How would British / UK schools stack up against American / US schools?

[Anonymous]

Oxbridge admits many more students than American colleges and not all constituent colleges are born equal. Some are more prestigious than others and much more selective because of history, prestige, etc. I would compare tiers of individual colleges like Balliol, Christ Church, St John's, for example, to equivalent American institutions.

[Anonymous]

Purely in terms of international name rec and prestige, I think Oxbridge = HYPS and, weirdly, Georgetown. I assume it’s because of the foreign service, but weirdly I read a poll indicating that H/Y/G in that order were far and away the most favorably viewed US universities abroad. Princeton was like barely top 10. I assume it’s because it doesn’t have law or medical schools, which is how loads of internationals are exposed to other schools (I.e., folks don’t distinguish between undergrad and grad degrees, especially where the subjects are undergrad subjects abroad).

On the flip side, in the US, I think Oxford is considered more prestigious than Cambridge largely because of the Rhodes. In the UK, Cambridge almost always comes out on top of ranking/prestige tables, in part because of its STEM superiority. There are actually a few subjects for which it goes Cam/Imperial/Ox, whereas Cam is at least 2nd for everything.

[Anonymous]

The UK is the size of Michigan, so you might as well ask how do UK schools compare with the schools of a particular state.

The US system is completely different for several reasons, but also because it isn't really one system; its 50 systems plus a ton of private institutions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How familiar are you with the UK schools? Hard to compare as the American university system is its own beast and differs in some very significant ways from the British system. In general, American universities are much wealthier and at the elite level, much smaller. But in terms of prestige and academic quality (with an eye on research, since that tips the scale in global reputation tables) I'd very roughly put it somewhat like this.

HYPSM

Oxbridge = Columbia, Caltech

UCL/LSE/Imperial/St Andrews = Penn/Duke/Cornell/Northwestern/Chicago/Berkeley

KCL/Edinburgh/Durham = Hopkins/Brown/Dartmouth/Rice/UCLA/UMich

...or some iteration. There are way more elite U.S. schools, and they're typically much more selective.

Brit here. I agree that it’s hard to compare, and you also need ot factor in what your American student wants to do afterwards with their UK degree.
I think Oxbridge is as prestigious as HYS (not sure I’d include others but maybe).
The next rung down is Imperial, LSE, and possibly UCL depending on department. St Andrews isn’t up there at all - it’s popular with Americans but not particularly prestigious in the UK. Then after that come all of the Russell group, but exactly where they rank completely depends on the subject in question.

"Oxbridge" is always ranked as one of the top 3 universities in the world. I may be biased as a grad, but I would say both are better than Harvard.

I'd agree there's a bit of a British bias there. IIRC the British publications tend to rank British institutions favorably vis-a-vis their American counterparts. I think Harvard is pretty unanimously considered the most prestigious university in the world, and it has the endowment to back that up. For the record, I'm not a Harvard grad and think it's a flawed institution in many ways, but I'd be foolish to pretend its reputation doesn't stand for itself.

I think even the equivalencies in 19:46 are a bit generous. I'd generally put Oxbridge = Ivy League (+ Stanford, MIT et al), and maybe the rung immediately below that (LSE, Imperial, UCL) as = to schools like Duke, Northwestern, Hopkins, UCB. But I would even put schools like UCLA, UM, Rice head to head with that second rung in terms of student quality and academic caliber.

I agree, Oxbridge admits a much larger contingent of students than most Ivy League schools (maybe except Cornell) since each of them has about 30+ colleges that do their own admissions. And the acceptance rate is a lot higher too (around 20%). Don't get me wrong, they're all pretty elite, but if you really want to split hairs, the perceived difference between someone who went to Balliol versus St Edmunds Hall (where DC did an exchange year) is probably equivalent to the perceived difference between an average Harvard student versus a Cornell student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Purely in terms of international name rec and prestige, I think Oxbridge = HYPS and, weirdly, Georgetown. I assume it’s because of the foreign service, but weirdly I read a poll indicating that H/Y/G in that order were far and away the most favorably viewed US universities abroad. Princeton was like barely top 10. I assume it’s because it doesn’t have law or medical schools, which is how loads of internationals are exposed to other schools (I.e., folks don’t distinguish between undergrad and grad degrees, especially where the subjects are undergrad subjects abroad).

On the flip side, in the US, I think Oxford is considered more prestigious than Cambridge largely because of the Rhodes. In the UK, Cambridge almost always comes out on top of ranking/prestige tables, in part because of its STEM superiority. There are actually a few subjects for which it goes Cam/Imperial/Ox, whereas Cam is at least 2nd for everything.

