St Andrews or Warwick?

Hi everyone,

I'm a post A Level Classics applicant and have narrowed my choices down to either Warwick (for classical civilisation) or St Andrews (for classical studies). Seeing as I'm post A Level I have unconditionals from both, so I'm just trying to decide now! I loved the look of the course at warwick, and being in central England it's much closer to where I live than St Andrews up in Fife!!! Buuuut St Andrews was absolutely beautiful (whereas Warwick is a bit of a concrete block) and their reputation is slightly better. Does anyone have any opinions on which is better? Completely out of ideas on how to choose at this point!!

Thanks :smile:

Reply 1

Okorange

17

I have to say St Andrews has a better reputation in Classical studies, there is no way a uni like Warwick which is known mainly for its econ, maths and business is better than St Andrews at the arts.

I would just choose to live away from home as long as you don't miss home too much. If you really do enjoy living close to home it might be better to choose Warwick because you don't want to be too homesick.

Reply 2

username1553813

10

Warwick is much more reputable. However, St Andrews is strong too.

Reply 3

ZSK2014

4

I'd say go for Warwick, it is much more prestigious.

Obvs Warwick.

For Classical Studies? St Andrew.

If not for anything else, don't you think the architecture in Warwick would be a bit too clinical and non-classical relatively speaking? LOL.

Reply 6

ElizabethRG

9

Original post by Posy_a

Hi everyone,

I'm a post A Level Classics applicant and have narrowed my choices down to either Warwick (for classical civilisation) or St Andrews (for classical studies). Seeing as I'm post A Level I have unconditionals from both, so I'm just trying to decide now! I loved the look of the course at warwick, and being in central England it's much closer to where I live than St Andrews up in Fife!!! Buuuut St Andrews was absolutely beautiful (whereas Warwick is a bit of a concrete block) and their reputation is slightly better. Does anyone have any opinions on which is better? Completely out of ideas on how to choose at this point!!

Thanks :smile:

The classics (and ancient history) program at St Andrews is really.. not good. I obviously can't speak for Warwick so maybe it's no better, but St Andrews' is dull, the lectures are poorly organised, and the professors/tutors in first and second year are disinterested and clearly don't want to be teaching. The only good thing is the exams are really, really easy. The three people I know who started in classics dropped it to do straight history instead. If you like the look of the course at Warwick better, go for it!

Reply 7

Okorange

17

Original post by ElizabethRG

The classics (and ancient history) program at St Andrews is really.. not good. I obviously can't speak for Warwick so maybe it's no better, but St Andrews' is dull, the lectures are poorly organised, and the professors/tutors in first and second year are disinterested and clearly don't want to be teaching. The only good thing is the exams are really, really easy. The three people I know who started in classics dropped it to do straight history instead. If you like the look of the course at Warwick better, go for it!

You did classics at St Andrews? What is so bad about it?

Reply 8

ElizabethRG

9

Original post by Okorange

You did classics at St Andrews? What is so bad about it?

Yeah, as an extra course, I did classics and ancient history both semesters 1st year and 1st semester of second year. My post said exactly what was bad about it - disinterested tutors (I had 1 that actually cared about her students - I don't want to get started on my worst tutor in classics), disorganised lectures, poor use of material, it takes six weeks to get an assignment back - the only good thing is that they mark pretty easily.

I have one close friend a year ahead of me who did classics and ancient history with modern history as an extra module, then swapped over to modern history in third year because she couldn't stand the classics dept. The other two people that changed over I only vaguely know so I don't know what motivated it.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 9

Okorange

17

Original post by ElizabethRG

Yeah, as an extra course, I did classics and ancient history both semesters 1st year and 1st semester of second year. My post said exactly what was bad about it - disinterested tutors (I had 1 that actually cared about her students - I don't want to get started on my worst tutor in classics), disorganised lectures, poor use of material, it takes six weeks to get an assignment back - the only good thing is that they mark pretty easily.

I have one close friend a year ahead of me who did classics and ancient history with modern history as an extra module, then swapped over to modern history in third year because she couldn't stand the classics dept. The other two people that changed over I only vaguely know so I don't know what motivated it.

