Fact: It was announced yesterday that a James Martin from US donated 60 million pounds (roughly 120 milliion USD?) to Oxford. James Martin did his Masters and PhD at Oxford. </p>
<p>Fact: In 2004, only 3 out of 120+ americans who applied were admitted into Cambridge. Not so easy anymore, is it?</p>
<p>Fact: International Students who did A levels (which is waaaaaaaay much harder than APs) will often find themselves in a more favourable position when they apply to Oxbridge. It is often wrongly perceived as 'easier' just because the A level system is a more suitable route into UK universities.</p>
<p>It is true that compared to US, UK universities are not as flexible, but they are not totally rigid either. Most students are given a wide range of choices when they reach their final years. UK is definitely more focused on the depth while US goes more for breadth.</p>
<p>UK is therefore wonderful for someone who is <em>really</em> passionate about his subject, whereas US is more for young people who still don't really know what they want to do later in life yet.</p>
<p>UK</p>
<p>and remember that endowments are in addition to being public and state funded.</p>
<p>but this thread is stupid</p>
<p>"As if Harvard were 4 times better than MIT (endowment about like oxbridge) just because its endowment is 4 times as large."</p>
<p>Exactly my point! ;) :)</p>
<p>The thing about these sorts of questions is that no-one can ever agree on what exactly "best" would constitute. Besides which, perceptions of value are really heavily dependent on culture and background: invariably americans argue for american universities being the best, British people for the UK and so forth.
I'll make my bias clear now: I am English and I go to Oxford. I think, that for my subject and my personal inclinations, where I am now is the best place I could possibly be. I don't think Oxford is the best in the world for everything, I recognise that there are funding problems, but for English (my subject) that's really not a problem.
But there have been threads here before about why Ivy League is not necessarily best for everyone, and that seems to me to apply on a global scale. The main thing is to find the university and course that suits you best, and obviously that will be different for everyone.
American and British education systems are very different: arguably the UK system is more specialised and for some people that works really well; similarly a broader education certainly has its advantages/appeal and specialisation (if required) can always be delayed for later.
To the main topic: from my perspective, undergraduate level education in the UK is better because it is more specialised and there is more tutor-student contact, but I would think that graduate study in the US is probably better. But that's a really vague, general perception and presumably thats simply not true for hundreds of people/places/courses.</p>
<p>"As if Harvard were 4 times better than MIT (endowment about like oxbridge) just because its endowment is 4 times as large."</p>
<p>well, 4x is not that much of a factor. But 30X is very significant. </p>
<p>Also, it's very easy to get into oxford compared to HYP. They have a 30% acceptance rate, and plus it's a Federal school (public?), so that adds another kick to the groin.</p>
<p>Golubb, I got into 4 Ivies and was rejected by Cambridge. I didn't even get an interview at Cambridge! The British system is very different from the American system. To even get an interview at Cambridge, you have to be an amazing student. And then, a student must present her/himself perfectly in the interview. Interviewers are looking for students with incredible eloquance, presence, ability to deal with pressure etc... Finally, if admitted, it is merely conditional. Admitted students must usually get 3 As on their A level exams. That's like 6 5s on the AP. </p>
<p>I would say the average student at Oxford or Cambridge is as good as your average student at Princeton or Stanford.</p>
<p>And so what if they are public? Class size at Oxford or Cambridge are smaller than they are at LACs. </p>
<p>I am no fan of British universities, but one must admit their strengths...and they are many!</p>
<p>Alexandre,</p>
<p>Are any of those 4 Ivies you got accepted to HYP? Just because you didn't get into Cambridge doesn't necessarily mean Cambridge is harder to get in than the 4 Ivies that you got accepted to. You have to remember you applied to Cambridge as an international student and Ivies as a native. While only 3 from the US got into Cambridge (last year?), only around 6 undergrad students (less than 2 people per year on average) at Stanford are from the UK. So the apparently difficult admission goes both ways. My hometown, Hong Kong, sends no more than ONE student to Harvard each year yet sends several to Cambridge each year. Hong Kong students seem more favored in UK because they are faimilar with their education system and know very well the A-level exams in math/science given in Hong Kong are even more difficult than the regular UK ones (hence much much harder than APs). I think whether it's harder or easier depends on so many things and citizenship, strangely, is a factor.</p>