Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Durham or LSE?

I'm applying for History. I can't decide between the two (I'm applying to both btw, but I don't know which I'd rather go to). I know it's my decision at the end of the day, but I need to think carefully about it nonetheless

some criteria;

1. Reputation
2. Course
3. Location and/or Cost
4. Employment afterwards

Any help would be much appreciated :smile:

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

username941859

I'd go for Durham for history. It has a great rep for it. LSE is very strong for everything it does though, and has a better overall reputation. That said, Durham will be considerably cheaper in terms of accom, as it is a collegiate university, similar to Oxford and Cambridge (but Durham colleges are not academic) and London prices are outstanding for accom, although you'll get a bigger student loan to compensate it. Employability-wise LSE probably edges Durham slightly. That said, if I had the choice between them, I'd go for Durham (I was rejected from Durham this year for history) but that is my personal preference.

Reply 2

one2three_abc

1) Pretty sure Durham is one of the best for History, but then again I am sure LSE is too.
2) Don't know anything about this, sorry.
3) London is a lot more expensive than Durham.
4) Naturally LSE probably has better employment prospects because it is based in London, and is LSE which has a slightly better presence than Durham despite both being great.

I think a 5th consideration is the college structure of Durham and the locations. The college structure is great for participation in sports, music, societies etc. But Durham is less lively than London...yet still a great place to spend three years.

Reply 3

hajinator

Durham, because I'm sure that it's better for History in terms of rank for the subject.

Reply 4

username941859

Original post by hajinator

Durham, because I'm sure that it's better for History in terms of rank for the subject.

It is but don't listen to league tables, they're often inaccurate (as in I seriously doubt Heriot Watt is 2nd best in Scotland after St. Andrews and Kings College London is 30 something th)

Reply 5

FrogInABog

Before applying, it's definitely worth having a look round both, and just seeing how they feel. I didn't apply to LSE on this basis; I looked round, and it just didn't feel right. On the other hand, I'm sure it suits some people very well. Try to get to an open day if you can, or, failing that, you could give them a ring and ask to arrange a visit.

Reply 6

DenchKing1832

Thanks guys, very good advice. I'm probably going for Durham over LSE (in the pecking order). I have visited the LSE, not Durham yet, and it didn't feel quite "right"

Reply 7

username941859

Original post by DenchKing1832

Thanks guys, very good advice. I'm probably going for Durham over LSE (in the pecking order). I have visited the LSE, not Durham yet, and it didn't feel quite "right"

Durham has a very homely feel about it. Where else are you applying? In my totally unbiased opinion, I'd recommend St. Andrews for history!

Reply 8

DenchKing1832

Original post by Calllu-m

Durham has a very homely feel about it. Where else are you applying? In my totally unbiased opinion, I'd recommend St. Andrews for history!

I'm applying:

1. Oxford
2. Durham
3. LSE
4. UCL
5. Exeter

That would be my order of preference

EDIT: Yes it is risky, but I'm applying post A-Level (i.e. I've done my A2s)

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 9

username941859

Original post by DenchKing1832

I'm applying:

1. Oxford
2. Durham
3. LSE
4. UCL
5. Exeter

That would be my order of preference

High risk application. Would you be happy going to Exeter in the event the other 4 reject you?

Reply 10

DenchKing1832

Original post by Calllu-m

High risk application. Would you be happy going to Exeter in the event the other 4 reject you?

I'm applying post A-Level bruv :wink:

. I see what you mean, but somehow I ended up with A*A*A (Econ, Maths and Hist) so it's not as high risk as someone applying in their AS year

Reply 11

username941859

Original post by DenchKing1832

I'm applying post A-Level bruv :wink:

. I see what you mean, but somehow I ended up with A*A*A (Econ, Maths and Hist) so it's not as high risk as someone applying in their AS year

No, it isn't, you're right. That said, I've known Durham to reject people with A*A*A*A* for history. It's almost potluck whether they take you or not. You should be okay though, and stand a good chance at Oxford, provided you don't balls up the HAT

Reply 12

KJ90

Original post by DenchKing1832

Thanks guys, very good advice. I'm probably going for Durham over LSE (in the pecking order). I have visited the LSE, not Durham yet, and it didn't feel quite "right"

I am now an LSE student (law) and oddly enough I had the same feeling when I first went for an open day.