Internationally, schools like Berkely, Columbia, and MIT are pretty well known too. Same with UCLA and NYU for some reason. This is based on my own experience. I'm not sure about Georgetown but it's got a reputation in Europe and the Middle East. MIT is universally well known for its sciences. Same as Berkely. UCB and UCLA have a lot of Asian presence. Columbia and NYU attract loads of rich internationals who just want to be living in New York and not anywhere else, also being in New York gives them a pretty significant name recognition bump.

[Anonymous]

As a general rule, UK schools are overrated. There's no real reason why a school like Oxford and Cambridge should ever be considered on par, let alone better, than HYPSM. Their inflated reputation has more to do with the vestiges of colonialism and imperialism than anything else.

A tangent, but Americans would do well to get over their Anglophilia. The British certainly don't think highly of Americans and our education system, so there's no reason why we should be over here fawning over the British and their schools and letting it get into their collective heads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a general rule, UK schools are overrated. There's no real reason why a school like Oxford and Cambridge should ever be considered on par, let alone better, than HYPSM. Their inflated reputation has more to do with the vestiges of colonialism and imperialism than anything else.

A tangent, but Americans would do well to get over their Anglophilia. The British certainly don't think highly of Americans and our education system, so there's no reason why we should be over here fawning over the British and their schools and letting it get into their collective heads.

Uh huh.

Sure.

[Anonymous]

This is the absolute first time I've heard of Georgetown having a great reputation abroad at the level of Harvard, Yale, MIT, or Stanford. I travel frequently for work (yes, to Europe, the Middle East, and Asia) and I find that claim highly dubious.

Anecdotally, Cornell has great name recognition in Asia. I'd put it just behind HYSM. Agreed that people often forget about Pton. Columbia also has strong name recognition generally for its association with NYC. And this may be because I work in marketing, but I've had clients in both Europe and Japan who are oddly familiar with Northwestern.

+1 for UCB, UCLA, NYU. Big schools with big international contingent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a general rule, UK schools are overrated. There's no real reason why a school like Oxford and Cambridge should ever be considered on par, let alone better, than HYPSM. Their inflated reputation has more to do with the vestiges of colonialism and imperialism than anything else.

A tangent, but Americans would do well to get over their Anglophilia. The British certainly don't think highly of Americans and our education system, so there's no reason why we should be over here fawning over the British and their schools and letting it get into their collective heads.

Oh dear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a general rule, UK schools are overrated. There's no real reason why a school like Oxford and Cambridge should ever be considered on par, let alone better, than HYPSM. Their inflated reputation has more to do with the vestiges of colonialism and imperialism than anything else.

A tangent, but Americans would do well to get over their Anglophilia. The British certainly don't think highly of Americans and our education system, so there's no reason why we should be over here fawning over the British and their schools and letting it get into their collective heads.

Lol, dullard of a troll fail.

I definitely think it is worth noting the potential obstacles the generalist-American applicant might face at the undergrad level. On the whole, I think while people MIGHT quibble about recognized "prestige," the quality of education and applicants are the same at Oxbridge & H/y/p. The differences are going to be in best fit and each school's "arena" ( i.e., Yale is academic-oriented and Harvard has thier "business" school). Yet the quality of applicants is going to be top-level at both). As reflected by the fact these are all top 5 ranked schools in the WORLD.

On a side note, I went to grad school at Oxford, and during my time there had several chances to have dinner as part of my college's finance club and advisors' relationships with the CEOs of the top 10 IBs in the world. The networking and career opportunities are the exact same as HYP, etc., That's how I got my first job. The people who know, know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a general rule, UK schools are overrated. There's no real reason why a school like Oxford and Cambridge should ever be considered on par, let alone better, than HYPSM. Their inflated reputation has more to do with the vestiges of colonialism and imperialism than anything else.

A tangent, but Americans would do well to get over their Anglophilia. The British certainly don't think highly of Americans and our education system, so there's no reason why we should be over here fawning over the British and their schools and letting it get into their collective heads.

Lol, dullard of a troll fail.

I definitely think it is worth noting the potential obstacles the generalist-American applicant might face at the undergrad level. On the whole, I think while people MIGHT quibble about recognized "prestige," the quality of education and applicants are the same at Oxbridge & H/y/p. The differences are going to be in best fit and each school's "arena" ( i.e., Yale is academic-oriented and Harvard has thier "business" school). Yet the quality of applicants is going to be top-level at both). As reflected by the fact these are all top 5 ranked schools in the WORLD.

On a side note, I went to grad school at Oxford, and during my time there had several chances to have dinner as part of my college's finance club and advisors' relationships with the CEOs of the top 10 IBs in the world. The networking and career opportunities are the exact same as HYP, etc., That's how I got my first job. The people who know, know.

