<p>I may go to undergrad school in UK and then to grad school in US. Although 3 years of undergrad program in UK is widely considered comparable with 4 years of undergrad program in US, I think applicants to grad program in US from school in UK have a disadvantage in their relatively less time to engage in research than students in US. Is this true? For me, research experience will be the most significant part in undergrad period, and it's also important in grad program admission. How is research environment in UK?</p>
<p>I know people who have gone from UK undergrad to US postgrad. I can’t answer the specific question of how much research you get in each country, but don’t forget in the UK you would only be studying your main subject, so you would have less time taken up with gen ed requirements. A reputable UK university degree would certainly have some research involved; have a look at what each university you’re considering includes. For instance, I understand you want to do biology, and one of the universities you were thinking of is York:
[BSc</a> in Biology - Biology, The University of York](<a href=“http://www.york.ac.uk/biology/undergraduate/programmes/biology/]BSc”>Biology (BSc) - Undergraduate, University of York)</p>
<p>Or possibly one of the four-year UK degrees with a year in industry (if your visa allows it) might give you wider research experiences and work better for you.</p>
<p>I was just inspired by your proposal of four-year UK degrees. It sounds great to me, but how about this? I will first finish three-year UK degree and apply to US grad programs. If I will not be satisfied with my result, I will take Master degree course in UK and then apply to both US Master course and UK Doctor course. The reason why I’m persisting about US schools is that their program of my interest is recently so densely funded. But if my merit of taking PhD in UK will be greater than that in US, I will rather choose to stay in UK. </p>
<p>York has pretty nice biology-related courses and seems to have nice research research environment for my interested area, according to your link. I will also check other universities of my choice. Thank you.</p>
<p>Why does this keep coming up?</p>
<p>A UK Bachelor’s degree is just as good as a USA Bachelor’s degree. Maybe even better. Nobody will be bothered that you only spent three years. Do you really think that USA grad schools say “Well, this English applicant looks good, he has a BA from Cambridge with a first, but he only spent three years to get it. But this applicant has a BA from Podunk U that he spent four years to get. Let’s take the one from Podunk!”</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>The reason it only takes three years at English universties is that they expect their students to arrive already knowing everything that a USA university teaches in the first year. That’s why it is harder to get into UK colleges and unis. Once you get your BA, that’s just as good as an American BA, and possibly better.</p>
<p>TheRealKEVP, I think OP was talking about research opportunities in the U.S. compared to those in the U.K. He does have a point: undergraduate students in the U.K. rarely, if ever, undertake research. In the U.S., there is a plethora of research opportunities that graduate schools weigh very heavily.</p>
<p>MeIsHM’s comment summed up my opinion perfectly. I understand that undergrad programs in UK offer education of high quality, but I’m worried about how much I can engage in research in UK undergrad program. Many competitive American undergrad students begin research in their Sophomore year, so I hope to begin research in my Freshman year in UK, if possible. If MeIsHM is totally right, I will not have research experience enough for me to get into competitive American grad program. I’m fearing such a possibility.</p>
<p>You say American undergrads do research, could you give me an example of the kind of research they do? </p>
<p>I know a lot of Americans who have studied abroad in the UK and the majority complained about the work being too hard, they said they are used to a more structured way of learning. How are students who are used to being guided through their degree able to conduct independent and original research? One person even said to me “how am I supposed to write this essay, we haven’t been told what books to read” - this is all anecdotal of course but I simply do not believe that US students engage in proper research in their undergrad years, if that were true then why do US grad students have to learn research techniques in the first two years of their PhDs?</p>
<p>So, it seems that I don’t have to worry about research opportunity. Then, UK seems very nice place to spend my undergrad period.</p>
<p>Undergraduate research experiences in the U.S. is not necessarily equivalent to research work done by PhD’s nor does it have to be to be of great value in admissions for U.S. graduate schools. But many undergrads certainly do proper research. Some join labs with positions starting at the bottom and of increasing responsibility. Some are on teams or are independent with supervision by a professor. Having these kinds of opportunities exposes the student to the research process and allows them to demonstrate understanding of what research entails and aptitude for it that can be discussed in the student’s Letters of Recommendation. Without such work and those types of letters, graduate schools will not admit students to PhD programs directly from undergraduate program. Those students will have to do a master’s degree with research first.</p>
<p>For instance, my daughter was admitted directly to a PhD track program after getting her BSc. She had many semester and summer long research experiences and one on a project that lasted`18 months which resulted in a publication with an author credit. She did many things to contribute to this project which required taking graduate classes to get background in the mathematics theory used for her part of the project. She did develop an algorithm which was novel and improved the speed of the processes, among other activities. </p>
<p>Now, in her phD program, she completed the studies required of a Master’s degree then took the qualifying exams for the PhD. So the path at this particular university is the same as BS…>MS…>PhD program. But the advantage is that 1) you don’t have to apply to MS program then also apply and hope to get into a PHD program, you are already in and 2) the master’s is funded, where if you are in stand alone program you often are self pay.</p>
<p>Here is a quick idea of the sort of research that goes on at one university that may develop into publications and/or senior thesis.
