I have recently been accepted to Sociology & Politics at the University of Glasgow, Social Anthropology at the University of St. Andrews, and International Relations & Politics at Queen Mary University of London. I have visited Glasgow and St. Andrews, but have not been to Queen Mary.
I was wondering how these schools and programs compare with academics, employability, social life, the area the school is in, how they view American students, public opinion and view, and other relevant factors.
I have an interest in all of the subjects and programs I have been accepted to so that is a non issue. Any opinions or thoughts on the subject would be greatly appreciated.
All 3 are good schools. If you are thinking about post grad in the US, they will all be well known in academic circles. Academically they will all be challenging but it will be up to you, you get out what you put in, if you are in the library more often than the pub then you will do better. Glasgow and QMUL are both urban campuses, I know QMUL quite well I used to live quite near, its what you would describe as gritty East London (although to be honest it has been a while 25 years+ and the 2012 Olympics spruced the place up a bit). I am not a fan of London unless money is literally no object ,I find it congested and hideously expensive, If your going to live in London, at least find a nice bit and QMUL is not in a nice bit, but London is London as far as lights and entertainment etc.Glasgow is to the UK what Oakland is to the US, blue collar, port, edgy but the weather in Oakland is 1000 times better, Glasgow has a lively nightlife and you wont be stuck for things to do. St Andrews is a quaint seaside town, the university dominates but is much smaller in student numbers than either Glasgow or QMUL who have a larger research output than St A’s. Since you have visited both Weegie and St A’s I guess you know what I mean. St A’s has one of the highest entry standards for UK and EU students so your cohort will be among the academic cream. Good luck in whatever you choose.
^ Good run-down.
What are you looking for? What goals?
St. Andrews probably is best known among Americans among the 3.
@PurpleTitan The end goal would be to have a job that involves writing and politics, I’m not sure exactly what yet. I love big cities which is what appeals to me about Glasgow and QMUL but I also love all the cool traditions and history at St. Andrews as well as it’s proximity to the Highlands. I’d love to be able to see other parts of Europe and the world while I’m over there which I recognize might be more difficult at St. Andrews as there’s no airport. When it comes down to it I just want to go to the school that will allow me to have the best experience possible.
St A’s has a shuttle to Edinburgh airport takes about 1hr 20 mins. To get to Heathrow from QMUL 1 hr 30 mins just on the tube, Stansted 2Hrs+, City airport will be less but your limited where you can get to. Flying from and to Glasgow is the most convenient.
If you don’t know what you want to do or your interests yet, I highly recommend the much more flexible and generalist American higher education system if that is within the same price range.
@PurpleTitan I know my interests I just don’t know what kind of career I want to have yet.
Queen Mary is in a gritty area of London. It’s heavily commuter and one of the less desirable London universities. Housing will either be in that area and okay price wise, or outrageously expensive. So, I’d nix it unless you got a major scholarship/bursary/prize/incentive of some sort.
Glasgow the University is aristocratic as opposed to Glasgow the city. It’s very prestigious in a city reborn.
St Andrews is the most prestigious.
Current (2018) Times University World Rankings have Glasgow at 80, Queen Mary University of London at 121
and St Andrews at 143. Personally, I would choose Glasgow or Queen Mary, depending on whether you would rather be in London or Scotland. Glasgow may not be as fashionable with some people as St Andrews, or as heavily promoted in the US, but is a solid university, as is Queen Mary.
This post is from earlier this year - the OP has made her decision and started college by now.
@lizzzar there is more to university selection than the Times ranking. It’s interesting, and one data point, but when my kid was accepted to #46, #143, #228 and some others I’m not going to bother to look up, I certainly didn’t automatically think she should go to the highest on one particular ranking scheme. The TUR uses:
Teaching: the learning environment
27.5 per cent
Research: volume, income and reputation
27.5 per cent
Citations: research influence
35 per cent
International outlook: staff, students and research
7.5 per cent
Industry income: innovation
2.5 per cent
For an undergrad student that is far too heavily weighted towards research and not nearly weighted enough towards teaching and undergrad experience. I was a grad student at a school that performs well on those metrics, and an undergrad at a school that doesn’t even make the cut to be on this list. My undergrad experience was so much better for me than what I saw at the large research university where I TAed.
Agreed, @VickiSoCal. Using those numbers above, it seems THE rankings are 62.5% based on current + older research (older research as measured by frequency of citation). These rankings seem to be mostly helpful for globally-focused research universities measuring their relative research output. If that’s important to you, then yes, it’s helpful.
There are lots of rankings, people should look at the ones valuable to them (along with qualitative info, such as visits & tours, conversations with guidance counselors who have placed students there, meetings with university personnel, etc). Here are a couple that would be similar to USNWR in the U.S. (more targeted for lay audience looking at undergrad). They are also imperfect data points (as is USNWR)
https://www.theguardian.com/education/ng-interactive/2017/may/16/university-league-tables-2018
https://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings