<p>a prestigious school in london, stands for University College London</p>
<p>I agree with jimmy about extra curriculars not making it easier to get into a good university, extra-curriculars take so much time!</p>
<p>[swim73088] While most undergrad degrees in England require only 3 years of university studies, most engineering students nowadays opt for the alternative 4-year MEng degree, which I believe is required by the professional societies for registration as a chartered engineer. I would say then that 4-year programs are now the norm for undergraduate engineering education in most top UK universities. Furthermore, students in hard sciences majors like physics, chemistry or math are also increasingly opting for 4-year degrees (e.g. Oxford's MPhys and MMath degrees, or Cambridge's MSci degree).</p>
<p>thats true...but most social and historic sciences are only three years though, it just depends what one studies</p>
<p>Yes I agree with swim's response. I gave up studying econ at Cornell, UCB, UCLA, Northwestern, UCL for University of Warwick (UK) goign to major in economics, politics and international studies. Compare to the US, UK is very rigourous in what you study I have seen the classes and they are basically focus on ur major from Day 1 till you graduate. you might get optional modules that you can study but majority of your classes are major realted. Yes I choose UK so that I can have an international experience along with a very good undergraduate education. I believe the reason that people do not choose UK over US undergrad is the idea of the unknown. Since many people go to the US, they are familiar with the system. However if you know the UK system and really research what they have to offer is very demanding and can compete with teh Ivy's. Many colleges in the UK (Oxbridge, LSE, UCL, Imperial, Warwick (I had to add that in since i'm going there)) can compete with the Ivy's</p>
<p>Someone knows what's the equivalent of LSE for the Yanks?</p>
<p>My guess is UChicago?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The main difference between Europe and the US is, as King is Here says, that you have to focus on one subject from the start in Europe. But this difference already starts earlier, in the UK at least. Students usually only take 3 or 4 subjects to A-level (age 18). So of course they are more advanced in these subjects, but haven't done any other subjects for 2 years. This is why a I know UK university higher education can be difficult for people who have been to US high school, at least at first. If you are not sure what you want to study, the UK is not a good choice foryou. Flexibility is the strength of the US system. I also agree with overseas in that there is a lot less contact time for students in the UK. But this is seen as normal. Students are adults and meant to learn on their own and take responsibilty for their own learning. Compared to the US college process parents are completely uninvolved (note there is a parents forum here but not at the student room). It's quite a big cultural difference. I read that some US colleges send parents their children's grades. I don't think my parents know any of my grades!</p>
<p>As for US students coming to the UK, considering that about 90% of the US population don't have a passport, there are quite a lot of US students here I think. Especially graduate students where there are more scholarships available. I would be surprised if the UK wasn't the number 1 choice for US students studying abroad. A shared language and all (sort of).</p>
<p>As for ECs, again this is a US cultural difference. Many students in Europe do other things outside of school, but these are not organised by their school and are considered part of their private life which is not scrutinised during college applications. The only students who I think would attend many organised school-based activites are those very few who attend extremely expensive boarding schools. They haven't got anything to do in their spare time unless the school organises something. Also don't most US schools finish earlier in the day so that there is more time for ECs? My school (elementry though) did. When I went to school in France we were at school 9am-6pm every day, with half days on Saturdays.</p>
<p>I can't speak about every country in Europe but certainly in France (so probably in others) the major point of selection is not at entry but after the first year. Everyone in France can attend their local university if they graduate from High School. So those who do brilliantly as well as those who just scrape through end up in the same class. But for subjects such as medicine (for example) about 80% (guessing from my personal observation) appear to fail the first year and do not continue. This isn't the case in the UK where the selection, like the US, occurs at college admission time.</p>
<p>that is so true .. the a level system is so limiting .. im completely unsure but i had to opt for science subjects ..</p>
<p>the best thing to do (if you don't know what to do) is to get an american liberal arts degree and then go to Oxbridge as an affliated student specializing in the area of your interest. This way you can have a broad education and a lot of time to expriment and find out the subject you are really interested in.</p>
<p>That would be freaking 6 years of undergrad. I don't think anybody with plans for the future would want to waste that much time as an undergrad.</p>
<p>when you're 60 what difference would 2 years make?</p>
<p>very well said!</p>
<p>It's not that simple. I think we can all agree that our 20s are our most precious years.</p>
<p>My opinion: 1 year in your 20s = 4 years in your 60s.
So....
I would say when you're 60, 8 years (nearly a decade) would make a difference. :)</p>
<p>It's not really time wasted, though, is it? As long as you enjoy being a student... (and have the money to support yourself while not earning)</p>