I'm telling my kids to go to the UK for undergrad

[Anonymous]

Gorgeous country. Oh, so beautiful! The Highlands? The west coast? The Islands? Sigh....

And Edinburgh is one of the most beautiful cities in the world.

But yes, the winters are long and dark. Dark. Dark. But it's not too different from going to school in New England.

Anonymous wrote:have you people been to scotland? it is fucking depressing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am English, and am telling my kids to go to University in the UK anyway, because the education is better. I just don't know if they will be able to get in anywhere good after going through the system here.

I know, right??!

I'm German and while I know we'll only be here a few years, I worry the school system here will dumb our kids down. They'll have a lot of catching up to do when I compare with the levels German kids are at. I would never send them to university over here. Especially since college in Germany is completely free!
I've taken a few classes over here myself and have never seen so many lazy uneducated people at a university level. They need to sort them out, like many European countries do. The fact is, not everybody should go to college. But of course here it's all about money. That's the problem.

I wish more German universities had courses (majors) taught in English. What do you feel are the top schools in Germany? I had friends do grad programs at TUM and they all enjoyed it.

Having "top schools" is a uniquely American/British concept. The universities in Germany are all state schools and all more or less identical beyond certain ones not offering certain majors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The UK system excels at helping students learn a specific topic quite thoroughly. The system also is designed around how to take a specific test (A levels). It also means students need to declare their intended career path by approx. age 15.

Nonsense.

It is not nonsense. My stepchild just finished A levels in the UK and had to select courses for the exams at age 15. By selecting English literature courses, it meant that pursuing a science-related career path would not be an option. That would never be the case in the U.S. where there is much more time to decide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have had occasion to work with Canadian and Oxbridge educated Brits. My Canadian and US colleagues often remark on how different the Brits are from us in the way they think.

They are very good in coming up with elegant concepts, but as soon as one scratches below the surface it becomes pretty obvious to the North Americans they are simply not operational. For us, having something that is operational is critical; not so much to the Brits.

Perhaps the way they are educated?

A person I know works for a big 3 in international tax accounting. This friend said the same thing about Americans, that their knowledge was less deep than their internationally educated counterparts. I really think it has to do with specific people, possibly the major and what school you went to both in the US and UK.

We are making quite a sweeping generalization here. There are smart/talented people from both sides, notwithstanding what university they went to.

Actually, this is not about depth of knowledge in the field. It is more about whether one takes a more theoretical or a more practical approach to problems. US and Canadian colleagues tend to be more practical and less infatuated with theoretical approaches.

Interesting you should mention accounting. The area I work in is not accounting, but accounting bears on it. And often the theoretical approach is tripped up in part because of accounting, which our British colleagues know next to nothing about and even more important don't know what they don't know.

This is not a one time experience; it has happened over and over again with a different succession of British colleagues. I don't know if this is an education thing or more of a cultural thing of where they work.

HYP grad but not in a major that has anything to do, even remotely, with what I do now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am English, and am telling my kids to go to University in the UK anyway, because the education is better. I just don't know if they will be able to get in anywhere good after going through the system here.

I know, right??!

I'm German and while I know we'll only be here a few years, I worry the school system here will dumb our kids down. They'll have a lot of catching up to do when I compare with the levels German kids are at. I would never send them to university over here. Especially since college in Germany is completely free!
I've taken a few classes over here myself and have never seen so many lazy uneducated people at a university level. They need to sort them out, like many European countries do. The fact is, not everybody should go to college. But of course here it's all about money. That's the problem.

I wish more German universities had courses (majors) taught in English. What do you feel are the top schools in Germany? I had friends do grad programs at TUM and they all enjoyed it.

Having "top schools" is a uniquely American/British concept. The universities in Germany are all state schools and all more or less identical beyond certain ones not offering certain majors.

and france

[Anonymous]

While there is certainly a cult of top colleges in the US, it seems mostly limited to parents. IRL what you do after college means a lot more than what college you went to and not going to a name college doesn't limit your chances financially or socially.

Is America great or what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am English, and am telling my kids to go to University in the UK anyway, because the education is better. I just don't know if they will be able to get in anywhere good after going through the system here.

I know, right??!

I'm German and while I know we'll only be here a few years, I worry the school system here will dumb our kids down. They'll have a lot of catching up to do when I compare with the levels German kids are at. I would never send them to university over here. Especially since college in Germany is completely free!
I've taken a few classes over here myself and have never seen so many lazy uneducated people at a university level. They need to sort them out, like many European countries do. The fact is, not everybody should go to college. But of course here it's all about money. That's the problem.

