"Warwick" cannot be compared with "Imperial" brand name !!!!!

You're so full of it! You pick a course out of you head just assuming its entry requirements are low and then look a tool when it transpires they're not (and they are, in fact, the same as the entry requirments for several Imperial courses). You compare LSE and Imperial as though they're doing the same thing when they have different specialisms. You talk as if everyone automatically puts Imperial and Oxbridge on a par when the only people who do that are Imperial grads. You claim Imperial has a higher calibre of student when there's nothing in it. You talk as if going to Imperial automatically confers some immense prestige on a person and is evidence of triumph over the greatest academic odds, when in fact most science courses are less competitive to get onto than many arts courses and people who've got into, say, English or History at top unis have done so in the face of much stiffer competition than the engineering of computer science entrants.

You look kind of desperate. Imperial's a great uni and doesn't need the defence of people with massive chips on thier shoulders and a lot of misinformation and prejudice at their fingertips.

OP, reputationally-speaking there's very little in it. You should go with the institution and course you are most attracted to - either will be an amazing basis for your career.

How many universities have ever had an average UCAS tariff above 500?

People have to defend Imperial because idiots like you dont hear it mentioned in every bond film and think its got the same student calibre as LSE.............. errr you do know LSE teaches sociology and management???

Imperial IS better than LSE or Warwick, because most of the subjects at Imperial produce exceptionally high calbibre graduates. You going to tell me Warwick's french graduates are amazingly high-calibre? How about LSE's sociology graduates? How about Warwick's English graduates? Warwick's sociology graduates?

Im not JUST defending Imperial, quite clearly said Warwick has 3 main courses which are as amazing as Oxbridge and Imperial's: Maths, Economics and CS. LSE has it's economics.

Bond films? What are you talking about, you muppet?

How many universities have ever had an average UCAS tariff above 500?

People have to defend Imperial because idiots like you dont hear it mentioned in every bond film and think its got the same student calibre as LSE.............. errr you do know LSE teaches sociology and management???

Imperial IS better than LSE or Warwick, because most of the subjects at Imperial produce exceptionally high calbibre graduates. You going to tell me Warwick's french graduates are amazingly high-calibre? How about LSE's sociology graduates? How about Warwick's English graduates? Warwick's sociology graduates?

Im not JUST defending Imperial, ive quite clearly said Warwick has 3 main courses which are as amazing as Oxbridge and Imperial's: Maths, Economics and CS. LSE has it's economics.

The league tables have different metrics and serve different purposes. As another poster said, the Guardian's table can be understood largely as a Student Experience table. It'd be a brilliant card to have up your sleeve if someone said "Imperial students rate their courses and university experience more highly than do students at Warwick", then. It's hardly following-suit if the point at issue is that of which has the higher international profile*.



*It is Imperial.

**** Imperial mathematics!!

LSE is more famous and we all know that nowadays popularilty is half the battle in life.

The difference in entry standards is never more than 10 points and often less than 5 (in fact LSE always beat Imperial for entry standards upto 4 years ago). A-levels work in differences of 20's, so if Imperial has 489 and LSE has 484 (according to the stats im looking at now), both their students have over AAAA at A-level.

It has been categorically stated that sciences are not harder than everything else, or more respected.

Finally, i find it quite remarkable that LSE often beats Imperial in employmet rankings, both domestically and internationally. Bearing in mind that science grads tend to be more 'employable' compared to say history or sociology, it is a credit to LSE that it has the best employment prospects even though it teaches just the social sciences. Afterall, LSE has always been in the top 5 universities in the worl for employability according to the THES world ranking. Suffice to say Imperial has not.

**** knows.

He's a deluded idiot.

Bond films? What are you talking about, you muppet?

or that those Warwick English or French students you dismiss (average 465 and 462 respectively) are better than Imperial's Computer Scientists (average 460)

Really, grow up. The UK has some amazing unis at the top end and it just looks lame when people play the my-uni's-better-than-yours game (I know, I've done it ) Talk to academics and they will have respect and admiration for their peers in other institutions rather than trying to do them down. If you have enough confidence in yourself and your institution you don't need to big it up at others' expense.

Go on then, just so we're clear..... Oxbridge constantly being mentioned in the media, having tuition interview books written, websites devoted etc.... doesnt add to their reputation? I guess the fact that half of the media went there doesnt make articles about them bias??



http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2010/jun/04/university-guide-computer-sciences-and-it

You mean '507'?


Errrrr........... i'm not doing this for Imperial's sake, im doing it for the 18yr olds who will come on TSR, reading you saying Warwick and Imperial are pretty much even and then make a decision based on a wrong fact.

If you want to say there's no difference between Warwick and Imperial, then you have to say there's no difference between the calibre of student between Imperial and Oxbridge.... it's as simple as that!

Warwick is an ex-poly, so I would say go for Imperial.

billydisco,

if you attend UCL why are you such a fanboy for Imperial which is no longer a U of L university?

What exactly are you smoking?

1) Since when does LSE beat Imperial in employment rankings? Are we including the McDonalds' jobs your sociology graduates take up? Imperial had the highest employment rate this year, kinda wipes out your argument.

What about the ecology, zoology, geology grads?

I'm sure they are making $$$...

Every big tech firm has a CEO yet none of them came from Imperial (Nottingham for example has more CEO's). MIT has many many famous alumni so why doesn't imperial. Face it billydisco, LSE has produced more world leaders than any other university bar Oxford and Harvard