[Summer</a> labs and learning yield student discoveries | Today at Brown](<a href=“Web Login Service”>Web Login Service)</p>
<p>From what you describe it sounds as if the learning of research skills is an optional part of ones degree in the US. I am afraid there is no escaping it here in Britain. In the UK it is usual to expose students to research and its various processes from day one. I am not a scientist so I can’t comment on lab work such as you describe BrownParent, but I have friends who certainly did similar projects to your daughter and they also went straight onto a PhD without the need for a master’s degree. The only difference seems to be that your daughter’s project was not compulsory and theirs were.</p>
<p>I had to write a 12,000 word long dissertation in my final year and it had to be original and worked on independently using the skills I had learned during my degree. I know a few people whose undergrad dissertations were deemed good enough to be published in journals; do US students do anything similar? I rather think the UK is as good if not a better place to study if gradate studies in the US are your ultimate goal.</p>
<p>Nordicblue, some colleges (and some majors, e.g. political science) in the United States also require a senior thesis in order to graduate – they’re nothing special. However, OP is referring to independent research carried out by undergraduate students. This research is not required and carries no academic weight. It is carried out to showcase the student’s initiative and research abilities. </p>
<p>[Research</a> Opportunities at Harvard Undergraduate Research at Harvard](<a href=“http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k71606&pageid=icb.page351002]Research”>http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k71606&pageid=icb.page351002)</p>
<p>BrownParent’s daughter’s experience is pretty interesting. Skipping MS is challenging but worthwhile. I heard from my friend in university that each year small number of students in his major skip MS as a result of their decent performance in research. If I will go to US undergrad program, I will aim to do so by concentrating on my independent research. If I will go to UK undergrad program, the result will be the same, no matter how well I will do in my research, though. I will just spend four years in BSc and MS programs and go to PhD. I’m glad that there are such many options to go to PhD program early.</p>
<p>“From what you describe it sounds as if the learning of research skills is an optional part of ones degree in the US. I am afraid there is no escaping it here in Britain. In the UK it is usual to expose students to research and its various processes from day one.”</p>
<p>Nordic Blue, no need to slap around the US system. The range of courses and programs across the 2600 colleges and universities makes it almost impossible to make a sweeping statement that is true for all of them. Equally, ‘expose’ to research and its processes from day one is so broad that almost any educational institution could claim the same.</p>
<p>That said, it is fair to say that in most credible third level programs, in both the UK and the US, students will be expected to ‘research’ something in their field as part of completing their degrees. Depending on the subject area, that might be research papers (in history, say) or learning how to do (and later develop) experiments to test a hypothesis (say, in chemistry). When, how much, to what level, etc. will vary by the institution, the lecturer and the student.</p>
<p>However, what the OP is referring to is the involvement of undergrad students in primary research. In the sciences there have always been opportunities for student to be ‘involved’, through doing low level lab tasks. Increasingly, however, undergrads are doing higher order work, and even original work. In the US, especially but not solely in colleges (ie, third level institutions that have little or no fourth level), this is becoming increasingly common. As an example, the majority of undergrad students in science subjects at William and Mary, for example, will be involved in primary research; as many as a quarter will have published work in peer-reviewed journals before they graduate. I picked W&M partly b/c I know something about it, but also as an example of a good solid state university- not an Ivy League or private university, where you might expect to see support for undergrad work. I think this is the worry that the OP has.</p>
<p>I have heard anecdotally that it can be challenging to move from UK undergrad to US grad (mostly over on the uk site, the student room) but the complaints seem to relate more to the ancillary pieces, not the quality of the degree. That is, applicants to competitive grad programs in the US typically have accumulated a lot of other experience during their uni years, whether by doing primary research during term or research / internships during breaks. Although these opportunities do exist in the UK, most frequently in the sciences, they are not (imo) as much a part of the fabric of undergraduate life as they are in the US. Watching what the UK students I know do with their breaks, I see much less emphasis on CV building than I do with the US students that I know. </p>
<p>So, OP, if you go to the UK knowing that you plan to apply to US grad schools, do your homework early: shortlist programs, look at what they are looking for, build that into your choices of courses, professors, summer work, etc. The combination of having good degrees from both sides is fantastic from your own point of view (and I speak in part as a parent with a student currently in undergrad in the US and one in the UK- and both are preparing to apply to grad school in the opposite place): you have a broader world view- and a broader range of contacts in your field. The UK difference can be an presented as a real plus, adding to what you bring to the US program.</p>
