University of St. Andrews in Scotland

Student Lounge International Students
41

<p>asimpsonpike,</p>

<p>you turned down Cambridge’s offer for St Andrews??? You’re quite rare!
Not so many people do that. And to be honest with you, I haven’t met anyone who did that. I did meet a few students who turned down Cambridge for Imperial, LSE, Warwick and UCL though, but St Andrews??? </p>

<p>Anyway, I don’t want to pursue this argument anymore. Cambridge and St Andrews are not in the same league. Cambridge’s rival is Oxford. </p>

<p>Here’s how UK unis are generally ranked, as they were / have been for the past many years:</p>

<p>Cambridge
Oxford
Imperial
LSE
Warwick / UCL
Durham
St Andrews / Bristol / Edinburgh
York / Bath / Nottingham
King’s
Manchester
New Castle Upon Tyne
Leeds / Birmingham / Sheffield / Cardiff / Glassgow
Lancaster / Leicester</p>

42

<p>RML,</p>

<p>About 22% of the grades are "A"s, so that means on average you just need to be >78th percentile on a given subject to get an A. I am oversimplifying of course as the curves vary fairly significantly among different subjects. But overall, the curves are not tough (nothing like those in Hong Kong).</p>

43

<p>I think it’s telling that you haven’t been able to offer any facts to support your arguments in the wake of my exposing them as wrong. I’m not “rare” RML, I’m actually at St Andrews so I know how many people in the same position are here and believe me, I am in no way unique. Cambridge’s rival is Oxford- correct. I’m not saying that St Andrews is yet at a level where it is the direct threat I’m just arguing it’s on the rise and is a threat especially in subjects like Politics/International Relations/Chemistry/Classics/Philosophy/French…the list goes on. What I won’t accept, what is fallacious, is to rank UCL/Warwick head and shoulders above St Andrews when St Andrews is at least as good if not better. I seem to be rather better informed than you so you’re right, the argument is pointless because you simply don’t have enough facts concerning the subject. Being an alumnus you’re rather out of the loop not having had to recently look at recent university tables etc. so I can understand. However, perhaps consider whether you should be giving out university advice, advice that could be life-changing, when this is the case. A lot of the things you’ve said have been worryingly ignorant/misinformed. It’s nice you’ve made your own league table but you should realise there are other more accurate ones that actually reflect fact and statistics and that producing one based on your own opinions won’t statisfy prospective students’ thirst for cold hard facts. In any case, I’ve provided links to real tables so people should look at those for something credible, objective and professionally done.</p>

44

<p>In my college (Girton), for example, only 4 students did not accept the offer, and our college is one of the least prestigious in the university. Two of those accepted but did not enroll went to Imperial to read engineering. 1 went to LSE to read L100 Economics. 1 went to Warwick to read maths. Cambridge does tract down where the admitted applicants went to university. Don’t make up stories. Cambridge and Oxford have very high enrollment yield, even for international students.</p>

<p>Re league tables, they vary almost every year. The latest league table of Times shows that LSE is number 7. Do you honestly believe that? The rankings vary every year. You need to consider that. However, since the inception of league tables in the UK, only 5 unis were never been ranked outside of the top 10 and these are: Cambridge, Oxford, Imperial, LSE and Warwick. St Andrews was ranked outside of the top 10 many times in the past years. </p>

<p>Additionally, if you’ll remove the student satisfaction rate, St Andrews would drop in the ranking, maybe outside of the top 10. The only reason why it’s number 4 this time is because student satisfaction rate was integrated in this year’s survey. If not for that, St Andrews would hardly be a top 10 in the UK. </p>

<p>Another thing, the Entry Standard points registered for all Scottish universities are highly suspicious. St Andrews isn’t more selective than Warwick, UCL and Durham. Check your facts.</p>

