Tell me about St Andrews in Scotland

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven’t waded through all 20+ pages, but just wanted to put in my 2 cents. I spent year of grad school at St. Andrews.

It’s sooo different than you’d expect. There are a few old/attractive college buildings but nothing remotely like Oxford or Cambridge. My department was located in a musty old house with zero academic ambiance.

Dorm food was horrible, with scarce fruit & veggies. Local doctor told me it wasn’t uncommon for students end up with problems at various points along the digestive path.

Biggest problem was train didn’t stop in town. Train station was several miles outside of town. I hope they have fixed that by now, as that would dramatically ease the feeling of isolation.

Faculty & students were both top-notch, so why people think it would be way down the list in US is puzzling.

A wonderful compromise for adventurous American students are the many fine universities in Canada, some of which look far more Hogwartsish than St Andrews does.

As a person who graduated from Oxford (in the last century), much of it is gorgeous .. and then met our tutors in musty old houses with zero academic ambiance. That was where 80% of our education happened. And we ate a lot of sausages and potatoes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not f'ing Dartmouth or Brown. Or even Edinburgh. ::

Looks like somebody got rejected.

Or is British and not drinking the St. Andrews marketing koolaid, targeting gullible Americans

[Anonymous]

Dorm food when I was there had lots of fresh veg and seasonal fruit options (fruit in winter seemed to come from Spain or Israel).

In winter, its often wet, days are short, and its quite cold (often with a wind from the north sea). Some folks will find winter depressing.

While talk of restoring railway tracks to StA continues to just be talk, the 99 bus does provide reasonably frequent service to Leuchars, which is on the east coast main line (LNER).

StA is far from unique in repurposing old houses as academic space, as various PPs have noted. This is pretty common across the UK, in part due to UK planning permission processes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not f'ing Dartmouth or Brown. Or even Edinburgh. ::

Looks like somebody got rejected.

Or is British and not drinking the St. Andrews marketing koolaid, targeting gullible Americans

Hmm. I know multiple UK folks who turned down other so-called "better" UK universities for StA precisely because they wanted StA. I think quoted PP is either using old information, is confused, or is being provocative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not f'ing Dartmouth or Brown. Or even Edinburgh. ::

Looks like somebody got rejected.

Or is British and not drinking the St. Andrews marketing koolaid, targeting gullible Americans

Hmm. I know multiple UK folks who turned down other so-called "better" UK universities for StA precisely because they wanted StA. I think quoted PP is either using old information, is confused, or is being provocative.

and without more info, you are just being silly. WHAT "better" UK universities? St. Andrews is 30. Or are you talking Oxbridge? hahah. you need to provide more info

[Anonymous]

The Oxbridge and Cambridge crowd are just upset because Oxbridge has become Stoxbridge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Oxbridge and Cambridge crowd are just upset because Oxbridge has become Stoxbridge.

You have to stop trolling like this!

[Anonymous]

This week (Sept 2023) both (a) The Times & Sunday Times “Good University Guide”, and also (b) The Guardian’s equivalent, have named U. StAndrews the #1 UK university. For The Times, this bumped Oxford to #2, while Cambridge remains #3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This week (Sept 2023) both (a) The Times & Sunday Times “Good University Guide”, and also (b) The Guardian’s equivalent, have named U. StAndrews the #1 UK university. For The Times, this bumped Oxford to #2, while Cambridge remains #3.

[Anonymous]

As an overall university, St Andrews is not and will never be comparable to Oxbridge. Oxbridge excels at both undergraduate and postgraduate education and gets consistently top students at both levels, and offers just about all subjects. At the undergraduate level, St Andrews is a university of choice for the most academically capable students in the courses it offers. This is not an opinion, it’s a statistical fact. The average UCAS points (which are derived from applicant grades, e.g., A levels) speak for themselves. Some people have argued that St Andrews is far behind universities such as Edinburgh, the latter of which apparently even the Londoners will give its due. But while St Andrews is getting undergraduate students with 208 UCAS points (UCAS points reflect the entry standards of the incoming class and are based on the academic credentials, e.g., A levels, of the incoming class) on average, Edinburgh is getting students with 191 on average, and as you parse through the numbers for specific courses (majors), the average student choosing St Andrews has higher entry standards than the average student choosing Edinburgh. St Andrews UCAS numbers are in line with those of Oxford (200) and Cambridge (206), and St Andrews’ average UCAS numbers are in fact the highest in the UK. (For Oxbridge in particular, the UCAS numbers tell an incomplete story, because Oxbridge requires additional subject-specific testing and interviews that the UCAS numbers don’t reflect. Thus, Oxbridge should still get the nod for quality of intake in my view. But this Oxbridge exception doesn’t apply to other universities.) St Andrews also leads the county in student satisfaction with undergraduate teaching. That said, St Andrews is well behind Edinburgh in terms of global impact for research, which really should not be a huge surprise given that Edinburgh has about six times as many graduate students as St Andrews. So while St Andrews may be doing a fair amount of marketing, what it’s marketing is a university of choice for undergraduate education in the subjects it teaches. St Andrews is not an Oxbridge and it will never will be. And given the size of its graduate programs, and the subjects in which it focuses (e.g., no engineering), it will likely never be the kind of research powerhouse that Edinburgh is. It punches above its weight in its research focus areas, but the differences in size and scope of its postgraduate research are meaningful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As an overall university, St Andrews is not and will never be comparable to Oxbridge. Oxbridge excels at both undergraduate and postgraduate education and gets consistently top students at both levels, and offers just about all subjects. At the undergraduate level, St Andrews is a university of choice for the most academically capable students in the courses it offers. This is not an opinion, it’s a statistical fact. The average UCAS points (which are derived from applicant grades, e.g., A levels) speak for themselves. Some people have argued that St Andrews is far behind universities such as Edinburgh, the latter of which apparently even the Londoners will give its due. But while St Andrews is getting undergraduate students with 208 UCAS points (UCAS points reflect the entry standards of the incoming class and are based on the academic credentials, e.g., A levels, of the incoming class) on average, Edinburgh is getting students with 191 on average, and as you parse through the numbers for specific courses (majors), the average student choosing St Andrews has higher entry standards than the average student choosing Edinburgh. St Andrews UCAS numbers are in line with those of Oxford (200) and Cambridge (206), and St Andrews’ average UCAS numbers are in fact the highest in the UK. (For Oxbridge in particular, the UCAS numbers tell an incomplete story, because Oxbridge requires additional subject-specific testing and interviews that the UCAS numbers don’t reflect. Thus, Oxbridge should still get the nod for quality of intake in my view. But this Oxbridge exception doesn’t apply to other universities.) St Andrews also leads the county in student satisfaction with undergraduate teaching. That said, St Andrews is well behind Edinburgh in terms of global impact for research, which really should not be a huge surprise given that Edinburgh has about six times as many graduate students as St Andrews. So while St Andrews may be doing a fair amount of marketing, what it’s marketing is a university of choice for undergraduate education in the subjects it teaches. St Andrews is not an Oxbridge and it will never will be. And given the size of its graduate programs, and the subjects in which it focuses (e.g., no engineering), it will likely never be the kind of research powerhouse that Edinburgh is. It punches above its weight in its research focus areas, but the differences in size and scope of its postgraduate research are meaningful.

