<p>Congrats on getting into Yale... and A Levels are not THAT intense... I'm sure people taking 5-6 APs during Senior year has the same or more workload than the people taking 3-4 A levels.</p>
<p>theGame: Entry requirements only matter to a certain extent. It's what you do in university and how the university shapes you that determines whether the university is better for you or not. No ranking in the world is based purely on selectivity. Universities such as Cooper Union has a low admit rate, but I don't see it ever rivaling the ivy league schools.</p>
<p>And Harvard being the best university in the world? That's a bit subjective isn't it?</p>
<p>Sure it might be in terms of postgraduate research, but undergraduate teaching? I don't think so...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Congrats on getting into Yale... and A Levels are not THAT intense... I'm sure people taking 5-6 APs during Senior year has the same or more workload than the people taking 3-4 A levels.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It depends on which A Levels we're talking about. Some A Level systems have suffered massive grade inflation. In Singapore, land of the bell curve, I've heard some university students (particularly in UK/US unis) say that after the rigor of the A Levels, the work needed for college feels like a drop in the bucket.</p>
<p>I've heard this comparison of Edexcel A Level Math to Singapore-GCE A Level Math: Edexcel Math covers only about 40% of the curriculum of the Singaporean version. I don't know how valid this comparison really is. But the fact such as comparison even exists suggests that there is a large variance of standard across different types of A Levels.</p>
<p>The workload also differs depending on the subject. A Level Math, for instance, will never be as tough in terms of workload as A Level Music, Theater or Art.</p>
<p>UK unis just weed out the best "nerds" if you will from the oversees-fees-paying applicant pool and inflate their rankings so swiftly its quite amazing. You might not agree. But I certainly am adamant that most measures of ranking are academically focused (graduation rate, peer review) while others require heavy funding (international faculty, international students (indirectly i.e. marketing for them etc), student-faculty ratio). So American unis following the more "logical" holistic approach falter in front of their British counterparts. Just try grappling with the THES world uni rankings. Or the hot new USENEWS ones. Happy New Year.</p>
<p>I speak as someone who has applied/been accepted to both the US and the UK. I choose not to even include sports and minority status etc. while comparing the two because that isn't comparable, really.When I compare the two, the merits of the US system are undeniable. The golden rule in the US is admissions are unpredictable- beyond a certain point, there's no telling what can or cannot get you in. There are a variety of factors that come into play while selecting a student for a US college, and not one seems more important than the other. This gives people who are highly accomplished in a certain area, a chance to compensate for their weaknesses. Also, there is greater emphasis on a certain element of personality - to be able to project yourself in a certain manner and communicate effectively and well, whether it's through extensive writing (multiple essays, often quirky and multidimensional) or interviews.The UK process, in contrast is fairly cut and dry. It's rather predictable. If you have a certain score you apply, and if you don't you just won't cut it in any case, so there's no point bothering. However, you'd still apply to a Harvard or a Yale ( if you wanted to go there), and if you're lucky and have something "intangible" that the colleges are looking for, you might just be in. I chuckled when theGame said US universities focus on the education of the "body". I think that isn't necessarily true, but what I have come to realise is that the US admissions committees look for "interesting" students as opposed to just "highly-qualified" ones. What this means in educational terms is that they look at education holistically, where it's not just about what you study, but whom you interact with and what you learn from them in worldly, adult contexts. It's a gamble, but the US universities, prove what most employers will later tell you, that your success cannot solely depend on how many As you got, it's what differentiates you from the millions of people that get As. If what differentiates you happens to be that you speak Spanish at a US university, it could very well be what differentiates you in getting that job in a Multi National Corporation dealing with Spanish speaking clients. Even if you got a gazillions As in Economics at Oxford, you wouldn't compare to the guy who knows Spanish. Because at that point it isn't about the grades anymore, it's about what else you bring to the table. Even if you volunteer at a hospital through college, that underlines a sense of commitment to a cause you believe in, and consequently will commit yourself in the same manner to your job. You can be stupid as hell or completely oblivious to the world beyond academics even if you get those As. And this is increasingly the trend across the world, more people are realising it isn't about grades.I look at it as the stereotype of British versus American. The "stiff upper lip" versus the "guffaw", that's really what admissions are about anyway. :P
And for whoever said there's no system of legacies in Oxbridge has got to be kidding me. That's where the whole system arose. Watch "The History Boys" if you want to get a glimpse into how it all evolved. Also, google Rahul Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and Bilawal Bhutto Zardari (more relevant)- all less than ordinary academically, but managed to earn spots at Oxbridge because they were children of Heads of States. Now, the US also does this on a fairly similar scale, but is not very holier than thou about it. Rahul Gandhi even got kicked out of Harvard and had to continue at Rollins College or something like that. Also, the US compensates for this by trying to encourage first-generation college goers, ethnic minorities etc. Their cause is more social upliftment through education, noble as it is, it's not without its faults.
