Rating top UK universities vs top US universities

<p>I don’t think US and UK universities are directly comparable. British undergraduate degrees are highly specialized, meaning you pretty much study one single subject only (or at most two related subjects) for three or four years. US undergraduate education on the other hand, especially in the liberal arts model, is more concerned with breadth than depth. In addition to their own major field of study, US students are normally required to take several classes in different areas as part of the “core curriculum”.</p>

<p>Specialization does have advantages though. In engineering specifically, I would say that a 4-year MEng from a top UK school like Imperial College London gives you an in-depth level of training that would be comparable to that of a first-year PhD student in the US, except that, in the US, it would normally take six years of study (4-year B.S + 2-year M.S.) to reach that same level.</p>

<p>^Not true- lots of top engineering schools have 4+ (Columbia FU) or 5 years BS/MS programs which would give u an equivalent education. The 4 year Meng program is not comparable always to even most BS/MS because it lacks a research dissertation and is typically course based. So while an MS student would engage in research work, the Meng student would just have the opportunity to take graduate classes for Credit which you can do in most top-tier research programs in the US just not with a fluff degree called Meng.</p>

<p>Most people are not really doing comparisons the right way most likely because they have not attended school in both countries.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>MEng students in the UK, e.g. at Imperial or Cambridge, are required to complete a substantial fourth-year technical project that is actually comparable for example to the so-called “master’s thesis” in the 4+1 (BS/MEng) program at MIT. </p>

<p>In fact, in most US universities nowadays, it is possible to get an MS degree based on course work only or requiring at most a very shallow research project. The master’s degree in the US is increasingly viewed as “remedial degree” to make up for the lack of specialization in the B.S.</p>

<p>I stand therefore by my previous comments.</p>

<p>Yup, ongoing project throughout the year which we are supposed to spend at least 2 full days per week on, culminating in a sub, but near, 100 page dissertation (20000-30000 if you like words). Some of these result in papers depending on what the topic/application. Dunno what the norm is but it felt pretty substantial to me.</p>

<p>I will add however that from what I’ve heard from my American lecturers it is not comparable to BS/MS. But why would it be we’re comparing 4 to 5/6 years. Yes the American MS is more substantial than the MEng and also than the 1yr MSc. It is however comparable to some 2yr masters programmes being run in Europe for example at ETH Zurich and KTH Stockholm (just random examples, there are loads). Here I am speaking in terms of rigour not in terms of quality of research or prestige.</p>

<p>One thing I question about the English system is the idea that 18 year olds are ready to be sure about their ultimate field of study. My student changed completely in his focus because of new subjects to which he was introduced in college. At my British uni, I was amazed by certain majors such as Byzantine studies. Are there many teenagers who really know that they are ready to study Byzantine history and nothing but Byzantine history for their whole university experience? Aside from missing out on so many other wonderful possibilities in life, it seems to me that such students would not necessarily be getting a solid understanding of the field of history and all of its wonders of the non-Byzantine type. Frankly, as interesting as Byzantine history is, I think I would find three straight years of it a bit stultifying, and I would not like that to be the only focus of my, or my child’s, educational experience in college.</p>

<p>"MEng students in the UK, e.g. at Imperial or Cambridge, are required to complete a substantial fourth-year technical project that is actually comparable for example to the so-called “master’s thesis” in the 4+1 (BS/MEng) program at MIT.</p>

<p>In fact, in most US universities nowadays, it is possible to get an MS degree based on course work only or requiring at most a very shallow research project. The master’s degree in the US is increasingly viewed as “remedial degree” to make up for the lack of specialization in the B.S."</p>

<p>You equated it to a 4+2 MS projects.I think this is wrong but I am not sure. For an MS (research) you do two years of research as opposed to a fourth year technical project- they are not the same thing at all. There are MS coursework based degrees but they are not respected. Meng and MS are usually not the same in the US most of the time.</p>

