Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

Harvard on BTEC

Scroll to see replies

Haha I agree. It's like my chemistry teacher said, US universities are a joke. In chemistry for example in first year at uni she said they learn basic stuff that I'm learning at AS level atm.

Keep in mind freshman year would be equivalent to year 13.

I would take what your teacher said with a grain of salt, unless she's studied at a top 50 US uni and majored in chemistry or something science related.

But anyways, trust me, if you are taking chemistry at a real US uni (not some crap) it is nothing compared to AS level. Maybe freshman year is on par with A2 because you probably wouldn't start organic chemistry as a freshman, or at least not until second semester.

There's a reason the US has the most unis in the world top 20.

With regards to sports, I hope you guys understand UK unis do that to. Ever find it strange how olympians some how pop up on masters courses at top 5 UK unis, while competing in sport?

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 21

ragnar_jonsson

Original post by adam0311

Humanities and Social Science subjects are by no means any easier.

Edit (due to the neg): I'm trying to be as objective as possible when I say this. The majority of my friends taking Science/Maths classes are having a difficult time; however, if they put in the work they usually are fine. For me, I have to read a minimum of 400 pages per week, study Chinese for about 15 hours (to just adequately review), and work on essays and creative writing pieces - only to hope I can get an A for the work (and it's damn bloody difficult!).

So, you can hate all you want, but it's not a walk in the park.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 22

manchild007

Original post by NS17

Irregardless is NOT A WORD.
Yale intake must've been weak your freshman year.

OH NOZ!?! I made a mistake on AN INTERNET FORUM. Whatever shall I do, as we all know, how one conducts themselves on an some random internet forum is how they conduct themselves in real life now don't we. Nice one with that logic, no wonder you're at the university......actually I won't be that petty :rolleyes:

And I'm not at Yale yet, I'll be starting come August of next-year (i.e. I have my offer, but choose to defer it for a year to do other things).

Reply 23

manchild007

Original post by ilickbatteries

Most ridiculous way to get into university I have ever, ever heard. I actually cannot believe you can get into American universities based on sporting performance.

Can you seriously imagine someone getting into a decent UK uni, say Nottingham or Leicester because they can play football really, really well?! That's madness!

You can't get into top universities based solely on sports (they don't have any scholarships based on such criteria or any other), but I don't find it shocking or bad that you can get into a lower-tiered university based on sporing ability - you have to be the best of the best (i.e. Olympic Level, National Level, Top Draft Pick in the USA etc) to be given a full scholarship and to get to those achievements in your sport, require a HUGE amount of dedication, motivation and skill. Sport (particularly Basketball and American Football) are big things out in the US...

Reply 24

Dusty12

You don't have no chance, since your well-roundedness as a person is important too. You'd need to get good, competitive SAT scores though, which is especially difficult considering American students will have been taught towards them and may have retaken them a few times to get excellent scores. I'd say this is a disadvantage when you're doing SATS as an international student. The chances don't look too good for you, but don't dismiss the idea. It's not a space on your UCAS, so you may as well give it a shot. :smile:

Original post by NS17

Irregardless is NOT A WORD.
Yale intake must've been weak your freshman year.

I'm so glad you said that. I was gnashing my teeth reading 'irregardless', but didn't want to be the one that pointed it out. =L

I know someone that got into Princeton because he was a good XC runner. :dontknow:

I don't think it's so bad that it's a factor in uni decisions. You still have to be good academically in addition. They don't accept any old imbeciles because they're good at Shot Putt or whatev.

Reply 25

Aspiringlawstudent

Original post by Hi.im.a.Faggot

mate listen i dont know why people are putting down btecs... i chiose to do mine cos i hated doing exams although i got 4 A*s and 7 A's at gcse. i was told that i could get the same number of ucas points without having to do any exams. that what i did. i got DDD - 360 ucas points and was accepted into my choices. i had physics at durham, warwick, leeds, sussex and MIT (US). i had to do two extra exams for mit but they stil acepted me and for my college years i had to do no exams.. alot of people are jealous of the fact that i had to do no exams and had 3 month deadlines for coursework so they just badmouth btecs.

I don't think MIT accepts people who can't spell or grammaticize correctly...