This is how many people get their first jobs from every college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How familiar are you with the UK schools? Hard to compare as the American university system is its own beast and differs in some very significant ways from the British system. In general, American universities are much wealthier and at the elite level, much smaller. But in terms of prestige and academic quality (with an eye on research, since that tips the scale in global reputation tables) I'd very roughly put it somewhat like this.

HYPSM

Oxbridge = Columbia, Caltech

UCL/LSE/Imperial/St Andrews = Penn/Duke/Cornell/Northwestern/Chicago/Berkeley

KCL/Edinburgh/Durham = Hopkins/Brown/Dartmouth/Rice/UCLA/UMich

...or some iteration. There are way more elite U.S. schools, and they're typically much more selective.

Brit here. I agree that it’s hard to compare, and you also need ot factor in what your American student wants to do afterwards with their UK degree.
I think Oxbridge is as prestigious as HYS (not sure I’d include others but maybe).
The next rung down is Imperial, LSE, and possibly UCL depending on department. St Andrews isn’t up there at all - it’s popular with Americans but not particularly prestigious in the UK. Then after that come all of the Russell group, but exactly where they rank completely depends on the subject in question.

"Oxbridge" is always ranked as one of the top 3 universities in the world. I may be biased as a grad, but I would say both are better than Harvard.

I'd agree there's a bit of a British bias there. IIRC the British publications tend to rank British institutions favorably vis-a-vis their American counterparts. I think Harvard is pretty unanimously considered the most prestigious university in the world, and it has the endowment to back that up. For the record, I'm not a Harvard grad and think it's a flawed institution in many ways, but I'd be foolish to pretend its reputation doesn't stand for itself.

I think even the equivalencies in 19:46 are a bit generous. I'd generally put Oxbridge = Ivy League (+ Stanford, MIT et al), and maybe the rung immediately below that (LSE, Imperial, UCL) as = to schools like Duke, Northwestern, Hopkins, UCB. But I would even put schools like UCLA, UM, Rice head to head with that second rung in terms of student quality and academic caliber.

I agree, Oxbridge admits a much larger contingent of students than most Ivy League schools (maybe except Cornell) since each of them has about 30+ colleges that do their own admissions. And the acceptance rate is a lot higher too (around 20%). Don't get me wrong, they're all pretty elite, but if you really want to split hairs, the perceived difference between someone who went to Balliol versus St Edmunds Hall (where DC did an exchange year) is probably equivalent to the perceived difference between an average Harvard student versus a Cornell student.

This is misleading. Because you must meet the admissions criteria to even apply, the pool of applicants is much stronger than the pool of applicants that applies to HYPSM+. The 20% figure is not really apples to apples. You would need to figure out how many candidates to The American school that are similarly in the top 1-2% academically are accepted/rejected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How familiar are you with the UK schools? Hard to compare as the American university system is its own beast and differs in some very significant ways from the British system. In general, American universities are much wealthier and at the elite level, much smaller. But in terms of prestige and academic quality (with an eye on research, since that tips the scale in global reputation tables) I'd very roughly put it somewhat like this.

HYPSM

Oxbridge = Columbia, Caltech

UCL/LSE/Imperial/St Andrews = Penn/Duke/Cornell/Northwestern/Chicago/Berkeley

KCL/Edinburgh/Durham = Hopkins/Brown/Dartmouth/Rice/UCLA/UMich

...or some iteration. There are way more elite U.S. schools, and they're typically much more selective.

Brit here. I agree that it’s hard to compare, and you also need ot factor in what your American student wants to do afterwards with their UK degree.
I think Oxbridge is as prestigious as HYS (not sure I’d include others but maybe).
The next rung down is Imperial, LSE, and possibly UCL depending on department. St Andrews isn’t up there at all - it’s popular with Americans but not particularly prestigious in the UK. Then after that come all of the Russell group, but exactly where they rank completely depends on the subject in question.

"Oxbridge" is always ranked as one of the top 3 universities in the world. I may be biased as a grad, but I would say both are better than Harvard.

I'd agree there's a bit of a British bias there. IIRC the British publications tend to rank British institutions favorably vis-a-vis their American counterparts. I think Harvard is pretty unanimously considered the most prestigious university in the world, and it has the endowment to back that up. For the record, I'm not a Harvard grad and think it's a flawed institution in many ways, but I'd be foolish to pretend its reputation doesn't stand for itself.

I think even the equivalencies in 19:46 are a bit generous. I'd generally put Oxbridge = Ivy League (+ Stanford, MIT et al), and maybe the rung immediately below that (LSE, Imperial, UCL) as = to schools like Duke, Northwestern, Hopkins, UCB. But I would even put schools like UCLA, UM, Rice head to head with that second rung in terms of student quality and academic caliber.