<p>MeIsHM, you say ‘some’ majors require a similar thesis - my point was that everyone does one in the UK. All of my scientist friends had to do equally long written dissertations; it certainly isn’t just the humanists and social scientists that do them. Everyone is able to conduct independent research in their own free time. It isn’t such a big deal when you consider that it is compulsory element of ones education, which perhaps explains why nobody in the UK talks about getting research experience at university.</p>
<p>collegemom3717 I am not slapping around the US system. It just seems to me that the two systems of higher education have different priorities and will therefore do things differently. I can only talk about my personal experience and that of the Americans I know. I mentioned my dissertation as an example of the research any British student would be expected to do. The American students I know were very clear with me that they never had to do extended pieces of writing or conduct their own independent research.</p>
<p>The place where I will get PhD is pretty important, while it’s not much important where I will get MS and BSc. So, I need to be a competitive applicant to go to one of best programs in US in spite of shorter years spent in higher education. I will try to somehow strengthen aspects mentioned as integral by collegemon. </p>
<p>I don’t know which undergrad program I will get in, yet. Probably it will be either Imperial or Warwick. I believe universities in this level are academically strong enough for me to aim to go to programs ranked top 10 in area of my interest in the US. So, the problem is such peripheral factors which students in UK usually don’t consider as integral. Preparing early for American grad program admission will distinguish me from other applicants from UK. So, I think I have much more advantage than other int’l applicants.</p>
<p>Sorry if this comes across as rude, but you are being quite silly worry123. You haven’t event started college yet, you can not know that you will do a PhD let alone know where you will do it.</p>
<p>If you are applying to study biology (are you?), you must know that the life sciences have one of the largest numbers of sub-disciplines. You can have no idea which one will interest you the most or whether you even want to stay within the biological sciences (many undergrad biologists move into different fields entirely). Only after you know which facet of biology interests you the most and after you have a pretty clear research proposal can you begin to think about where you will do your PhD - not every university will cater to your specific academic interests and most will not have staff willing or able to be your advisor.</p>
<p>My strong determination to research about stem cell and develop regenerative medicine is the only thing which distinguishes me from others. I first decided to pursue this career five years ago, and it made me move from my native country to the U.S., where the area of my interest is most popular in the world. Although I will not spend my undergrad period here, I will certainly come back to US for my PhD period. Although the area of my interest is, as you mentioned, broad and has ambiguous boundary, I already decided where to get my PhD. The place should be either UCSF, UCSD, UCI, UCLA, Scrips Research Institute, Stanford, Harvard, MIT, WM, or Cambridge (located in England, though). I don’t know well about circumstances of British universities, including Cambridge, but I know that the most funded and well-renowned stem cell / regenerative medicine programs are basically in California. </p>
<p>My selection of schools where I will get BSc and MS was based on their curriculum. I simply don’t think American curriculum is efficient in making me familiar with my area of interest, so I chose some British schools renowned for their Biology department and stem cell research. But for PhD, these schools are no longer attractive compared with the above 10 schools.</p>
<p>As I say, you can not decide where you will do your PhD (if you do one at all) before you know what it is you will be researching. You appear to have chosen universities purely for their prestige, this is absurd and no doubt in four or five years you will regret having said this. The most important thing to consider when applying for a PhD is where are the specialists in your (often very narrow and obscure) branch of your subject. Quite often the department or academic advisor which suits you exactly will be at a university you have never heard of before. This is a silly discussion, you really ought to focus your attention on the present and concentrate on getting into university.</p>
<p>Nordicblue, some colleges require senior theses for all students (e.g. Princeton). Other colleges allow individual faculties to decide whether or not a research project is necessary (Harvard and Yale) – some departments use a rigorous final examination in lieu of a senior thesis. </p>
<p>Other than that, you are absolutely correct with your advice. Warwick and ICL are both excellent institutions; OP won’t be at a disadvantage if he went to them. It is way to early for him to be thinking of a PhD program just yet. Entry into a graduate program depends on the GPA (or degree classification), recommendations, the GRE, and personal statement.</p>
<p>Worry - if you are absolutely sure you want to live and work in the US, and study a very specific subject in California only, I really do not understand why you are applying to the UK. Especially as it seems to be causing you so many problems and upset. Just apply to CA schools.</p>