<p>So basically it's come down to these two. I will be a 2nd year transfer student into UBC Arts and Western Arts (although Social Science or a double major are definitely on my radar and their modular degree program would make it easy to do both)
I'd just like some input on the academics and opportunities at each University. At first UBC seemed like the logical choice due to reputation but Western seems like a more personal school. Also several college review websites seem to be a little unfavorable towards UBC however the two don't seem to be compared often. I'll be undeclared and the tuition and cost of living at Western is lower but not to the point of being a game changer.
Is living in Vancouver worth it? I definitely want to pursue internships and work experience opportunities and the like. Are these harder to come by at Western, being located in London, or do many students participate in them easily during the summer in say, Toronto? One of my qualms with Western is that it's perceived as a party school.</p>
<p>UBC is by far the stronger school of the two. Not only does it have higher rep, but you will genuinely receive better training with better faculty that use better methodologies. </p>
<p>When I think of “personal school,” I think of American SLACs. Western is not nearly that small. </p>
<p>As far as internships go, you can find opportunities in nearly every major metropolitan area. In the worst case scenario, there’s nothing stopping you from accepting a summer position in a different city and subletting your place in Vancouver.</p>
<p>Is UBC’s reputation really that much better? I’ve always considered the big 4 in Canada to be UBC, U of T, McGill and Western?</p>
<p>There is no such thing as “Big 4.” There is only Big 3. </p>
<p>[QS</a> World University Rankings - Topuniversities](<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011/subject-rankings/social-sciences/politics-international-studies]QS”>http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011/subject-rankings/social-sciences/politics-international-studies)</p>
<p>[QS</a> World University Rankings - Topuniversities](<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011/subject-rankings/social-sciences/sociology]QS”>http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011/subject-rankings/social-sciences/sociology)</p>
<p>[QS</a> World University Rankings - Topuniversities](<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011/subject-rankings/social-sciences/economics]QS”>http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011/subject-rankings/social-sciences/economics)</p>
<p>As you can see, in each of these subject rankings UoT, McGill and UBC are roughly similar to each other, and usually in the top-25 or top-30. UoT’s ranking is somewhat skewed because it concentrates on different (read: outdated) methodologies in comparison to the more “Americanized” methods at McGill and UBC. </p>
<p>No other Canadian university even comes close to the Big 3. These three schools indisputably form the “elite” in terms of Canadian post-secondary institutions both in terms of the social sciences and in general terms. </p>
<p>Of course, other universities might be competitive in a specific field (i.e., York’s Osgoode law school), or perhaps even in a very, very specific subfield in the social sciences (i.e., York again, if one wants to do critical/postmodernist IR in Canada.)</p>
<p>I believe they were referring to the “Old Four”, which are members of an athletic conference consisting of Queen’s, McGill, Western and Toronto…not UBC. UBC originated as a McGill offshoot in Vancouver and later became independent, so the “Old Four” could easily extend to UBC. </p>
<p>OP, if you intend to pursue further studies in America and/or internationally I would suggest UBC over Western. However, Vancouver is ridiculously expensive to live in (easily rivals NYC in cost). I couldn’t afford to live there very long. :(</p>
<p>
Citation please.</p>
<p>^ [Google</a> Scholar](<a href=“http://scholar.google.ca/]Google”>http://scholar.google.ca/)</p>
<p>(I’m not going to do your homework for you :p)</p>
<p>I’m not going to waste my time looking for something that doesn’t exist :)</p>
<p>Yes, I suppose this is why QS has UBC consistently in or near top-25 global and Western at/below 100. </p>
<p>Just because one shuts ones eyes doesn’t mean the world stops existing.</p>
<p>The latest QS rankings have UBC at [#51[/url</a>] and not above #30 in the past seven years. I don’t find that credible; if I were to construct a ranking, UBC would be much higher.</p>
<p>In any case, I emphasized a very specific portion of your post. Can you explain how the [url=<a href=“http://www.iu.qs.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/]QS”>http://www.iu.qs.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/]QS</a> methodology](<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/institution/university-british-columbia]#51[/url”>University of British Columbia : Rankings, Fees & Courses Details | Top Universities) is related?
</p>
<p>^ OP is transferring into the Faculty of Arts, and specifically the Social Sciences. Hence, those are the rankings that I linked, which I will thrice emphasize as showing UBC as a top-25/top-30 school, and Western as clearly not one. Had you attentively read my post, you will see that I even acknowledged the caveat that other faculties/departments may have different rankings. </p>
<p>I will issue you a counter-challenge: explain to me how the QS methodology is NOT related to the quality of faculty. Insofar as academic reputation and citations - which form the majority of the QS weighing scheme - are reflective of scholarly impact, UBC’s relatively high showing and Western’s comparatively poor results are reflective of the former’s faculty’s ability to attract the attention and interest of other scholars, whereas the latter evidently cannot. </p>
<p>However, if the OP would like to verify her/himself, then he/she will look at the faculty list of each institution and do some homework on the output of scholars at each school. Since you evidently cannot be bothered to do the same, and since you’ve provided no counter argument as to why my claim is incorrect, unless you can give me a credible reason to continue defending an institution with which I have no affiliation, I will rest my case :p</p>
<p>Edit: Or are you claiming that faculty impact has no correlation with faculty quality? Because I have no idea what you’re claiming, just that you’re vehemently feeding my procrastination habit ^^</p>
<p>^ Alright, I’ll stop playing games. Here’s what I’m getting at:</p>
<p>First, what does it mean to receive “better training” ?
