Which UK universities apart from Oxbridge are comparable to the Ivy Leagues?

I like this thread.

I too wish to impress the layman that knows little about universities. Getting an 'oooooo' from him makes my university career worthwhile. What people who know about departments and academics think, or what I have been taught is of secondary importance to what the bloke outside McDonald's knows of universities in other countries.

Please, continue.

Huh. If you find the discussion trivial, don't come in here...?

Reply 121

Jedbrien

8

@OP The general consensus from this thread is that Imperial and LSE are definitely comparable with the Ivies and UCL to some extent

Reply 122

Zenomorph

3

I think only Imperial.
LSE/UCl would still be a cut below the likes of UPenn.

Reply 123

nightmare91

7

Original post by billydisco

Complete tosh I am afraid. Durham is NOWHERE near being comparable to an Ivy League.

Oxbridge, Imperial and LSE are the only truly prestigious universities in the UK.

Ok I wasn't sure about Durham anyway. But you have to consider that Ivy League isn't just Harvard and Yale. It's also Cornell and Dartmouth which are definitely not more reputable than UCL/Warwick/Edinburgh. And again, I wasn't only talking about what universities are as prestigious as the Ivy Leagues. The OP also asked about teaching quality and job prospects. Of course these are all just assumptions as we don't have access to the needed data to assess this case. But the undergrad teaching quality at the Ivy Leagues aren't any better than the top UK ones. Many people hear Ivy League and think this is the best where you can get. Well again, for undergrad it's not.

I have a Spanish friend who just came back from Harvard. He spent 5 months attending undergrad Economics classes there (don't ask me why, he apparently had a lot of spare time :tongue:

). He told me that the teaching quality is GOOD, but not that amazing. Because the top professors that make Harvard so reputable would NEVER teach undergrads. Usually only the Phd candidates teach the undergrads. Hence my post wasn't that wrong.

Anyway, I think we can all agree that reputation wise most of the top American unis are better than the UK ones (Oxbridge is the exception). But when it comes to the quality of the course, then there isn't much of a difference. Btw, most Americans pursue a Master's degree anyway. Just a Bachelor is kind of worthless in the States. Same situation in Germany and other countries. That's why American unis put a bigger emphasis on postrgrad and hence the reputation.

Reply 124

fudgesundae

16

Original post by Smack

But what about the UK? There are a lot of companies who do not attend an careers fair at either Oxford nor Cambridge but attend careers fairs at other universities. Did they get chased off campus by angry Oxbridge dons?

If you want me to link you to an independent report that looked into graduate employment then I can. It quite clearly shows that the universities most heavily targeted by top employers are Oxford, Cambridge, Warwick, London unis (incl. UCL, Imperial and King's) and I think Manchester was the last one.

From that, and my experiences at two other companies, what I learned is that the people who sift through graduate CVs are HR people who often did not attend university themselves (and if they did it was usually the local one) and honestly have no idea about universities that aren't local or Oxbridge.

Maybe it depends on the sector. I know that in Finance, Law, Tech (F500 tech companies), Consulting HR only do the very initial screening. They weed out the people without a 2:i or higher (if this is a requirement), the actual looking at people's experience and deciding who to invite to interviews is not done by HR.

Okay but you're still acting as if I or indeed most people actually care about those places.

Well in my post I stated that they had some of the most competitive graduate training programs and the intake in some of these sectors is among the largest of any sector for graduates. So yes, it seems a lot of people do care about these places.

Where am I trying to prove you wrong? How can I even prove you wrong when you're discussing companies that I've never even heard of?

I'm assuming you're trying to argue that your university has little or no bearing on your job prospects. Seeing as I am arguing the opposite, and you quoted me, I assume you to be trying to prove me wrong in that respect.

No.

Care to enlighten me?

I didn't ask you what OCR is as I have never heard of it. I rhetorically asked you if you have experience of on-campus recruitment in the US because I know you don't.

You never asked if I had first hand experience of it. I have very reliable second hand experience of it. You can look into OCR if you really want, the information I told you about it is not hard to find. If a company does not recruit on your campus, your chances of getting an interview with said company is very slim. Many firms fight pretty hard to get OCR slots at the top colleges.

Reply 125

Zenomorph

3

That Newsweek report is drawn from only 10 English speaking countries, not exactly a great sample. If it was truly international, I bet places likes Duke and Chicago would rank easily higher than LSE/UCL or Durham.

Reply 126

DynamicSyngery

14

Half the Ivy League isn't even particularly prestigious apart from for being in the Ivy League. What is Dartmouth or Cornell famous for? Do you think people on the street have heard of them? If you mean comparable to Harvard, then perhaps LSE is comparable in terms of man-on-the-street name recognition, and the whole 'Golden Triangle' and Warwick in terms of research quality.

Reply 127

Tsunami2011

15

Original post by Zenomorph

I think only Imperial.
LSE/UCl would still be a cut below the likes of UPenn.

