<p>Marketing indeed, I agree. The same could be said of McGill in Canada. Not to say it's a bad school as it is very good, but it's perceived in the US as better than it really is. Law, business, medicine, engineering, economics, computer science, and most other disciplines except psychology are better at the University of Toronto. Still, I don't think most people would ever admit that they have been duped, especially those who have chosen to attend. </p>
<p>Does Edinburgh's reputation mean it will provide a better education than St Andrews? Doubtful IMO, since they are both very good. However the perception of education from each of those schools may be wildly different depending on who you ask.</p>
<p>Edinburgh is really famous for medicine (it kinda invented the discipline in the UK). St. Andrews in the USA seems to be more famous but in the UK edinburgh is consideared the better. I would personally put Glasgow at the same level St. Andrews.</p>
<p>Edinburgh and Glasgow are <em>definitely</em> superior to St Andrew's. I've said it before on this forum and I'll say it again - before Prince William went there, barely anyone outside of Scotland had heard of St Andrew's. </p>
<p>But the first question you need to answer when choosing between the three is what kind of environment you want to be in - a big city or a small town? Both Edinburgh and Glasgow are in cities, St Andrew's is not. </p>
<p>Also, not sure who asked this, but mentioning you have a relative who went to Cam during an interview is <em>not</em> a good idea. You'll come off like someone trying to work the old boy's network, which is something Oxbridge gets challenged on by the media and politicians every single year.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
I know two E&M tutors, and about 10 E&M students, and NO it's def not a business degree... or if for some reason, u considered it a business degree, u could consider all the econ courses as business degrees. "Prety simple" lol
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Unless you work at Oxford, I highly doubt you "know" all those people, lol.
Anycase, I don't really care...we'll just stick to our opinions because I don't think either of us will convince the other.</p>
<p>And introduction to management is REQUIRED of everone. course description:
[QUOTE]
Introduction to Management provides an overview of the historical context of modern business and of the major functional areas of management studies such as organisational behaviour, strategic management, technology and operations management, accounting, finance and marketing.
<p>I think pearfire means that the E&M course is theoretical rather than vocational. Look at the course description for Intro to Management - it provides "an overview of the historical context of modern business and of the major functional areas of management studies". Nothing in that looks vocational. </p>
<p>I guess it depends on whether you count 'business' as part of economics or a vocational pathway on its own.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
I think pearfire means that the E&M course is theoretical rather than vocational. Look at the course description for Intro to Management - it provides "an overview of the historical context of modern business and of the major functional areas of management studies". Nothing in that looks vocational.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>read again the quote you have taken: "functional areas of management studies".</p>
<p>BTW, The term vocational did not come up in our discussion. (I wouldn't call it vocational myself.) </p>
<p>imo, oxford e&m is more academically orientied than most business courses, but by vurtue of studying functional areas of management, accounting, finance, marketing, etc it is indeed a business course.</p>
<p>lol... and you think you can't take these modules if you do straight econ at other unis??? if you do straight econ at the LSE, u'll be able to take accounting and fincance and etc...
also, since when do you have to work at a uni to know ppl there? maybe you've just lived there and know lots of classmates who went on to pursue a degree there? or maybe you've even visited that place serveral times, because you considered to apply for E&M there? Or maybe you've met with the E&M tutors at Oxford to see whether it'd be a good fit for you? But I'm sure just because an Management tutor at Oxford told u that E&M is not a business degree, you should disagree with him and instead believe some random guy from the web who probably has no clue about the degree...</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
lol... and you think you can't take these modules if you do straight econ at other unis??? if you do straight econ at the LSE, u'll be able to take accounting and fincance and etc...
[/QUOTE]
At LSE BSc Econ, one would have to go out of the way to choose a business related course for an elective. I don't don't think there's place for more than one (I've researched this extensively since I'm an applicant for fall 07)</p>
<p>At Oxford E&M, intro to management is required, and there is no way to avoid at least 3 business related courses (operations, accounting, finance, or marketing) for electives.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
also, since when do you have to work at a uni to know ppl there? maybe you've just lived there and know lots of classmates who went on to pursue a degree there? or maybe you've even visited that place serveral times, because you considered to apply for E&M there? Or maybe you've met with the E&M tutors at Oxford to see whether it'd be a good fit for you?