45

<p>I may be interested in St. Andrews? I want to go into print journalism though and they don’t have it. Would International Relations be good? Also, would it be hard to go to graduate school for journalism at Columbia? I also saw they have a PHD program with an acting college, can you do that afterwards. Acting has always been my passion, but career wise journalism is where I may go. I also may want to go to an early college, Bard College at Simon’s Rock. If I went there for two years, would any credits transfer. Also, would you suggest any other schools over there? I’m also Catholic and I know in the UK most people are not would I fit in and is a Scottish Accent like a British one? Thanks!</p>

46

<p>Your problem asimpsonpike, apart from prolixity, is that you raise your opinions to the point of fact and dismiss contrary position as opinions in the face of fact.</p>

<p>It was you who posted the Times tables, claiming your comments were proven as a result. So lets look at your claims in the light of the tables you posted:</p>

<p>asimpsonpike: “At best you could put Warwick/UCL/St Andrews into the same bracket but even that is an overstretching in the current climate.” According to the table St Andrews got 792 points, UCL 775, and Warwick 772. So contrary to your claim they are precisely in the same bracket. </p>

<p>asimpsonpike: “The fact is that St Andrews is formidable and is now turning its attention to its actual main rivals, Oxford and Cambridge.” No, the fact is that St Andrews is one of a pack of 2nd tier universities but is in no way a rival to Oxbridge.</p>

<p>asimpsonpike: “I think it’s telling that you haven’t been able to offer any facts to support your arguments in the wake of my exposing them as wrong.” “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.” Have you got any facts - instead of your opinion, hearsay, and wishful thinking - to back up your claim that Oxbridge should be quaking in their boots.</p>

47

<p>RML, you were in one year in one college in just Cambridge. That means that you aren’t aware of other people in the many other colleges in different years from you. You also don’t know about people who’ve turned down Oxford because you weren’t there. I’m not making up stories, I’m simply telling you that contrary to your opinion there are students at St Andrews who did turn down Oxbridge places. You’re right though, they both do have a very high enrollment yield, as do other places. You’re right that league tables vary every year but they vary based on statistics, when unis are improving this is recognised. St Andrews has not been out of the top 10 many times. Correct it has been before but the vast majority of the time it has not been and even in the two years it was not ranked in the top 10 by one league table or another there has always been at least one league table that still ranked it top 10. I am not aware of a year when every league table ranked it outside of the top 10. </p>

<p>St Andrews was top 10 before student satisfaction I’m afraid so you’re point doesn’t stick. It is part of the Sutton 13, which you should remember. Also, student satisfaction has been integrated since 2007, not just this year. True student satisfaction has boosted its position but it was already a fixture in the top 10. Even so, student satisfaction is nothing to be looked down upon. You may not hold enjoyment of life in high regard but most other people do. </p>

<p>Why should Scottish uni entry standards be suspicious? That doesn’t hold water. It’s strange that even in the face of objectively gathered facts about entry standards you won’t accept the truth. That is, it is more selective than them. It is becoming more and more apparent to me that even despite your education, which might have taught you to value fact, you keep on throwing out these weird notions that whenever presented with a fact it must be “weird” or “suspicious”. You won’t substantiate any of your claims by providing sources and simply rebut my points on the basis that you don’t want to accept St Andrews’ position. You also contradict yourself, one minute it’s “St Andrews is a great university” and in your own rankings you placed in 7th and the next minute it’s “hardly a top 10 uni”. It would hardly be a “great university” if it wasn’t top 10. Make up your mind, it seems to me that you’re getting more intransigent as I prove you wrong, perhaps desperately making illogical statements to self assure and make yourself feel better. </p>

<p>oldspc- As you’ll notice St Andrews is not in the 770’s bracket as are UCL/Warwick so “precisely in the same bracket” is a bit of an overstatement. </p>

<p>I’ve provided facts from the league tables. When the Guardian was “weird” I provided the Times and still RML finds it implausible. </p>

<p>Here are more facts: [St</a> Andrews earns a high five - Times Online](<a href=“http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/sunday_times_university_guide/article4779421.ece]St”>The Times & The Sunday Times: breaking news & today's latest headlines)</p>