Second, what does it mean to have “better faculty” ?
Third, what does it mean to use “better methodologies” ?</p>
<p>What objectives are we trying to accomplish? What assumptions are we making?</p>
<p>It’s a natural tendency to make this sort of thing into a contest. The various ranking groups make a lot of money that way. CC generates a lot of traffic. But that doesn’t really answer the OP’s question.</p>
<p>So, I think we need to wait for mapo10 to elaborate a little bit. What does s/he want to accomplish through attending a university? What factors have played a role in achieving past goals?</p>
<p>I see. So basically, your view can be boiled down to rather simple agnosticism.</p>
<p>Might I suggest that someone coming onto a website asking specifically for advice about “academics” and “reputation” is likely looking for a better answer than: “I don’t know?” In fact, such a view is better left unsaid.</p>
<p>If you’ll re-read more carefully my last post, you’ll see that I’ve already answered your three "what does it mean?!"s. And since four posts later, you’ve still yet to actually disagree with the rather straightforward proposition of UBC > Western, I’m beginning to seriously lose confidence in the value of continuing this conversation.</p>
<p>LOL @ all this university ranking nonsense. No one actually cares about any of that. One must research schools individually and not rely on rankings…there are numerous fallacies behind ranks, not limited to a) individual faculty recognition (not vague entities such as ‘natural sciences’/‘technology’), b) citations in relevant journals, c) anecdotal evidence, d) journalist bias, e) pretentious horse crap. Not to mention numerous schools discourage rankings, going as far as actively withholding information from magazines and journals that ‘rank’ schools (hello Macleans!). </p>
<p>If ‘rankings’ are the basis of any discussion, it’s a fantastic waste of time. Prospective students should be researching faculty members, exploring campuses, scholarships (sport or otherwise), libraries, graduation outcomes, available extracurriculars. It’s fine attending the University of British Columbia and scoring a 3.91 GPA. It’s even better attending the University of Western Ontario, scoring a 3.60 GPA, 600 community service hours a year and heading a LGBT/debate/drama/film/whatever club. People that rely on rankings for admissions have either never attended university or have no clue about how what you do in university effects your resume.</p>
<p>Well, I can at least hope that the OP will put more effort into research than dmn has evidently put into reading what he blindly criticizes 
I’m not sure why University of Toronto has such an illustrious history of philistinism when it comes to quantitative analysis, but dmn is certainly doing a fine job of upholding such traditions. </p>
<p>Considering how I’ve recommended earlier that the OP takes time to conduct her/his own research into the faculty/programs at each university, however, I suspect dmn’s above melodrama obscures how much we actually agree, in this thread at least.</p>
<p>Or I was annoyed by your passive-aggressiveness. You’ll make a fine poli-sci. ;)</p>
<p>I’m on this site predominantly to procrastinate. Half the fun comes from passive-aggressiveness (other half, of course, from genuine pleasure in assisting others, despite what you may believe :p) And I shall be interpreting that last comment charitably.</p>
<p>I think everyone has generally said the same thing but UBC is definitely the way to go. While they are both GREAT college atmospheres (I have friends who went to both), UBC is way more internationally recognized as a great school. Everyone in my community certainly considers it a great accomplishment to get accepted to UBC and I live in a very wealthy city with very high grade averages.</p>
<p>Hi there.
I am going through the same problem.
I have been accepted in ubc in ab economics and at western in financial economics, but I am unable to choose one out of them.
I want to go to western because of its campus life and that there I can get involved and put something on my resume. The only thing pulling me to ubc is its ranking. I personally think that only ranking doesn’t matter and as long as you are not a whole package no employer will have you.
Which university do you guys think would help me land a good job lets say in us or London and will later help me get into a good grad school. I want to go into banking after my undergrad.
I am good at studies and at York I had an avg of 88% in my first year so studying is not a problem for me. The only problem is I cannot study at all if I don’t have enough friends around me to spend time with them when I am free. I get depressed when lonely. I already have friends at western whereas at ubc I don’t know anyone and was not given a place on campus so will have to rent an apartment off campus. </p>
<p>Kindly help me decide if I should go to ubc just because of its ranking or should I take into consideration all other aspect of uni life too. </p>
<p>Plus it would be very helpful if you could outline if we can work in public/private econ sector with a Econ degree(undergrad) or is masters compulsory.</p>
<p>My parents think I should go to ubc considering its ranking but after going through your experience at the university I am having doubts over it</p>