It doesn't help that the open day is very busy and seemingly unfriendly, which unfortunately is the nature of the LSE open day.

I went back a few times and it really grew on me - the unlimited opportunities that come with living as a student in London (something that you will never get anywhere else in the UK), the international make-up of the university and, of course, it fact it is the LSE - so has first class lecturers, the best job prospects and great facilities. Plus the social life is nowhere near as bad as some make out.

For history specifically, I believe that Durham is better for the course. That is a good reason to go there, I guess. However, don't rule out LSE on first impressions. Although intimidating on the outside, once you are there it has a more friendly personality.

Reply 13

WGR

Original post by DenchKing1832

I'm applying:

1. Oxford
2. Durham
3. LSE
4. UCL
5. Exeter

That would be my order of preference

Risky stuff.

Reply 14

username1221364

I would rather be in Durham. I know both are big universities, but I'd imagine LSE is huge and you wouldn't get as much personal time.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 15

Protagoras

From my personal experience of studying in London and attending the guest lectures that go on at the LSE, I would highly recommend going for LSE.

I attended a three day mini-lecture series of Nicholas Stern, former World Bank chief economist and former second permanent secretary of the Treasury, and his outlook on environmental economics and the 5 years since the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. When the Occupy movement was outside St. Pauls Cathedral, Harvard professor Michael Sandel gave a talk on 'morality in the markets'. So in addition to so much going on at the school of economics, if you are willing to find out about life then you can't go wrong in London. If you enjoy art then across the road is the Courtauld Institute and gallery at Somerset House, all the think tanks in Westminster - Adam Smith Institute, Policy Exchange, Institute of Economic Affairs etc.

Outside of studying it is a much better life to lead. Just head down to Imperial College and check out the Science Museum or pop along to the King's road off Sloane square and check out some of the most beautiful women you will ever see.

The LSE has a much better international reputation and you are likely to meet a lot more people whom are from many different backgrounds and if you go for a drink at the LSE pub, the George IV, you might end up talking to someone who studied at Harvard and they'll let you know what it is like studying in the U.S. for example.

Of course, London is the best place for internship opportunities; Civil Service, the City, and so much more.

The LSE will give you a great platform for networking.

I think LSE will give you a more broader outlook to be more pragmatic with your history degree.

I have always wondered if I should have done a history degree and commentate like Niall Ferguson.

Reply 16

smile:D

Original post by DenchKing1832

1. They're roughly the same, LSE has the edge internationally
2. The courses differ hugely: I'd be careful here, at LSE you only do modern international history whereas at durham you have to do modules from all three eras in your first year: medieval, early modern and modern
3. Durham is good if you want a university town feel: it's quaint has lots of old buildings etc., it's also a collegiate uni. LSE is London (it's in Holborn which is a nice area) but there will be more nightclubs etc if you like that sort of thing. The cost will be much higher in London, especially for accommodation, you do get a higher loan to cover this, but even so you're definitely paying over the odds
4. LSE has pretty much the best employment rate of all unis, and seems to be strong in this area

I would recommend you look at the courses - this will ultimately determine whether you'd be happy at a uni and both are so different :smile:

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 17

ILIGAN

As someone international, my view is: LSE for international reputation and Durham for what we, Americans, call, "college experience".

Reply 18

username1197057

I don't know specifically about history, but apparently on the economics course it was only £8000 a year, not 9? This was from unistats this year :smile:

if you put two in it'll compare everything side by side, quite useful if you're undecided! Good luck choosing!

Reply 19

dragonkeeper999

The universities are fairly similarly ranked for History, and the employment prospects are also reasonably similar. I think that the main difference is that LSE is a real city university, bring in London, whereas Durham has a more relaxed, homely feel with its collegiate structure. I would highly recommend visiting the two universities and deciding which atmosphere is best for you - for example I really dislike London and other big cities, so didn't apply to any London universities, but did apply to Durham since I felt very comfortable there on the open day. It really depends upon your personality and personal preference.