[/QUOTE]
To know 10 E&M students (which doesn't accept many students) and 2 tutors, you would have to have strong affiliations. Visiting the school in hopes of getting in wouldn't provide the opportunity to get to know so many e&m students. You're obviously a liar. And judging by your posts on the_studentroom, you're a kid whos applied to said program without referencing the management side in your econ-focused-personal-essay.</p>
<p>??? you do realise that ppl who apply via UCAS need to write one PS for all 6 schools, right? why would I put in management stuff, which would signal to other schools that I'm not that interested in them? do you think an adcom for , say, L101 at the LSE would be happy to read a PS which contains management?</p>
<p>And even if you have "researched this extensively", you still don't have a clue. Why not just ask some current L101 students? It's simple and effective. You actually get a pretty good variety in what you want to do as an elective and you don't have to go out of the way to take a accounting or finance class. Since LSE is pretty focused towards ib anyway, there are actually quite a few econ students who take these courses. Also, did you even apply for L101? Seeing your insightful view about it, I don't believe that you have. Didn't you apply for econometrics? You haven't gotten in, have you? But of course, you're much better informed about it than I am. I'm just someone who actually got into L101, but you definetely know much more about this course, lol... And what's this know thing about? Look up the definition of the word in a dic, it's not that hard. It means "to be acquainted with". And yes, I know E&Mist from 5 colleges, but of course you're right again and I'm lying, lol... You know, it's not that hard to get to know ppl, but I guess with your personality, it's almost impossible, seeing how your thoughts are so easily refuted and don't really make much sense. This is probably why you haven't gotten accepted into the econometrics course... Good to see that the LSE still does care about the quality of its students.</p>
<p>foxdie!: Sorry, pre-professional was what I meant, not vocational! Apologies for the lack of clarity. </p>
<p>As you say, the course covers "an overview of...the major functional areas of management studies". But as I understand it, they are studied as a complement to the historical overview... That said, I am very possibly wrong. I only 'know' one E&Mist (and before any asks, yes, I do 'know' her, she was my housemate last year ;) ), and she actually complains that the course is far too theoretical, including the management component. According to her, it's a major failing of the course.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
And even if you have "researched this extensively", you still don't have a clue. Why not just ask some current L101 students? It's simple and effective. You actually get a pretty good variety in what you want to do as an elective and you don't have to go out of the way to take a accounting or finance class. Since LSE is pretty focused towards ib anyway, there are actually quite a few econ students who take these courses. Also, did you even apply for L101? Seeing your insightful view about it, I don't believe that you have. Didn't you apply for econometrics? You haven't gotten in, have you? But of course, you're much better informed about it than I am. I'm just someone who actually got into L101, but you definetely know much more about this course, lol...
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>I expect a decision soon (not that its any of your businesss, frankly).</p>
<p>And Reading the course requirements and approved electives is much more straightforward than asking around on forums, imo.</p>
<p>I'm sorry. I still don't believe you know 10 e&m students and 2 e&m tutors. Furthermore I still consider e&m to be a business degree (albeit a very prestigious and academically rigorous one.) Let's just part ways because I don't think either of us will successfully convince the other.</p>
<p>You don't have to be sorry. Frankly, I don't expect anyone from the University of Maryland who scored a 600 on the Lit test to understand a plausible thought. English prose does not seem to be one of your strength, at least this is what your test scores indicate. So long, mate. Let's hope we don't have to endure you at the LSE.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
You don't have to be sorry. Frankly, I don't expect anyone from the University of Maryland who scored a 600 on the Lit test to understand a plausible thought. English prose does not seem to be one of your strength, at least this is what your test scores indicate.
[/QUOTE]
That exam was retaken for a much higher score.
However I would still appreciate it if you refrained from researching my stats and reproducing any of my personal information on this public forum.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
So long, mate. Let's hope we don't have to endure you at the LSE.
<p>A representative from LSE came to our school, and they don't look at any standardized test like SAT, SAT II, ACT, or anything. I mean they might see it and notice if you get a really bad grade but they don't care. They also don't really care about your school record, which is really strange I think, all they look are your AP's (they require 5 or 6 of scores of 4 and 5) and most of all, the personal statement or essay you write.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have heard that the US undergrad experience is far more fun than the UK's, but that college is only 3 years over there.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It normally takes 3 years to get a bachelor's degree in arts, humanities, law, or social sciences (economics, sociology, etc.). The standard undergraduate engineering degree (MEng) requires however 4 years of study. The old 3-year BEng is still available, but is being phased out in many schools and is no longer offered for example in Cambridge or Oxford. Other 4-year undergraduate degrees, e.g. Cambridge's MSci or Oxford's MPhys, MMath, MChem, etc. are also becoming the norm now for science majors. </p>
<p>Also, keep in mind that secondary school has one additional year (13th grade) in the UK compared to the US. Therefore, even if you study for a 3-year bachelor's degree, it still takes, counting from 1st grade, the same total number of years as in the States to graduate from college in England.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Marketing indeed, I agree. The same could be said of McGill in Canada. Not to say it's a bad school as it is very good, but it's perceived in the US as better than it really is. Law, business, medicine, engineering, economics, computer science, and most other disciplines except psychology are better at the University of Toronto
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're probably right about engineering, but isn't McGill supposed to be the best medical school in Canada (and indeed of one of the top medical schools in North America ) ?</p>
<p>There is no question that U of T law, engineering and economics are top in Canada by a very large margin. For business one could make an argument that the University of Western Ontario is top (with U of T second). For computer science one could make an argument for the University of Waterloo being better than U of T (with U of T second). The list of subjects goes on and on, but I don't feel like dragging this out. </p>