People urging me to choose Kings over QMUL for History

So i got offers from both, and I've visited QM twice and kings once. Kings was very...detached for me. It wasn't very comfortable or home-y like QM felt. Kings seemed very serious to me. It was off-putting.

HOWEVERRRRRRRR
everyone's telling me not to be stupid and to firm kings because of the prestige associated and how it will make me more employable etc etc

but QMUL has just been added to russel group, and although it's not kings-level yet, shouldn't this make the decision to firm QM and reject kings a little more acceptable (lol) right?

HIT ME WITH OPINIONS

Reply 1

Democracy

QMUL has an excellent history department and is a very good uni overall. If you feel more comfortable there, I think you have your answer.

Queen Mary, University Of London

London

Reply 2

victoryshinesonus

King's is just over-hyped and a sub-standard UCL :tongue:

Be original, QMUL.

Reply 3

ScholarsInk

Really?

I got the opposite impression from dealing with both places. QMUL was very dismissive and rigid, whereas King's was incredibly accommodating and welcoming, especially the History people. Students I spoke to seemed to absolutely love doing history there.

(This isn't a slight on QMUL, by the way - my favourite current historian teaches there which was a huge part of the draw.)

Reply 4

SloaneRanger

QMUL is where the less intelligent people go, KCL is far superior.

Reply 5

Loeszie.

I chose QMUL over KCL for Spanish, and also wondered whether it's really a good decisions but I think you should consider where you will feel happiest and choose the course (have a look at the content at both unis) you like best! And in the end QMUL is not a bad university at all (:

Reply 6

kka25

Do not follow what people say and follow what's best for you is my advice to you..

Reply 7

Locke54

King's has the better reputation largely due to it's longer history. Academically in History you'd find it hard to slide a piece of paper between them these days. So basically make your decision based on whether prestige is really important to you or whether you'd rather spend three years at a now Russell group uni that you feel more at home at. I wouldn't deny the fact that KCL on you CV might well look better though.

Reply 8

VickyG166

Original post by yari-n

Haven't you just answered your own question? You're the one who has to go there, not everyone else. Besides, QM, while admittedly not on the same level as KCL in a lot of peoples minds, is by no means a bad university, has some very strong departments, such as law, and as you say, has just been admitted to the Russel Group. IMO if you go somewhere where you are happy you'll work better and come out with a much better result than if you go somewhere you don't really want to be. Point is, its your decision.

Edit: Why the neg?

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 9

HighestKungFu

I actually chose QMUL over KCL myself in the end as I to got the same impression as you. That isn't to say that King's isn't a fantastic university (which it is), but I think your gut is telling you the answer already. In life we sometimes just get a 'feeling' that can guide us when we are presented with difficult decisions.

Also, as has already been stated, it's a university on the up-and-up overall, has a brand new History building (ArtsTwo) which kicks ass, and has also been admitted to The Russell Group. So for History there isn't much difference between the two.

Personally I also liked QMUL given its location, which allows you to mix East End bargains and West End affluence.