<p>I’m not saying Oxbridge should be quaking in their boots I’m just saying don’t underestimate St Andrews.</p>

48

<p>

</p>

<p>early_college,</p>

<p>St Andrews and Edinburgh are the best universities in Scotland. However, there are other excellent universities in Scotland that are also worth attending, and two of these are: Aberdeen and Glasgow. These 2 unis are also ancient whose history can be traced back several hundred years ago. </p>

<p>Then there’s also Stirling, which has a golf course on its campus. Dundee is strong for medicine and programmes allied to medicine. Heriot-Watt University, located just in the outskirt of the beautiful city of Edinburgh, is strong in engineering, languages and management. </p>

<p>In England, Durham is the place to go if you can’t crack Oxbridg’s tough entry requirements and you like an antiquated university atmosphere. Warwick, which a “plate glass” campus uni, is modern, progressive and strong in research. UCL is strong across many major fields but particularly strong on law, economics, medicine and biological sciences. LSE for social sciences. Imperial for engineering. Bristol is located in the heart of a bustling city. The University of Bristol is also one of the very best unis in the UK. Then there’s Nottingham, Manchester, Birmingham, Sheffield, Cardiff, which are large unis, in terms of student population. They’re also research unis. Bath and York are debatable considered top 10 unis as well.</p>

49

<p>bit of a tangent, but FWIW, for graduate philosophy “faculties”, St Andrews (with Stirling) is rated #2 behind Oxford and ahead of Cambridge in UK, and tied for #17 in the English speaking world.
[The</a> Philosophical Gourmet Report 2009 :: Overall Rankings](<a href=“http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/overall.asp]The”>http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/overall.asp)</p>

<p>Here’s the English speaking world list:</p>

<p>1 New York University</p>

<p>2 Oxford University</p>

<p>3 Rutgers University , New Brunswick</p>

<p>4 Princeton University</p>

<p>5 University of Pittsburgh</p>

<p>6 University of Michigan , Ann Arbor</p>

<p>7 Harvard University</p>

<pre><code>Massachusetts Institute of Technology
</code></pre>

<p>9 Yale University</p>

<p>10 Stanford University</p>

<pre><code>University of California, Berkeley

University of California, Los Angeles

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
</code></pre>

<p>14 Australian National University</p>

<pre><code>Columbia University

University of Arizona
</code></pre>

<p>17 City University of New York Graduate Center</p>

<pre><code>University of Notre Dame

University of St. Andrews/University of Stirling Joint Program

University of Toronto
</code></pre>

<p>21 Brown University</p>

<pre><code>Cornell University

University of Southern California
</code></pre>

<p>24 Cambridge University</p>

<pre><code>University of Texas , Austin
</code></pre>

50

<p>asimpsonpike,</p>

<p>According to league tables, LSE isn’t top 3 for economics. Do you really believe that? Come on. Who would choose St Andrews’ economics over LSE’s? Be honest! </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Look at the league table for Economics above and see for yourself how flawed that ranking is. How in the world is LSE just #7 for economics in the UK, even below to unis like Edinburgh, St Andrews, Durham and Birmingham??! Come on, be honest! </p>

<p>That’s what happens when you include student satisfaction rate. The real, genuine, true and factual result gets screwed up. The ranking becomes superficial –> FAKE! Imagine St Andrews above LSE for economics??? Isn’t that a crystal clear bogus ranking! </p>

<p>And, are you drunk? I never said St Andrews has so-so academic standard. I even said it’s a great university. I just don’t think it’s a top 5 uni yet. It’s not superior to UCL and Warwick at the moment. Maybe it will be in the future if it continues to improve and both Warwick and UCL cease to improve. But that’s highly unlikely to happen as Warwick is advancing at a very fast rate whilst UCL has a huge university budget and has very well-established reputation for teaching and research.</p>

51

<p>

</p>

<p>The Times League Tables rank LSE # 3 for economics, behind Oxford (#1) and Cambridge (#2). That is also quite pathetic BTW considering that Oxford for example doesn’t even offer a single hono(u)rs degree in economics. </p>

