<p>St. Andrews and Edinburgh are the top two schools in Scotland.</p>
<p>in terms of name recognition, normal people in the US will only know oxford and cambridge. people in the US who matter, like future business contacts, will have heard of LSE. that's about it.
1. oxford
2. cambridge
3. LSE</p>
<p>the_prestige,</p>
<p>I don't know what you mean by "relative obscurity" and "decent recognition". It's always obscure to me and I probably already know more than most people in the US. Who outside the UK cares about where Prince William went anyway? It's not like the Royal family is known for having smart people. If anything, just bunch of spoiled brats. The OP is asking if people know about St. Andrew and the answer is a definite "No" for most people.</p>
<p>In sum, I totally agree with what ChoklitRain just said.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't know what you mean by "relative obscurity" and "decent recognition". It's always obscure to me and I probably already know more than most people in the US.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Look, I am not claiming that St. Andrews went from ZERO name recognition to rivaling Oxford. Perhaps it had no impact on you, but it has had some (not profound) name recognition impact on people that I have spoken to (again, there are two important points here: 1) i am NOT talking about some kind of revolutionary, radical impact and 2) we are just talking about name recognition here not "prestige" (i've made plenty of previous posts on the difference between those two points, but I will post that again at the end of this post)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Who outside the UK cares about where Prince William went anyway? It's not like the Royal family is known for having smart people. If anything, just bunch of spoiled brats.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Again, its not about having some kind of man-crush on Prince William. The point is about "name recognition" and being in the public eye. For instance, if JFK Jr. had a kid (hypothetically -- I figure this is the closest that America had to a "royal" family). And let's say that the media had been following JFK III's every move since graduating from high school -- and now the kid chooses to attend his dad's alma mater (Brown) -- don't you think that even if it were "at the margin", Brown's name recognition gets at least a little bit of a boost? And lastly, to reiterate the point, it's not about Prince William being "smart" or not - it is just about increased "familiarity" (see below).</p>
<p>That is all I was saying (nothing less, nothing more).</p>
<p>I know you meant name recognition and like I said and as ChoklitRain pointed out, most people in the US don't know St. Andrew. I don't know what makes you think otherwise.</p>
<p>Most people have short attention span and honestly, what makes you think Americans actually remember? I haven't met an American that could correctly remember Hong Kong went back to China in 1997 (was it 2000?...). That was a much better deal than which school Prince went to. LOL! Your analogy is off because we aren't talking about the Brits; we are talking about Americans here. Americans care way more about JFK than the Brits royal family. Still a lot of Americans don't even know Chelsea went to Stanford.</p>
<p>Actually, Sam Lee, in a certain segment of the US there are MANY people who know about St Andrews...it's been a popular destination for graduates of New England boarding schools for two decades, and many graduates of NYC and other east coast private day schools are going too. And the Wall Street world (not that it's very attractive now, but whatever) and the Greenwich hedge funds all recognize St Andrews as a place where suitable new hires might have gone.</p>
<p>"certain segment"? You mean those with British relatives like yourself? I am talking about the big picture here. Not some tiny niche segment. The fraction of HS students that are attending New England boarding schools is extremely tiny. Never heard of St. Andrew being some kind of target for Wall Streeet firms even though I've been hanging out in CC for a while. You are giving something new.</p>
<p>In my sons' very competitive New England public high school, St Andrews is known, and one or two matriculate there every year. Also one or two go to Trinity Dublin and Edinburgh. NO one has been accepted to Oxford or Cambridge in the last few years, although one or two try yearly. We are a town with great interest in money (!), and LSE is known and respected. Very few know Durham, I imagine, except for its choral singing....</p>
<p>Sam, when did this turn into a referendum on the "dumbness" of America? You don't get any argument from me on that front -- but that is not what we are talking about here.</p>
<p>I remember Andison applied to St Andrews. Actually that is how I've heard of it. I bet you most people from New England heard of St Andrews. Most teenagers heard that Prince William went to St Andrews. Don't under estimate how many people read People magazine. :D</p>
<p>^^^ that was exactly my point Columbia_Student.</p>
<p>St Andrews is seriously overrated in the US. It's not even a target for City firms in the UK.</p>
<p>Cambridge, LSE, St. Andrews I have heard of. Though to be fair, I've only heard of St. Andrews because I met someone who went there...moreover, the entire list of UK schools I know would be that + Oxford, UCL, SOAS...</p>
<p>the_prestige,</p>
<p>Never implied any "dumbness". I bet a lot of really smart people don't read People magazine or know the latest gossip about Prince William. :)</p>
<p>No, Sam Lee, the certain segment is not those with British relatives. It is those who go to New England and perhaps other East Coast private schools and a few top publics. I remember my friend from Groton said a few years ago 10% of the graduating class matriculated at UK universities, overwhelmingly St Andrews.</p>
<p>Now, now, now. St. Andrews is falling way over your head, CCers! I mean, why don't you consider how much overrated LSE is in the USA! In fact, many distinguished academics prefer (esp. those in the LACs) prefer LSE to Oxbridge because Oxbridge is way more elitist :) I may be wrong but that's what I've heard and read. Can't produce the link, though - don't remember the website.</p>
<p>I expect to receive of a LOT of heat.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Now, now, now. St. Andrews is falling way over your head, CCers! I mean, why don't you consider how much overrated LSE is in the USA! In fact, many distinguished academics prefer (esp. those in the LACs) prefer LSE to Oxbridge because Oxbridge is way more elitist I may be wrong but that's what I've heard and read. Can't produce the link, though - don't remember the website.</p>
<p>I expect to receive of a LOT of heat.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The fact that many Americans put Oxford over Cambridge is wrong, and that LSE is the undisputed no.3 is also plain wrong. </p>
<p>In the UK the ranking actually goes like this: </p>
<p>1/2: Cambridge or Oxford
3/4: Imperial or LSE
5/6: Warwick or UCL</p>
<p>
[quote]
I probably already know more than most people in the US.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sam, you certainly have a very high opinion of yourself -- that is for sure. ;)</p>
<p>^lol...be nice now!!</p>
<p>^ just a small joke sam - no harm intended!</p>