I love the UK- the history and the culture, and I will definitely consider coming to Cambridge if I meet my condition. The US just pales in comparison, if you want a very depth-oriented academic focus. Since I'm not sure on that front, I'll take my time to decide. Suffice to say that both systems aren't foolproof or right, just that in my opinion the US gets it right in many respects.</p>
<p>^ Depends primarily on your A grade subjects and the course(s) you've applied for. For example, Economics and Accounting and Finance are two extremely competitive courses - even 3 As in 3 "good" A Level subjects (i.e. not easy subjects like Accounting, General studies, Music etc) don't guarantee admission. So either you will have to score more As (accepted applicants usually have 4 As) or write a exceptional personal statement and have a great REC written for you. That academic competition is tough, I agree. Though no ECs - so no other worries.</p>
<p>Anyone else with decisions? There have got to be more CCers who applied to English schools...
(In the meantime, the heated debate on the merits of american vs british schools continues...;) )</p>
<p>^^ was wondering the same thing. I read somewhere that they'll start sending emails tomorrow. Mails were posted out 2nd Jan, but via normal post so i'm guessing they'll take a while to get to their destinations.. But some people (Singapore, India, etc.) have already got their decisions either via letter or email.
Why keeping the wait longer for some poor souls like myself?? ):</p>
<p>I got accepted into Oxford to study PPE a few weeks ago. I am an American with decent scores (a handful of 5s), but I feel like my good performance in the interview (I had to use Skype) and demonstration of substantial interest in politics, philosophy, and econ in my essay are what helped me.</p>
<p>I'm sorry to hear that, Flibb. What is the difference between A-levels and AS-levels (sorry, I'm not familiar with the British system).
soccerunner678: Congratulations, could you tell us what APs you took exactly and your SAT scores? Also, what was the interview like? How do you determine whether to do you interview on skype, in NY/LA, or on campus? Also, are you going to go to Oxford? Any tips on apps?</p>
<p>confused_vnese: yeah, my friend told me some singaporeans have already gotten their decisions! >< Do they actually send email to internationals? or mail? xD</p>
<p>It seems like the decisions were sent on Friday. Many students in the UK have already received their decisions. I believe internationals receive decisions in the same manner by mail.</p>
<p>For us, extra curricular isn't monitored nor is it used to work out university applications because, in the Uk (oddly...), we do it because we E-N-J-O-Y I-T. Not because it'll look good on the resume. Extra curricular remains just that in the UK, extra. Most schools do compulsory sport up until 6th form, then we can do clubs. We do stuff outside of school too. It's all about getting time to enjoy the things you are good at. Not impressing others.</p>
<p>They really don't care about ecs at oxbridge. They dont even require recommendations from subject teachers. Dats why i hope to go to the US.
My friend hu was prediced 40 out of 42 points for the IB was rejected from oxford. So were 4 other kids from my school.
Well UCL, imperial and LSE r all top-notch.</p>
<p>^ Oxbridge places great emphasis on the interview so even though a 40/42 predicted on the IB is impressive, a less-than-stellar interview might still kill one's chances.</p>
<p>@kwaldner and others: They sent mail and emails as well for internationals because our mails take forever to reach us. Policies vary among colleges so i'd suggest you email your admission office to ask.
I got my email yesterday (a Sunday!). Things do not look good ): There were 30 people competing for 3 places for my course at my college so...</p>