I agree, Oxbridge admits a much larger contingent of students than most Ivy League schools (maybe except Cornell) since each of them has about 30+ colleges that do their own admissions. And the acceptance rate is a lot higher too (around 20%). Don't get me wrong, they're all pretty elite, but if you really want to split hairs, the perceived difference between someone who went to Balliol versus St Edmunds Hall (where DC did an exchange year) is probably equivalent to the perceived difference between an average Harvard student versus a Cornell student.

This is misleading. Because you must meet the admissions criteria to even apply, the pool of applicants is much stronger than the pool of applicants that applies to HYPSM+. The 20% figure is not really apples to apples. You would need to figure out how many candidates to The American school that are similarly in the top 1-2% academically are accepted/rejected.

How do you know this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How familiar are you with the UK schools? Hard to compare as the American university system is its own beast and differs in some very significant ways from the British system. In general, American universities are much wealthier and at the elite level, much smaller. But in terms of prestige and academic quality (with an eye on research, since that tips the scale in global reputation tables) I'd very roughly put it somewhat like this.

HYPSM

Oxbridge = Columbia, Caltech

UCL/LSE/Imperial/St Andrews = Penn/Duke/Cornell/Northwestern/Chicago/Berkeley

KCL/Edinburgh/Durham = Hopkins/Brown/Dartmouth/Rice/UCLA/UMich

...or some iteration. There are way more elite U.S. schools, and they're typically much more selective.

Brit here. I agree that it’s hard to compare, and you also need ot factor in what your American student wants to do afterwards with their UK degree.
I think Oxbridge is as prestigious as HYS (not sure I’d include others but maybe).
The next rung down is Imperial, LSE, and possibly UCL depending on department. St Andrews isn’t up there at all - it’s popular with Americans but not particularly prestigious in the UK. Then after that come all of the Russell group, but exactly where they rank completely depends on the subject in question.

"Oxbridge" is always ranked as one of the top 3 universities in the world. I may be biased as a grad, but I would say both are better than Harvard.

I'd agree there's a bit of a British bias there. IIRC the British publications tend to rank British institutions favorably vis-a-vis their American counterparts. I think Harvard is pretty unanimously considered the most prestigious university in the world, and it has the endowment to back that up. For the record, I'm not a Harvard grad and think it's a flawed institution in many ways, but I'd be foolish to pretend its reputation doesn't stand for itself.

I think even the equivalencies in 19:46 are a bit generous. I'd generally put Oxbridge = Ivy League (+ Stanford, MIT et al), and maybe the rung immediately below that (LSE, Imperial, UCL) as = to schools like Duke, Northwestern, Hopkins, UCB. But I would even put schools like UCLA, UM, Rice head to head with that second rung in terms of student quality and academic caliber.

I agree, Oxbridge admits a much larger contingent of students than most Ivy League schools (maybe except Cornell) since each of them has about 30+ colleges that do their own admissions. And the acceptance rate is a lot higher too (around 20%). Don't get me wrong, they're all pretty elite, but if you really want to split hairs, the perceived difference between someone who went to Balliol versus St Edmunds Hall (where DC did an exchange year) is probably equivalent to the perceived difference between an average Harvard student versus a Cornell student.

This is misleading. Because you must meet the admissions criteria to even apply, the pool of applicants is much stronger than the pool of applicants that applies to HYPSM+. The 20% figure is not really apples to apples. You would need to figure out how many candidates to The American school that are similarly in the top 1-2% academically are accepted/rejected.

How do you know this?

I am not that poster but I am English and I know this because the school will not permit you to apply to Oxford or Cambridge unless you meet the criteria, they can refused to endorse your application and write your references - it is not a privately controlled process. You can apply to up to 5 universities on UCAS maximum. You cannot apply to both Cambs and OX - when you do apply to them, you have to put either at the top of the list of 5. When you do that there are multiple universities who will no longer consider you if you put them 2nd or lower.

Cultural knowledge comes when you grow up in a place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a general rule, UK schools are overrated. There's no real reason why a school like Oxford and Cambridge should ever be considered on par, let alone better, than HYPSM. Their inflated reputation has more to do with the vestiges of colonialism and imperialism than anything else.

A tangent, but Americans would do well to get over their Anglophilia. The British certainly don't think highly of Americans and our education system, so there's no reason why we should be over here fawning over the British and their schools and letting it get into their collective heads.

Oh dear.

I mean, are all these people refuting this British or what? I think it's a terrible look for Americans when Brits collectively look down their nose on us while we're licking their boots. America's tertiary education system is, amid the many (many) shortcomings of this country, one of the few things Americans can confidently say we're world leaders in. Our collective fixation on schools like Oxford and Cambridge is a holdover from Britain's sway on the world stage and our association of "British" with anything classy, upper-class, and better quality.

This is a tangential analogy, but it's sort of how like Brits will view an American accent with anything ranging from disinterest to outright disdain, while 100% of Americans will fawn over a British accent.