<p>Note though that, when the Times ranking is [sorted by “research quality”](<a href=“The Times & The Sunday Times: breaking news & today's latest headlines”>The Times & The Sunday Times: breaking news & today's latest headlines), LSE moves to #1, whereas Cambridge falls to #10 only. </p>

<p>Newspaper rankings notwithstanding, the prevailing opinion in academia is that LSE’s graduate degrees in economics are pretty much the only economics program(me)s in Europe that are comparable to those offered by top US economics departments. What probably brings LSE down in the league tables is most likely low (undergraduate) student satisfaction. In the Guardian table for example, the percentage of economics students who are satisfied with teaching at LSE is only 70 % compared to 93 % at Oxford.</p>

52

<p>BTW, the latest [RAE rankings](<a href=“RAE 2008: economics and econometrics results | Education | theguardian.com”>http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2008/dec/18/rae-2008-economics-and-econometrics&lt;/a&gt;) for academic research in economics also place LSE as #1 in the UK.</p>

<p>Interestingly enough, Imperial College (which, like LSE, is known for grade deflation) also suffers from low student satisfaction despite high research ratings. Imperial for example tops the [RAE rankings in mathematics](<a href=“RAE 2008: pure mathematics | Education | theguardian.com”>http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2008/dec/18/rae-2008-pure-mathematics&lt;/a&gt;), but the Guardian ranks Imperial maths #11 only in the UK, mostly because of a poor 72 % satisfaction rate with teaching and a very low 56 % satisfaction rate with feedback. Curiously, St. Andrews is ranked #5 in Maths by the Guardian, but its corresponding RAE ranking is way down. The same applies to St. Andrews economics BTW. </p>

<p>St. Andrews’ poor research rating is probably the reason why people like RML don’t see it as a rival to Oxbridge or Imperial/LSE/UCL/Warwick.</p>

53

<p>What international school is good for print journalism for undergrad? I’m American and thanks RML.</p>

54

<p>Let me rearrange the ranking.</p>

<p>Cambridge / Oxford – on the league of their own</p>

<p>Imperial / LSE – solid top 4</p>

<p>Warwick / UCL – solid top 6</p>

<p>Durham / St Andrews / Bristol / Edinburgh</p>

<p>–end of top 10–</p>

<p>York / Bath / Nottingham</p>

<p>King’s / Loughborough / SOAS / Manchester
New Castle Upon Tyne / Leeds / Birmingham / Sheffield / Cardiff / Glasgow</p>

<p>Lancaster / Leicester</p>

55

<p>Early College, City University has a very good reputation for journalism (all kinds), both for undergraduate and graduate. I went there for postgrad., and I thought it was good, if, at times, too low-brow. I know people who went to Columbia J-school, and I think that sounds better. </p>

<p>RML - I find myself, rather worryingly, in agreement with you. I did a BA at Oxford, an M.Phil at St Andrews. I came across brilliant people at St Andrews a few times; at Oxford and Cambridge you throw a stone and you hit one.</p>

56

<p>Which City University are you talking about? There are lots: Cuny, etc.</p>

57

<p>It’s sooooo ****ing easy to get into.</p>

58

<p>City University, London. Sorry, I thought we were on a bit of a UK thread…</p>

59

<p>Sorry I’m an American!</p>

60

<p>I have tons of questions about st a’s, I’m an American applying this fall, any responses from students there would be much appreciated!</p>

<ol>
<li>I’ve heard that there’s no campus bubble, there’s really no difference between the campus and the town. While I don’t mind this, will I miss out that I don’t get campus life?</li>
<li>What are the living accomodations like? Obviously there’s dorms, but I’m guessing it’ll be a lot different experience than University of Southern California…</li>
<li>the Fiske Guide was talking about how you’re basically put into class and you sink or swim, you’re on your own. I’m very independent and self-sufficient, but that sounds kind of uninviting. thoughts?</li>
</ol>

<p>thanks so much</p>