So you think LSE and UCL are not comparable with Cornell, Dartmouth and Brown?

Reply 128

s.a.u

17

Not all of the Ivy Leagues are all that great. Some of them (Cornell, Dartmouth and Brown) just piggy-back on the name, and achieve nothing of real substance. No-one would say that Manchester is comparable to the Ivy League, yet is is above Brown in world rankings.

Reply 129

Zenomorph

3

Original post by Tsunami2011

So you think LSE and UCL are not comparable with Cornell, Dartmouth and Brown?

I don't know enough about Brown or Dartmouth.
My comments referred to UPenn, and later Chicago, Duke, but I feel Cornell is better than LSE/UCL. Comparable, what does that mean ?

In theory at least Cornell like Chicago and Duke are supposed to be very hard to get into and it has always been that way at least since I can remember, whereas I don't feel the same can be said of LSE and UCL. These 2 seem to come of age since the internet particularly UCL, where I can't help but feel that it benefits simply from the names London and University.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 130

Tsunami2011

15

Original post by Zenomorph

I don't know enough about Brown or Dartmouth.
My comments referred to UPenn, and later Chicago, Duke, but I feel Cornell is better than LSE/UCL. Comparable, what does that mean ?

In theory at least Cornell like Chicago and Duke are supposed to be very hard to get into and it has always been that way at least since I can remember, whereas I don't feel the same can be said of LSE and UCL. These 2 seem to come of age since the internet particularly UCL, where I can't help but feel that it benefits simply from the names London and University.

If we're going of the dubious 'wow' factor or international prestige, I wouldn't say Cornell or Dartmouth/Brown are superior to LSE or UCL in that sense, since even amongst the educated in the UK, I don't hear them pop up as the top top schools in the US.

I wouldn't go that far, If that was the case, how come City University London, or Queen Mary University of London do not fare as well as UCL. I agree though, that they be slightly overhyped.

Reply 131

FO12DY

13

Original post by Lord of the Flies

Also, Stanford isn't part of the Ivy League.

Oh then it must be ****.

Oh, wait...

Reply 132

FO12DY

13

Original post by fudgesundae

The Ivy League now represents an educational philosophy

So in that sense why does it differ from the Russell group?

Not sure what you're arguing about to be honest.

Reply 133

AspiringGenius

15

Ivy league isn't a particular standard. For example, Cornell and UPenn are on a completely different level to Havard and Princeton. Icy league was based mm a sportinng league although the eight colleges tend to be some of the oldest.

Although I guess Oxbridge, LSE, imperial, UCL, (maybe KCL), Edinburgh, (maybe Bristol, St.Andrews and Durham) would be our Ivy?

Reply 134

Zenomorph

3

Original post by Tsunami2011

If we're going of the dubious 'wow' factor or international prestige, I wouldn't say Cornell or Dartmouth/Brown are superior to LSE or UCL in that sense, since even amongst the educated in the UK, I don't hear them pop up as the top top schools in the US.

I wouldn't go that far, If that was the case, how come City University London, or Queen Mary University of London do not fare as well as UCL. I agree though, that they be slightly overhyped.

Maybe but the reverse would certainly be true also especially in the pre net age. I think the 1st names to come out of most Americans' mouths would Oxbridge and then St Andrews.

Whereas Cornell ( I never mentioned the other 2) is more prestigious world wide.

It's obvious why QMC and City names don't have the kudos: if you going to say that might as well say the same for KCL/ICL and so on but UCL is the only one that has the U and L as part of it own name; the others don't.

Reply 135

Zenomorph

3

Original post by AspiringGenius

Ivy league isn't a particular standard. For example, Cornell and UPenn are on a completely different level to Havard and Princeton. Icy league was based mm a sportinng league although the eight colleges tend to be some of the oldest.

Although I guess Oxbridge, LSE, imperial, UCL, (maybe KCL), Edinburgh, (maybe Bristol, St.Andrews and Durham) would be our Ivy?

Oxbridge. Always been always will be

Reply 136

Newcastle456

14

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents/pressreleases/sunday_times_reveals/ - According to the Sunday Times - This is the UK Ivy League.

Oxford
Cambridge
Durham
London School of Economics
Bristol
Exeter
Warwick
Imperial College London
University College London

Can probably add in Edinburgh and St. Andrews, omitted as they don't use A-levels.

Reply 137

Zenomorph

3

Come on that's from the Warwick newsroom.

Reply 138

FO12DY

13

Original post by pop101

Imperial
LSE
Warwick
UCL
^ they, with Oxbridge are the top 6 Uni's in the UK. Russel group = Ivy league...I think. There's about 20 Uni's in the group including the ones I have mentioned.

Although I'd largely agree, this is a worthless conversation without considering which subject will be studied.

Especially with regard to Imperial and LSE - but UCL and Warwick obviously are also better than others for some courses, and not so good for others.

Engineering at Southampton > Engineering at LSE!