I wish more German universities had courses (majors) taught in English. What do you feel are the top schools in Germany? I had friends do grad programs at TUM and they all enjoyed it.

Having "top schools" is a uniquely American/British concept. The universities in Germany are all state schools and all more or less identical beyond certain ones not offering certain majors.

and france

Eh? What about les grandes écoles then?

[Anonymous]

Think PP's point was that France also has the concept of top schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Think PP's point was that France also has the concept of top schools.

Oh! Yes that would make more sense. As you were then.

[Anonymous]

I would've loved to have 'read' PPE at Balliol college

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have had occasion to work with Canadian and Oxbridge educated Brits. My Canadian and US colleagues often remark on how different the Brits are from us in the way they think.

They are very good in coming up with elegant concepts, but as soon as one scratches below the surface it becomes pretty obvious to the North Americans they are simply not operational. For us, having something that is operational is critical; not so much to the Brits.

Perhaps the way they are educated?

A person I know works for a big 3 in international tax accounting. This friend said the same thing about Americans, that their knowledge was less deep than their internationally educated counterparts. I really think it has to do with specific people, possibly the major and what school you went to both in the US and UK.

We are making quite a sweeping generalization here. There are smart/talented people from both sides, notwithstanding what university they went to.

Actually, this is not about depth of knowledge in the field. It is more about whether one takes a more theoretical or a more practical approach to problems. US and Canadian colleagues tend to be more practical and less infatuated with theoretical approaches.

Interesting you should mention accounting. The area I work in is not accounting, but accounting bears on it. And often the theoretical approach is tripped up in part because of accounting, which our British colleagues know next to nothing about and even more important don't know what they don't know.

This is not a one time experience; it has happened over and over again with a different succession of British colleagues. I don't know if this is an education thing or more of a cultural thing of where they work.

HYP grad but not in a major that has anything to do, even remotely, with what I do now.

This is interesting because the UC schools in CA are known for their theoretical teaching/learning, and CSU schools are known for their practical teaching, yet, it is the UC schools that are considered "higher" quality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm also English and agree with PP. It worries me a lot. UK is better at undergrad. US is better post grad IMO.

From another European country, but exact same impression. Europe is both better and cheaper for undergrad, US is better and truly unique, regardless of cost, for post grad.

Disagree. Spent a year in undergrad in Europe and a year there post-grad. secondary education better in Europe but college and grad school best in US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is UK "better" except the cost?

In the US the students are the customer, to be coddled and treated with the utmost sensitivity. "A"s are handed out like candy at a German carnival. Professors are evaluated according to how sweet and generous they are to the students. The easiest courses attract the most students. Courses are designed to instill pride and a sense of self-righteousness in students. The sports staff are the highest-paid staff members, coaches are worshiped. Colleges are above all businesses rather than centers of learning, and professors are entrepreneurs.

The result of all this is a relentless dumbing-down of the US educational establishment, with students emerging woefully unprepared for the demands of the workplace. Of course, there are many exceptions like MIT, and there are many bullshit courses in the UK - if you go to study media studies at the University of Sunderland then you won't be getting a great education. But generally speaking, courses in the better universities in the UK will demand a level of intellectual rigor that their US equivalents will not.

Agree. I was shocked by the attitudes of the student tour guides even at Ivy League schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

From the Law Society of the UK.

Here are some examples of friends who changed majors at US universities. If you assure me that each of these changes is possible at a UK university, I will stand down

Engineering to Math and Scandinavian Studies
Chemistry to English literature
Biochemistry to Biology
Biology to American History
Political Science to Economics
Physics to physics with an English literature minor

The fact that you can switch from engineering to scandinavian studies tells you how shallow the US undergrad courses are. This is for dilettantes, not a serious education.

I studied history for my undergraduate degree. I became an economist, my friends who studied the subject became lawyers, journalists, producers, script writers, academics. I know people who studied medicine that now work in the City or media. So your statement that you need to choose a career path at 17 is simply incorrect. The purpose of your undergraduate degree is to give you a solid foundation in an area of study, to teach you how to research, to think, and to express your ideas. The subject is irrelevant in the vast majority of cases.

The fact that you can't switch means that you are narrowly educated. You might know your subject very well, but you aren't well educated in other areas. You are missing the cross-pollination of ideas by only studying one field. You are a technician, not an educated person.

Did you even read and understand what the PP said? It all went above your head. Not a good sign. Where did you go for undergrad?

I understood it. I just don't agree. Your problem and PP's problem is that you don't know what you don't know.