+1. Well-said

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As an overall university, St Andrews is not and will never be comparable to Oxbridge. Oxbridge excels at both undergraduate and postgraduate education and gets consistently top students at both levels, and offers just about all subjects. At the undergraduate level, St Andrews is a university of choice for the most academically capable students in the courses it offers. This is not an opinion, it’s a statistical fact. The average UCAS points (which are derived from applicant grades, e.g., A levels) speak for themselves. Some people have argued that St Andrews is far behind universities such as Edinburgh, the latter of which apparently even the Londoners will give its due. But while St Andrews is getting undergraduate students with 208 UCAS points (UCAS points reflect the entry standards of the incoming class and are based on the academic credentials, e.g., A levels, of the incoming class) on average, Edinburgh is getting students with 191 on average, and as you parse through the numbers for specific courses (majors), the average student choosing St Andrews has higher entry standards than the average student choosing Edinburgh. St Andrews UCAS numbers are in line with those of Oxford (200) and Cambridge (206), and St Andrews’ average UCAS numbers are in fact the highest in the UK. (For Oxbridge in particular, the UCAS numbers tell an incomplete story, because Oxbridge requires additional subject-specific testing and interviews that the UCAS numbers don’t reflect. Thus, Oxbridge should still get the nod for quality of intake in my view. But this Oxbridge exception doesn’t apply to other universities.) St Andrews also leads the county in student satisfaction with undergraduate teaching. That said, St Andrews is well behind Edinburgh in terms of global impact for research, which really should not be a huge surprise given that Edinburgh has about six times as many graduate students as St Andrews. So while St Andrews may be doing a fair amount of marketing, what it’s marketing is a university of choice for undergraduate education in the subjects it teaches. St Andrews is not an Oxbridge and it will never will be. And given the size of its graduate programs, and the subjects in which it focuses (e.g., no engineering), it will likely never be the kind of research powerhouse that Edinburgh is. It punches above its weight in its research focus areas, but the differences in size and scope of its postgraduate research are meaningful.

Agree that your argument is sound, but St Andrews will always be limited in size compared to Oxbridge simply because of where it is located. It is 1/10 the size of both Oxford and Cambridge and will always be limited because of it location.

St Andrews cannot grow in size and is already straining at the gills in terms of the ability to house its students. As you note it offers an incredible undergraduate education in the courses it offers, so given growth constraints it will only become more competitive over time as its reputation thru many channels continues to grow.

As you say it will continue to punch above its weight where it can and is clearly not a university for every student. But it has earned its place as a leading university in the UK and so comparisons to Oxbridge are to be expected.

It shows up as a topic on this forum with proponents and detractors because more and more US students are taking note of St Andrews, particularly on the east coast, as it offers a tremendous educational value for students who wish to study international relations, economics and finance, as well as history and other courses where it is strong.

It would be great if those on this forum seeking advice on St Andrews could receive reasoned responses like yours when they ask questions when it is being considering as an option for their children’s education.

[Anonymous]

We visited St. Andrews this summer and it's a beautiful school. DS will be applying to St. Andrews and Oxbridge. But to say that it is ranked above Oxbridge is a marketing scheme. All you have to do is look at the minimum qualifications needed for each school and the application process. Oxbridge has stringent requirements of 1480/33 SAT/ACT and three to five 5's. St Andrews requires 1320/28 SAT/ACT, no APs. The application is much harder for Oxbridge and differs by subject. It requires extra testing or in depth papers and interviews. If you're applying for Math at Cambridge you are required to take two tests in June, and don't find out until August if you're accepted. BTW, half the students who get offers fail the test which means their offer is rescinded.

[Anonymous]

It's a great place if you want to tell your friends that your kid goes to school in Scotland! None of these classless American schools for my kid.

I know several families whose kids are there. A three year degree is taking 5 years - partying, COVID and homesickness being the contributing factors.

[Anonymous]

It's the Northeastern of Scotland.