I see

Reply 10

Cal-lum

13

I'd go with St Andrews, I love the tradition and how beautiful the uni is. From what I know it's slightly more reputable for Classics too.

Reply 11

Okorange

17

Yeah no matter what I mean I think I would rather study classics at a uni that is literally ancient, it just seems odd that a uni like Warwick would do classics well. Besides classics was ranked 2nd in the REF 2014. Maybe teaching isn't that great though so I would take ElizabethRG's advice as well. I personally have not studied classics at St Andrews.

Reply 12

StratfordLatin

As a first year St Andrews student taking 3 modules in Classics (Latin, Greek, and Ancient History), in my experience the department is actually really good! Out of the nine essays I've written this year only one has actually been returned more than about two weeks after it was submitted (the time limit they're supposed to have to mark and give it back) and I think that was due to the lecturer being quite ill.

My tutors have been standout as well, especially Ben Lowe and Juan Coderch. I've loved going to my tutorials because the discussions tend to be good and usually useful for the exam and you do get to know your tutors - last Friday Ben Lowe went on about his fairly hilarious drunken experiences at Hadrian's Wall. He recognised me on the street at the weekend with his family and said hi as well, which is always nice :smile:

In first year the lectures are deliberately designed to be fairly broad to give everyone the basic knowledge, a lot of which you might already know, but IMHO the staff manage still to make it interesting. Having read a couple of the St Andrews posts, ElizabethRG doesn't appear to have got on too well with the uni as a whole, but obviously I have no idea as to her exact experiences or circumstances so I won't say anything about that. All of my friends in Classics seem to really like their tutors and the department too, so make of that what you will.

I actually live about 10 miles away from Warwick and my Classics teacher at school is married to a tutor there (he gave me a mock Oxford interview). Warwick also has a standout Classics department and tbh the only reason I didn't apply there was because it was too close to home. The two unis both have a small town/suburban feel and have cities within fairly easy reach (Birmingham/London and Edinburgh/Glasgow). St Andrews is probably more of a love-hate place though. To make a really bad generalisation, socially if you're more into house parties or pubs than clubbing then St Andrews is probably a good fit for you. Socialising is easy as long as you want it to be and make the effort, you'll meet a 1,000,001 people and societies in freshers week, and 99% of flatmates are great too (if a bit messy in my case :P) and a lot of people I know are living with theirs again next year. It absolutely CAN get a bit isolated here, but trains home are reasonably cheap if you book in advance and you can always take a weekend out in Glasgow or somewhere (~£12 student return on the bus).

So both are great unis. I'd pick based on the one I wanted to spend 3/4 years at most on the open day rather than 'prestige', which isn't an exact science and fluctuates a fair bit. Besides after Oxford and Cambridge there isn't much in it at the top end anyway :smile:

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 13

ElizabethRG

9

Original post by StratfordLatin

My tutors have been standout as well, especially Ben Lowe and Juan Coderch. I've loved going to my tutorials because the discussions tend to be good and usually useful for the exam and you do get to know your tutors - last Friday Ben Lowe went on about his fairly hilarious drunken experiences at Hadrian's Wall. He recognised me on the street at the weekend with his family and said hi as well, which is always nice :smile:

In first year the lectures are deliberately designed to be fairly broad to give everyone the basic knowledge, a lot of which you might already know, but IMHO the staff manage still to make it interesting. Having read a couple of the St Andrews posts, ElizabethRG doesn't appear to have got on too well with the uni as a whole, but obviously I have no idea as to her exact experiences or circumstances so I won't say anything about that. All of my friends in Classics seem to really like their tutors and the department too, so make of that what you will.

BEN. Ha. Love/hate relationship with him. It took him til the end of semester to know my name, despite sitting in the front row of his tutorial for 10 weeks. I always found his lectures really boring; I want information, not tangents. Maybe they've taken the feedback from last year and improved the teaching. The tutorials are also a lot larger in classics than in the history department, fyi. Did you have Emma G for classics? She was the one really atrociously bad tutor I had.

Reply 14

FrayCish

2

Hey! Well, Warwick and St Andrews have the same reputation to be honest so I guess you should go for what provides you the best course. Usually, for classics, english, pick St Andrews, for everything else, Warwick.