University of St. Andrews in Scotland

<p>Thanks RML
I like the idea of going to school in the UK, but St Andrews looked like it was going to cost $30k. I can afford college a little bit, but that is too high of a price tag. Hopefully one of these schools will be less expensive.</p>

<p>stucki,
you should look into Warwick, Durham and Bristol. They are better regarded than St Andrews in Europe. Warwick --if intend to join in the banking and finance industry. It's a target uni for IB or the on par with LSE and Imperial. Both Durham and Bristol are also excellent and are particularly strong in law. But these are generally hard unis to get into.</p>

<p>RML,
I actually am interested in becoming a podiatrist, so I'd be a bio major. Which of these schools is the best for science?</p>

<p>bump
BTW sorry for hijacking the thread. Any people want to answer the original question please do so.</p>

<p>Does anyone know if ACTs can be sent in place of SATs?
For the Medicine faculty?</p>

<p>Just kidding. I found it online.</p>

<p>"That's like saying Dartmouth is "just behind" Harvard. Fair enough, but still misleading. LSE and Imperial place ahead of St Andrews, and arguably UCL and Warwick as well." Not at all. I live in the UK and have lived in both England and Scotland. I can tell you now that whilst LSE and Imperial are ahead of St Andrews in the tables, they are both specialised institutions and don't count in terms of multi-faculty universities. The fact is that St Andrews is described as "the main rival to Oxford and Cambridge in the UK" St</a> Andrews earns a high five - Times Online and is very highly regarded. Whilst American's are given places more readily than UK students it by no means makes St Andrews a soft touch admissions wise. There are well over 12 applicants per place at St Andrews in comparison with an average of just 4 applicants per place at Oxford so the competition is fierce to say the least.</p>

<p>"Historically, the University of Edinburgh was considered the best university in Scotland. Today, its standing has declined a little and I would say that Edinburgh and St. Andrews are both considered on equal footing. Both are excellent universities, considered among the top 10-15 universities in the UK."</p>

<p>St Andrews is Scotland's oldest university and the third oldest in the English-speaking world. If you want to argue about History, it's best not to compare stuff with St Andrews. Although it went through a period of decline centuries ago St Andrews was first considered the best and once again is unquestionably considered the best. Whereas Edinburgh can be found in the 20 somethings section of the league table, St Andrews was ranked 4th last year and 5th this year as usual.</p>

<p>stuckinillinois, </p>

<p>then you should definitely look into Warwick, if not, Durham. Warwick has the best reputation amongst the best ones though except Oxbridge. </p>

<p>You may also consider University College London (UCL), which has a very vibrant student atmosphere. UCL has a strong research program on bio even at the undergrad level.</p>

<p>The latest Guardian University Guide (May 2009) ranks University of St. Andrews 3rd best in the UK, just behind Oxford and Cambridge. London School of Economics and Warwick now rank 4 and 5 respectively. St. Andrews ranks #1 for all schools in the UK for student satisfaction. </p>

<p>For UK students, St. Andrew’s offers a seat to 1 out of 12 applicants. For Americans it’s a bit easier, they accept 1 out of 5 and the Fiske Guide (the only US Guide to rank and review St. Andrews) equates selectivity to places like Tufts, Cornell and Emory. Like Tufts, St. Andrews has a fantastic International Relations program, BTW, and also a very innovative, multi-disciplinary program in Sustainable Development.</p>

<p>Fiske also awards St. Andrews “Best Buy” status. All-in costs with the GBP at a 7 year low against the dollar are under $30,000. Significantly less than $50K for some top U.S. schools, and a big help if you don’t qualify for aid but are hard-pressed to afford the full-ticket here. Stafford loans are available to U.S. students at St. Andrews. </p>

<p>You can see the UK rankings here:</p>

<p>[University</a> guide | Education | guardian.co.uk](<a href=“http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/universityguide]University”>University guide | The Guardian)</p>

<p>St. Andrews does have a higher percentage of Americans pursuing full-time degrees than any other Uni in the UK, but it is not 1/3 American as some have stated above. The figure is 20% from North America - and that figure counts those on campus just for their junior year abroad. See link below.</p>