<p>“I will add however that from what I’ve heard from my American lecturers it is not comparable to BS/MS. But why would it be we’re comparing 4 to 5/6 years. Yes the American MS is more substantial than the MEng and also than the 1yr MSc. It is however comparable to some 2yr masters programmes being run in Europe for example at ETH Zurich and KTH Stockholm (just random examples, there are loads). Here I am speaking in terms of rigour not in terms of quality of research or prestige.”</p>

<p>yeah u are correct. Also a large number of undergraduates in the US write a thesis before graduation as a result of research- it could be library based or research based depending on the field.</p>

<p>Again Imperial and Cambridge are top universities. But what happens at the bottom of the top at schools like Exeter, Bath, Newcastle, Sheffield. While you will find strong standards at Bates and Colby which are lower in the LAC pool can you say the same for British schools.</p>

<p>Not everyone goes to Oxbridge, Imperial, LSE neither does everyone go to HYPSM+Ivies. I know a lot of people on college confidential do but thats a fraction of society.</p>

<p>Sefago - The author of that article is much better qualified to comment on the respective differences between the US and UK than you are. From what i can tell you have never even been to Britain let alone studied there. The article had many quotes from Yale and Oxford faculty and students, so why then do you feel your unfounded opinion supersedes them?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>By the time we start A Levels at 16 we have already narrowed down our subjects to four, and by the time we finish it’ll be three. So i think we have a good idea of what we like and dont like. Some people do change their minds, drop out and reapply the following year. And many people go on to study and work in things completely unrelated to their degrees.</p>

<p>Personally i feel that in the US students are treated like teenagers, a lot of the time still living off their parents and that colleges (especially LACs) are just an extension of high school. Here we’re legally adults; we dont live in a cocooned campus or are mollycoddled by professors, and we take adult decisions like deciding on a degree sooner.</p>

<p>As someone who attended both a British and a U.S. university, I did see certain differences, but being the difference was not in how much more adult the British students were. In fact, I was actually shocked at the incredible passivity of my fellow students at the Redbrick British Uni I attended. It seemed to me that American students were much more likely to ask questions and to be proactive, whereas British students just seemed to take down what the professors said and do their work dutifully. I was not sure why that was at the time, but I suspect that it was because the British students were so coddled at the time. Not only was it extremely inexpensive to go to university for the privileged few who could go, but students got welfare during the summer and allowances paid for by the government. Although I certainly think U.S. universities should cost less, I do think the fact that they cost real money and the fact that American students by and large expected to do on-campus as well as hold summer jobs made them much more active in getting a decent education. The actual method of teaching, in which students wrote endless papers that regurgitated what critics said instead of doing a certain amount of independent thinking about the literature at hand, also contributed to that sense of passivity. </p>

<p>Furthermore, just because you take on an adult decision does not mean it is going to be a wise one. The students of Byzantine history may not be aware of the larger framework of history in what they’re missing.</p>

<p>Frankly, we can entertain ourselves by disputing this, but one does not have to be on CC long to know that students from all over the world flock to the U.S. for higher education in drastically greater numbers–even proportionally–than they do to the UK. For whatever other social problems and annoyances we face as a country, our educational system for universities is widely acknowledged as perhaps the most expensive, but also clearly as the best in the world.</p>

<p>“Sefago - The author of that article is much better qualified to comment on the respective differences between the US and UK than you are. From what i can tell you have never even been to Britain let alone studied there.”</p>

<p>And you know this because . . .</p>

<p>I thought his opinions where Ok, but they did not give any insight into any differences between the system except ramble alot. I would take his opinion with a grain of salt- he studied at oxford and not the typical red brick british University so his experience cannot be extrapolated.</p>

<p>“Personally i feel that in the US students are treated like teenagers, a lot of the time still living off their parents and that colleges (especially LACs) are just an extension of high school. Here we’re legally adults; we dont live in a cocooned campus or are mollycoddled by professors, and we take adult decisions like deciding on a degree sooner.”</p>

<p>LOL, so whats the results . . . </p>

<p>“As someone who attended both a British and a U.S. university, I did see certain differences, but being the difference was not in how much more adult the British students were. In fact, I was actually shocked at the incredible passivity of my fellow students at the Redbrick British Uni I attended. It seemed to me that American students were much more likely to ask questions and to be proactive, whereas British students just seemed to take down what the professors said and do their work dutifully.”</p>

