<p>Just out of curiosity, how do the top international colleges stack up against the American top 15 universities (HYPMS, etc.)? What is the quality of the education like?</p>
<p>I've heard alot of good things about Oxford, Cambridge, Beijing University, IIT, etc. But how do they stack up against American universities (not just US News rankings)?</p>
<p>It's generally hard to compare International Universities to the American system because they are so different. But in general the US and the top UK ones are the best. There are a couple good ones in Switzerland though.</p>
<p>Cambridge, in my opinion, is a much better school than any of HYPSMC. The Chinese universities and IIT probably have just as good, if not much more qualified students, but they severely lack resources, and the educational systems (in Beida and Tsinghua, at least) need some serious revamping.</p>
<p>I don't try to compare them too much since they're so different. I was considering applying to some scottish universities since their system is much more closely related to the US system than anywhere else. :p</p>
<p>Oxford is superior academically compared to HYP. Oxford has continued to produce more world leaders than all the Ivy League schools combined. Oxford Alumni are national leaders in India, Ghana, Australia, Jordan, Norway, Pakistan and the list goes on and on </p>
<p>Oxford additionally has its share of Noble Prize winners.
Oxford excels even with a $1.2 billion endowment compared to Harvards $22 billion. </p>
<p>It is phenomenal that Oxford has been doing this for more than 800 years. </p>
<p>Cambridge and Harvard would be in line for second place. Yale takes the third place.</p>
<p>LSE, Imperial, and the Sorbonne are much better known around the world than Dartmouth, Brown and Cornell and the rest of the Ivy League.</p>
<p>I disagree. For example, Cambridge actually has more Nobel laureates than Oxford. Additionally, a great many graduates from top US schools go to Oxford for graduate (or post-graduate, whatever) study, so it can't claim all the fame. I also strongly object to Yale taking 3rd place. Undergraduate maybe, but on the graduate level it cannot compete with Chicago, Columbia, MIT, etc. :)</p>
<p>I really don't think UK universities are worth the cost for undergraduate study, but Canadian schools (McGill, Toronto, etc.) are probably worth consideration. </p>
<p>Also, if someone really wants to study at Oxford, Cambridge, UCL, LSE, etc., study abroad is a great resource-many colleges allow you to study at these (and other) universities for a year.</p>
<p>It is common knowledge that Cambridge has more Nobel laureates than Oxford. I was referring specifically Oxfords ability to attract future world leaders.</p>
<p>I am not referring to study abroad or extension schools. I am referring to legitimate Oxford. </p>
<p>It is farcical to state that Chicago and Columbia are respected abroad more than Yale.</p>
<p>Many Oxford rejects end up attending HYPS. Laura Spence was a famous example.</p>
<p>"It is farcical to state that Chicago and Columbia are [more respected]..."
Hmmmm...maybe not Columbia, but I know that, at least in Asia, Chicago is probably on par.</p>
<p>but I know that, at least in Asia, Chicago is probably on par.</p>
<p>I believe you are conversing with a constricted international focus. You are probably referring to Chicagos reputation in China and Korea. However, if you consider India and Pakistan, two other Asian countries even LSE would run rings around Chicago. India for example has hundreds of LSE alumni in top positions on at Bombay Stock Exchange.
There are huge LSE Alumni organizations in India, Pakistan, Singapore, Malaysia, Nepal, Burma
..</p>
<p>Now going back to our palatable discussion concerning Yale versus Chicago.
Yale is synonymous with success and job opportunities abroad. Harvard and Yale have been and still are the primary two US academic powerhouses.</p>
<p>Your argument would fall on deaf ears with many internationals, because it is analogous to the argument that Princeton is better than Harvard. </p>
<p>In Britain one would have to continue reminding chaps that one attended Dartmouth College and not Darthmouth, the British Naval Academy. Candidly speaking, people abroad care more about big name American colleges than US News college rankings.</p>
<p>Didn't the OP ask about quality, and not prestige? I would think the quality of a Columbia education remains the same regardless of how well Pakistanis know the school...</p>
<p>okay, i have nothing substantive to offer in terms of quality of education ...</p>
<p>but to those debating the international name-recognition and prestige of the universities, that DEPENDS ON WHERE IN THE WORLD you are!!! in some places, harvard is the best, in others, oxford is still tops. you may be able to assert a certain school has "international prestige" for whichever region you are familiar with, but that is not the case throughout the entire world. many schools have varying levels of prestige; some are widely recognized in a certain part of the world and at the same time are unheard of in other parts of the world.</p>
<p>LSE, imperial are so mcuh more easier to get in than the ivies... my school hav lots of ivy/par school rejects tht gets in lse imperial etc.</p>
<p>I contently believe that the MIT, Chicago, and Stanford are much better academically than the rest of the Ivy League with exception of HYPPenn. </p>
<p>Columbia, Berkeley, Duke, Brown, UVA should really be second echelon schools. Note, incidentally, I am not stating that these are inferior schools. As a matter of fact these universities are better than Harvard and Oxbridge in certain fields. However, Harvard and Oxbridge are the best overall. Indian Institute of Technology and Beijing University are much more competitive than second echelon Ivys.</p>