<p>[North</a> American applicants | University of St Andrews](<a href=“http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/admissions/int/northamericanapplicants/]North”>http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/admissions/int/northamericanapplicants/) </p>

<p>St. Andrews has one of the most global student bodies in the world with 63% from the UK and 37% outside the country from the EU, NA, Asia, etc.</p>

<p>The Scottish degree is 4 years (vs 3 for English universities) and they offer the chance to study a number of different subjects before choosing a major in the third year. But while the degree is flexible, you cannot dabble in as many areas as you might in a traditional U.S. liberal arts education. As such, St. Andrews isn’t a good choice if you don’t have some sense of what you would like to study going in.</p>

<p>If you decide to visit the St. Andrews campus, be warned: The charm and beauty of this ivy-covered 15th century campus and quaint college town set against a striking backdrop along the sea often exert a strong pull.</p>

<p>Just fyi, if you’re looking for a more exciting/city atmosphere, definitely look into University of Edinburgh. U of St. Andrews is only cool if you’re looking for a small (and beautiful, of course) town.</p>

<p>Warwick and UCL are definitely superior to St Andrews. That Guardian league table is weird. They have something like 30-40% weight for student satisfaction rate.</p>

<p>RML, I don’t know what you have against St Andrews but your vehement insistence that Warwick and UCL are “definitely superior” is strange at best. St Andrews, as I said in my last post and provided a link for, is described as the main rival in the UK to Oxford and Cambridge. It is ranked 3rd in the newest ranking, which actually places a very heavy emphasis on teaching, which is what is most important to undergraduates. It does take into account Student Satisfaction, and why is that bad? You seem to look down on it. At the end of the day, student satifaction is based on rankings of how happy students are with their teaching/feedback/general student experience. Surely, that is what is most important to an undergraduate. In terms of student satisfaction, St Andrews comes first. That is important. Just recently, an article described it as the creme de la creme along with Oxford and Cambridge and a Times writer has said that St Andrews will retain its place in the top 5 in their new tables as well, the only question is how high it will be. It is unlikely that UCL will feature in that list, it remains to be seen for Warwick. Even if student satisfaction was 40% weighted, which I doubt, why would that make it less impressive that St Andrews was 3rd. Nevertheless if you lower the weighting for student satisfaction, St Andrews is still above Warwick and still top 5. At best you could put Warwick/UCL/St Andrews into the same bracket but even that is an overstretching in the current climate. The fact is that St Andrews is formidable and is now turning its attention to its actual main rivals, Oxford and Cambridge. It will continue to rise especially at the helm of new leadership, with its newly appointed Principal Dr Louise Richardson who is accredited with turning Harvard’s Radcliffe Institute from a women’s college into a highly respected academic institute. The least of my argument’s and in no way my primary one is that Prince William did go to St Andrews and he wouldn’t have gone just anywhere. Warwick and UCL are good, but it would be highly erroneous to presume them better than St Andrews and it is shockingly naive to contend them to be “definitely superior”.</p>

<p>Newest times tables: [University</a> Rankings League Table 2010 | Good University Guide - Times Online](<a href=“http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/tol_gug/gooduniversityguide.php]University”>The Times & The Sunday Times: breaking news & today's latest headlines)</p>

<p>Point proven.</p>

<p>Although the League Table in the Times places St Andrews as the next generalist university after Oxford and Cambridge (with the specialist Imperial College in between) there is a massive gap between Oxbridge and St Andrews. That gap is the same size as the one between St Andrews and Strathclyde! So to suggest that St Andrews is now “turning its attention to its main rivals, Oxford and Cambridge” is more than a little hubristic. You have to be in the same league to be a rival.</p>

<p>asimpsonpike,</p>

<p>I’m a Cambridge alumnus and I will never ever treat St Andrews as our rival university. Our only rival in the UK is Oxford. And, I bet even Oxonians wouldn’t treat St Andrews as a rival uni. I am aware that St Andrews is somewhat popular in the US. But the truth is there’s a huge difference that separates between Oxbridge and St Andrews. Oxbridge is superior to St Andrews. It’s not even close even on areas where we can say they’re St Andrews biggest strengths such as international relations and PPE. At least, Warwick is strong in economics, maths, business and a whole range of language studies and social sciences. UCL is a rival on law, medicine, economics and physical and biological sciences. St Andrews is a great university. But its definitely not as great as Warwick and UCL. Again, it’s not even close.</p>