People who take the UK approach may be well educated in their major and capable of research in their major, but they lack the exposure to other fields to be good critical thinkers. Lots of smart people who haven't worked in a field think they know something about it and have something to say about it. Because they have no training in the entry level work in that field, though, they don't know what they don't know about it. Because they have a college degree, they assume they are smart and they can figure it out. They may figure out bits and pieces, but lacking an entry-level theorectical framework they almost always get it wrong. Lacking the experience of dealing with a field foreign to the main thrust of their training, they lack the humility to understand that they need to grapple with the basics before they start offering opinions.

Lacking knowledge in the field and lacking any understanding that they don't have the knowledge in the field, they are the true diletantes .


US college education includes a broad exposure to a number of fields. Students have to struggle with things they aren't good at. They learn to know when they don't know something and how to approach areas of knowledge that are outside their core training. Their training in their marriage doesn't suffer because they get an entire extra year as an undergraduate to take those liberal arts classes.

The value of the US approach over the UK approach is visible in the international rankings. A handful of UK schools do a fine job, but they're not as good as US schools. Even a second choice school in the US is better than 90% of UK schools .

The international rankings are based on graduate degrees. We are discussing undergrad here. A vast majority of the graduate students in those top billed universities are non US educated anyway.

Also you really do not seem to grasp what the PP is saying. These UK graduates hold successful careers, in subjects they did not major in. The UK still seem to be doing not too badly. They have a depth of knowledge in their fields, a capacity for analysis and problem solving that they are able to transfer to their careers in law, economics, journalism, etc...

Broad exposure to a number of fields means a generalist approach resulting in a mediocre grasp and understanding of the subject. Jack of all trades, master of none.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

From the Law Society of the UK.

Here are some examples of friends who changed majors at US universities. If you assure me that each of these changes is possible at a UK university, I will stand down

Engineering to Math and Scandinavian Studies
Chemistry to English literature
Biochemistry to Biology
Biology to American History
Political Science to Economics
Physics to physics with an English literature minor

The fact that you can switch from engineering to scandinavian studies tells you how shallow the US undergrad courses are. This is for dilettantes, not a serious education.

I studied history for my undergraduate degree. I became an economist, my friends who studied the subject became lawyers, journalists, producers, script writers, academics. I know people who studied medicine that now work in the City or media. So your statement that you need to choose a career path at 17 is simply incorrect. The purpose of your undergraduate degree is to give you a solid foundation in an area of study, to teach you how to research, to think, and to express your ideas. The subject is irrelevant in the vast majority of cases.

The fact that you can't switch means that you are narrowly educated. You might know your subject very well, but you aren't well educated in other areas. You are missing the cross-pollination of ideas by only studying one field. You are a technician, not an educated person.

Did you even read and understand what the PP said? It all went above your head. Not a good sign. Where did you go for undergrad?

I understood it. I just don't agree. Your problem and PP's problem is that you don't know what you don't know.

People who take the UK approach may be well educated in their major and capable of research in their major, but they lack the exposure to other fields to be good critical thinkers. Lots of smart people who haven't worked in a field think they know something about it and have something to say about it. Because they have no training in the entry level work in that field, though, they don't know what they don't know about it. Because they have a college degree, they assume they are smart and they can figure it out. They may figure out bits and pieces, but lacking an entry-level theorectical framework they almost always get it wrong. Lacking the experience of dealing with a field foreign to the main thrust of their training, they lack the humility to understand that they need to grapple with the basics before they start offering opinions.

Lacking knowledge in the field and lacking any understanding that they don't have the knowledge in the field, they are the true diletantes .


US college education includes a broad exposure to a number of fields. Students have to struggle with things they aren't good at. They learn to know when they don't know something and how to approach areas of knowledge that are outside their core training. Their training in their marriage doesn't suffer because they get an entire extra year as an undergraduate to take those liberal arts classes.

The value of the US approach over the UK approach is visible in the international rankings. A handful of UK schools do a fine job, but they're not as good as US schools. Even a second choice school in the US is better than 90% of UK schools .

The international rankings are based on graduate degrees. We are discussing undergrad here. A vast majority of the graduate students in those top billed universities are non US educated anyway.

Also you really do not seem to grasp what the PP is saying. These UK graduates hold successful careers, in subjects they did not major in. The UK still seem to be doing not too badly. They have a depth of knowledge in their fields, a capacity for analysis and problem solving that they are able to transfer to their careers in law, economics, journalism, etc...

Broad exposure to a number of fields means a generalist approach resulting in a mediocre grasp and understanding of the subject. Jack of all trades, master of none.

Good summary.

Proven repeatedly in this thread by (some) Americans who seem unable to get the point.