So I’ve recently been deciding between my university options. So far, my options are:
UChicago
University of Edinburgh
King’s College London
George Mason University (Full Ride)
Out of these 4, which makes the most sense for a US citizen living is Israel?
Also, which of these is most reputable, and what equivalent US universities are there to Edinburgh or KCL?
What do you guys think about these two UK universities?
The only U.K. school’s worth considering at the level of UChicago are Oxbridge. Name recognition both in US and Israel among businesses, academics, government and graduate schools is far better than any of your U.K. choices.
The American equivalents to Edinburgh & KCL are probably UT-Austin/UW-Madison/UNC/NYU. Maybe UCLA for Edinburgh.
Edinburgh is like UT-Austin in that for Scots just as for some Texans, Edinburgh is cheaper than Oxbridge (and they have Scottish pride) and both Edinburgh and UT-Austin are top-notch in some areas, so Edinburgh manages to draw some of Scotland’s brightest (just as UT-Austin may draw some of TX’s brightest). For that reason, you could argue that Edinburgh is on the level of UCLA as well.
KCL is easier to get in to for Brits than Edinburgh. All UK unis are public (though Oxbridge at least have sizeable endowments to draw upon), so there would be less hand-holding and resources overall than at top American privates. Ediniburgh and KCL are also fairly big. If UCL is like a public NYU or a UCLA, KCL would be a slightly lesser public NYU (a UCSD?).
Agree that the only UK unis that are Ivy-equivalents are Oxbridge, LSE, and maaaaybe Imperial (though that’s disputable) while the U of C is definitely an Ivy-equivalent.
What makes the most sense depends on potential goals, what you want to study, how certain you are (I know that you’d have to list that for KCL and Edinburgh and there would be a little flexibility for changing at Edinburgh and pretty much none at KCL), costs, and what you can afford.
LSE is a dreadful place. Depressing building. Not a campus. Why be on anti depressants for three years ?
^ Eh, I’ve heard that said of Columbia and MIT (other than the campus part; they have that, though crowded) yet they haven’t been kicked out of the Ivy League and HYPSM, respectively.
No comparison. LSE is in one building which needs to be torn down and replaced. It also slipped a lot. I would do kings college any day over LSE?
@Chrchill: I hear various Brits say LSE has slipped all the time (might be due to their over-reliance on research rankings to form their judgement), yet when you look at representation at MBB, it’s Oxbridge and LSE (and maybe Warwick) above everyone else and when you look at placement in to the City, it’s Oxbridge, LSE, Warwick, and UCL above everyone else.
Obviously, when you look at per capita entry in Who’s Who (which would be older cohorts), LSE is the only other school within striking distance of Oxbridge. Unlike in the US where there is a gradual falling off from HYPSM to other Ivies/equivalents to Near-Ivies to other good schools (and the difference in per capita alumni achievements of schools in adjacent half-tiers are barely perceptible) , there’s a order of magnitude difference between Oxbridge and every other non-LSE British uni.
You see this in the admit rates at UK unis as well:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/10/19/which-elite-universities-have-the-highest-offer-rates/
LSE’s admit rate is close to Oxbridge (St. Andrews, which is not listed, may be up there as well).
The next closest (Edinburgh and Imperial) are at 50% and everyone else admits more than half of applicants.
Granted, the UK unis set fair high minimums and don’t encourage tons of apps from no-hopers like the American colleges do (to artificially drive down admit rates to make them look better in the USNews beauty contest and to sell themselves to the gullible) and I know that Oxbridge only allows you to apply to one of them, but still, the point stands that LSE is the only UK uni close to Oxbridge by several metrics.
Imperial college would be the third school. Remember also that LSE has very narrow offerings.
@Chrchill: You may hold whatever preconceived notions you may like, but I measure by alumni achievements, and by every alumni achievement metric I can find (placement in to the prestige industries of MC and IB and per capita numbers in Who’s Who) as well as by admit rate, LSE clearly leads Imperial.
And Imperial is as narrow as LSE.
LSE only has social science but no STEM or humanities. Imperial only has STEM but no social science or humanities.
I am talking about the actual experience of being a studen at LSE, not the alumni.
The actual student experience at Imperial would be just as narrow as at LSE, no?
And certainly, depending on what qualities you measure, the experience of being a student at LSE may not measure up to the experience of being a student at some other UK uni below LSE. But that’s true when it comes to Ivies vs. some non-Ivy-equivalents as well. There are some colleges in the US where the school looks like a country club, the food is great, and the students rave about their experience there and there are some Ivies where a good chunk of the student body is stressed out and miserable and many of the profs care only about their research and not at all about undergraduate teaching, yet would you elevate those schools where the students rave about their experience over those Ivies?
And in any case, how would the experience at any of the London schools differ, anyway? None of them have real campuses.
There is something really oppressive about the LSA physical environment.
Thanks for all the responses! So, I was wondering, since I’m familiar with east-coast universities significantly more, would you say Edinburgh/KCL is the same calibre as, let’s say, Georgetown or Johns Hopkins? Also, when studying abroad, which I plan to do if I go to the UK or US, is it considered that I “graduated” from the study abroad institution that I spent a year at, or what exactly is it?
“Remember also that LSE has very narrow offerings.”
But that doesn’t affect UK students who are only reading one subject anyway. I mean, it affects the likelihood of sharing a flat with a future scientist, but it has no academic impact (as it would in a broad U.S.-style college program).
The faculty may be roughly on the same level as Georgetown/JHU, just like UNC’s and NYU’s are, but they’re not as hard to get in to as Georgetown (overall; big variations for different groups of applicants), in any case.
Outside of maybe certain departments at Edinburgh and KCL, the U of C is your only option at the Ivy/Oxbridge level.
You still haven’t stated what you plan to study or what your goals are (or costs or financial resources). That matters you know.
And no, you don’t graduate from a place you spent a year abroad at. Most people don’t care where you spent a year abroad at. Many schools outside of Oxbridge (and LSE) don’t even have (high) standards for their study abroad applicants. At Oxbridge, you get to be a Visiting Student. At LSE, I think General Course grads are considered alums.
I think it’s fair to say UChicago is the most prestigious of the 4 schools listed in the original post. That doesn’t necessarily make it the best choice. It might help to know the OP’s academic and career goals.
What about net costs? One offers a full ride. If the others are much more expensive, can the OP’s family afford them?
I don’t understand how being a US citizen living in Israel matters. It would affect tuition rates at US state universities, but that isn’t an issue here. Is there some question about the reputation of these 4 schools in Israel? Or of the UK schools in the USA?
What subject would you be studying in the UK? You should be aware that you will study only that subject at KCL, with a little more flexibility at Edinburgh, whereas your US choices will allow more exploration of different subject areas, and indeed enforce it.
Also, what are your current career plans?
Both of these will affect what is the best route for you.
“Remember also that LSE has very narrow offerings.”
“But that doesn’t affect UK students who are only reading one subject anyway. I mean, it affects the likelihood of sharing a flat with a future scientist, but it has no academic impact (as it would in a broad U.S.-style college program).”
Actually, at LSE and other University of London schools (like KCL), if you really want to live with students studying at other colleges, you could always sign up to live in one of the UoL Intercollegiate Halls. There would be college-specific extracurricular societies but also pan-UoL ones.
And indeed. Going to uni in England academically is just a different experience from the US…