<p>RML types pretty well for someone with a stick up his…</p>

<p>Hey RML,</p>

<p>Since the A-Level at UK gives "A"s like candies, isn’t that even AAB isn’t really hard to get?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’ve never seen a 140-point drop anywhere before. Perhaps you meant 1340.</p>

<p>RML, it’s quite clear that you’re “a Cambridge alumnus” given your mindset. That mindset is the reason I turned down Cambridge. Sadly, it doesn’t matter whether or not you “will never treat St Andrews as a rival university” because your opinion is, and I’m sorry to break this to you, not definitive. Much more experienced people than, dare I say it, even “a Cambridge alumnus” have come to the conclusion that St Andrews is the main multi-faculty institution to rival Oxbridge. Now, what I’m saying there is not that there isn’t a gap to traverse- there obviously is- but that does not defeat the fact. You should realise that much of that gap is made up by a massive difference in the amount of money the institutions have, not inherent skill. In fact it is a testament to how formidable St Andrews is, that it is such a major player with its relatively small amount of money. Inroads will be made with fundraising drives but it might be impossible to ever compete with the amount of historical money Oxbridge has. Louise Richardson, however, is coming from Harvard, bringing with her a deep knowledge of how to fundraise effectively and that is something to be acknowledged. To be honest your claim that “I bet even Oxonians wouldn’t treat St Andrews as a rival uni” is nice and adorable and everything but I have lot of friends who rejected Oxbridge/HYP places to come to St Andrews that seem to suggest otherwise. My friends at Oxford also do treat St Andrews as a rival uni. Sorry. You are correct that Oxbridge is superior to St Andrews in terms of academic ranking in general. I’m not denying that. I’m just saying I can see St Andrews is on an upward march and you shouldn’t neglect that. Furthermore your saying “At least, Warwick is strong in economics, maths, business and a whole range of language studies and social sciences. UCL is a rival on law, medicine, economics and physical and biological sciences” is also rather silly. If you knew anything about many of these subjects you’d know St Andrews’ high reputation in them. Yes, medicine is its most poorly ranked subject but even that is still top 10 and its ranking can be mostly attributed to the fact that there is no hospital stopping the possibility of clinical. St Andrews is doing amazing research in physical and biological sciences, which an informed person would already know- especially in Physics. I can’t be bothered to rebuff the rest of your statements until you come back with some more informed arguments. Just a tip though, some of the subjects you’re saying are done so well elsewhere aren’t even offered at St Andrews perhaps explaining their supposed lack of prowess in them. Before you go around making statements like “It’s not even close even on areas where we can say they’re St Andrews biggest strengths such as international relations and PPE”, you might want to have a glance at these: [University</a> Rankings League Table 2010 | Good University Guide - Times Online](<a href=“The Times & The Sunday Times: breaking news & today's latest headlines”>The Times & The Sunday Times: breaking news & today's latest headlines) and [University</a> guide 2010: Politics | Education | guardian.co.uk](<a href=“http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2009/may/12/university-guide-politics]University”>University guide 2010: Politics | Education | theguardian.com). If you actually knew anything about St Andrews or International Relations you’d realise how unintelligent that statement was. If you accidentally said that, particularly about IR, to people who are actually in the know, I’m not sure they’d believe you were indeed “a Cambridge alumnus.” You’re right about one thing though, St Andrews is a great university. Get used to it.</p>

<p>Sam Lee, I haven’t taken A Levels; I took up IB, so I can’t really say as to it’s level of difficulty. But from what I’ve gathered, those who prepared so much for the A Levels found it not that hard to get As. As a result, some universities require that their applicants pass an interview aside from getting As. Some universities require a battery test such as the STEP for those who’d like to major in maths. Cambridge and Warwick require that their applicants must pass a certain level on STEP. Cambridge and Oxford generally interview their applicants.</p>