I have offers from Manchester and Bath and Birmingham for undergrad chemical engineering, which one would you say is best in terms of academic strength?Leaning towards Manchester but want to make sure it's a top-quality University for chemical engineering

Reply 24

sfs1012

Original post by GradeA*UnderA

If you click on a university, you'll see their employer and academic rating. I think UCL is high up on this list as it offers quality across a breadth of subjects, where as this is uncertain with other American universities like Yale. I know Yale is acclaimed for humanities, but what about science? LSE loses is out due to lack of breadth in courses. Manchester, well, perhaps we all underrate it. After all, it's a really strong university for science and has many Nobel prize laureates associated with it.

I think it all depends on what makes a good overall university. Obviously, if you're doing science you pick Imperial, and likewise, for economics you'd pick LSE(excluding Oxbridge). But when you factor in UCL, it has (near enough) all the courses those two offer to a similar (but typically lower) standard.

I do think Cambridge is underrated though...

Edit: this is probably the most accurate representation of universities worldwide, as it shows you all the criteria associated with each university and why it's placed there. If you value other factors more than others, well alter the table to your mind's liking and apply to the unis in that order.

In that case, MIT shouldn't even be in top 10 let alone being ranked first since they are only strong in the Science and Engineering fields. Also, the gap between UCL and Durham/Warwick/Bristol is way too big on this ranking when really they are in the same tier.*

Reply 25

username2752874

Original post by sfs1012

*

In that case, MIT shouldn't even be in top 10 let alone being ranked first since they are only strong in the Science and Engineering fields. Also, the gap between UCL and Durham/Warwick/Bristol is way too big on this ranking when really they are in the same tier.*

Science and engineering fields are vast enough to account for dozens of courses, not mention joint honours between different sciences. They've also got a colossal amount of research going on with NASA and CERN so it's obviously going to boost them up.

UCL is the beneficial position of being located in London. This means it will catch the eye of many internationals, as London is a well known city. High fee paying international come, get their degrees, some go back and enhance the reputation of UCL in their region. UCL gets money and puts it into research, facilities etc, allowing it to improve in tables. As a result of of this, it's naturally going to be placed higher than those unis. Warwick is pretty poor on life science side and Durham's research is non-existent. I also think that Warwick is seen as a uni for banking rather than a general faculty. Bristol? Well, they're ranked fairly well on this, though since employer reputation is factored in, it probably drops as it's not as well known as UCL.

Reply 26

username2752874

Original post by Karimbayoumi

Hello, please help :smile:

It's between Manchester and Bath tbh. See what the course structure is like and other bits like that. Though for general worldwide prestige, Manchester wins.

Reply 27

KardasDragon

I don't go to Manchester but I'm glad its 29th now. TSR seems to **** on it but it's honestly a fantastic university and provides a much better student experience than most of the London unis. Lots of employers go there too, and it is academically well respected. I honestly think that it is a very competitive choice to put up against UCL, KCL and LSE. You definitely won't come out disadvataged.

Glasgow has snuck up ahead of Durham lol. RIP Doxbridge.