<p>You actually hit the nail on the head since your experience aligns with those of several others. My own experiences as I have pointed out are inconsequential since I dont believe in using my personal anecdotes to prove a point.</p>

<p>Guys, I’m a student from the UK. If I want to find a job in NYC (or in the US in general), as I have got a green card but not a UK permanent residency. Would it be wiser to go to LSE or Emory University for undergraduate study?</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>^ this is a hard choice. Emory is not quite recruited on wall street but it could be seen as a better alternative to LSE. However LSE has huge name in America- its like going to Princeton or Stanford lol when you tell people from NYC or Washington DC, which is not really the case. I would say the best school for someone who wants to study in the UK and come to work in the US with a recognized degree:</p>

<p>LSE, Edinburgh, St Andrews, Oxbridge and increasingly UCL.</p>

<p>I saw you dropped Imperial- I would guess its the ridiculous costs. Dont take my advise as word, ask other more qualified people though.</p>

<p>“Would it be wiser to go to LSE or Emory University for undergraduate study?”</p>

<p>Which is cheaper for you? Also you could go to Emory for undergrad and maybe LSE for masters. Less party fun in LSE though, the collegiate spirit in the UK is massively different.</p>

<p>They dont do keg stands in the UK lol.</p>

<p>Now that we have all of that settled, perhaps someone let us know whether it’s more prestigious to play for Manchester United or for the New York Yankees.</p>

<p>Football (Soccer) >>>>> baseball</p>

<p>Enough said</p>

<p>What pays more Yankees or Man U?</p>

<p>LSE over Emory anyday.</p>

<p>LSE is a world leading institution.</p>

<p>This is quite an interesting article on british schools and their selectivity towards international students:</p>

<p>[Universities</a> ‘admitting more foreign students’ - Telegraph](<a href=“Universities 'admitting more foreign students'”>Universities 'admitting more foreign students')</p>

<p>I did my undergrad at a top 50 UC and my Masters and LSE. Apart from being a self-proclaimed “world class” institution, the LSE can’t compare to US schools in some regards, especially when it comes to research.</p>

<p>I want to be an academic and I’m going to be pursuing a PhD at Cornell in the fall and what really put me off about the UK schools is funding.</p>

<p>Graduate student funding and how much they pay professors (a pittance in both areas) is what disadvantages UK schools and it shows. UK schools don’t spend nearly as much as US schools. Thus, I found that professors at LSE were less engaging and more likely to spend less face-to-face time with students.</p>

<p>It’s different strokes for different folks when it comes to undergrad, though. US schools are definitely better if you want to go into academia, but if you just want to work, LSE, Oxbridge and Imperial are hard to beat. US schools have the advantage if you want to go into academia or get a PhD because of the amount of money they can throw around.</p>

<p>Whether its US or UK, if you want to just get a job after school, what will really matter in your undergrad years is who you meet and the experiences you gain outside of the classroom, through internships or work.</p>

<p>If I were in the shoes of an undergrad, I’d go where the money is better. A great name versus a very good name school is not worth it if you’re too busy with work (to pay off tuition fees) to enjoy the entire university experience.</p>

<p>Yeah, British A-levels are pretty easy. SATs are a joke though. Would like to see how most ‘further maths’ SAT students would handle FP2, FP3, and M3 modules from the British A-levels. I’m not saying they’re hard, but it’s quite a difference.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>‘Byzantine studies’ is probably an extreme and somewhat unusual example. In most cases, UK university students study broad subjects (like history, mathematics, physics, biology, etc.) that give them both depth and breadth in their chosen field. </p>

<p>Nowadays it is even possible (and somewhat common) to combine two subjects in one single bachelor’s degree. For example, Oxford allows you to major in history together with either English, political science, economics, or modern languages. At the LSE on the other hand, one can double major in economics and mathematics, or get a joint degree in history and international relations, or history and government.</p>