Reply 26

Phantom_X

as far as im aware, US applications are based mainly on SAT scores and I think some entrance essays. Im not sure about Harvard, but at UBC (where I applied in Canada) it would have been based on SATs to calculate your GPA average. In that case, you need to do ridiculously well on the SAT, which definitely isn't a piece of cake. That said, if you do pull it off, then you are a hero.

Reply 27

member552785

Original post by Aspiringlawstudent

I don't think MIT accepts people who can't spell or grammaticize correctly...

they dont, they accept really, really smart people. i wrote that in a minute. didn't realise people cared much about grammar. oh well, i'll let you ponder in your own little world my friend. best of luck darling xx

Reply 28

Aspiringlawstudent

Original post by Hi.im.a.Faggot

lol.

You just look like an idiot.

Reply 29

Aspiringlawstudent

Original post by Hi.im.a.Faggot

And if you're going to lie about going to MIT, at least keep your lies consistent.

Two days ago you seemed to be applying to Leeds.

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?p=28672990&highlight=

"i really hope they accept me. ive applied for physics... i need AAB, with A in Maths and A in physics. :/ ".

Bad luck, old sport.

Reply 30

air-ninety-one

Original post by Aspiringlawstudent

he said he applied for leeds and mit didnt he? lol you failed so hard right there

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 31

adam0311

Original post by ragnar_jonsson

Humanities and Social Science subjects are by no means any easier.

Absolutely agree.

Original post by manchild007

I know someone that got into Princeton because he was a good XC runner. :dontknow:

I don't think it's so bad that it's a factor in uni decisions. You still have to be good academically in addition. They don't accept any old imbeciles because they're good at Shot Putt or whatev.

Just to be clear, ivy league schools do not offer athletic scholarships. They still recruit and will give you extra weight for being recruited in admissions. What this means though is that the 2100 SAT and 4.0 GPA with no other hook will probably get in by being a recruited quarterback. They aren't letting in 2.5 GPA w/ 1000 SAT. Being recruited for athletics at an ivy league gives that extra boost. The only schools that will take the 2.5 GPA w/1000 SAT are the schools with the huge football programs (think anything state).

Original post by Phantom_X

No its not just on the SAT score. A very rough way to break it down would be:
GPA-40%
SAT-40%
Hollistic approach (ec's, essays, demographics)-20%

Reply 32

ilickbatteries

Original post by manchild007

What would you say is the UK equivalent of a university you can get into in the US based on sporting ability? I suppose the NFL and NBA is based around college sports, isn't it? I mean can you even play in the NFL without having gone to college? Surely there must be some fantastic players who never bothered with college?

I think university admission should be based solely on academic achievement or relevant work experience. Sporting ability shouldn't get you a place ahead of someone else.

Reply 33

Organ

Original post by ilickbatteries

Land economy at Cambridge :flute:

Reply 34

uer23

I'd worry for you getting into a decent University in the UK let alone Havard. And No DDD for BTEC is not equivalent to 3 A's at A-Level. You can't just convert the grades between the 2 qualifications. They are two different things.

Reply 35

ilickbatteries

Original post by uer23

I see the point you're making, but if I'm perfectly honest I think you're a wee bit under-qualified to be making such statements.

You're not an A2 examiner or BTEC course-coordinator, nor are you a university admissions tutor. Oxbridge may not accept BTEC, but I know that BTECs are accepted by KCL, who are definitely a 'decent' university.

BTECs are excellent courses for those wishing to pursue a particular vocation, particularly BTECs in Engineering and ICT. The top universities may have a stick up their arse about A-Levels, christ Trinity College, Cambridge are probably the biggest dicks out of the lot, but decent universities do accept outstanding BTEC candidates.

Reply 36

air-ninety-one

Original post by uer23

they are equivalent on points and from next year, a distinction will be worth 140 ucas points. by equivalent it means, equal to, so 3 A's = 360 ucas points and 3 D's = 360 ucas points.

simples

Reply 37

NS17

Original post by manchild007

And I'm not at Yale yet, I'll be starting come August of next-year (i.e. I have my offer, but choose to defer it for a year to do other things).

Got yourself really riled up about that little comment didn't you? Might want to grow a thicker skin because you'll get called out on all your retarded mistakes at 'Yale' if that's really where you're going.

Reply 38

ragnar_jonsson

Original post by ilickbatteries

I think university admission should be based solely on academic achievement or relevant work experience. Sporting ability shouldn't get you a place ahead of someone else.

Well, it's difficult. US universities place a far greater emphasis on the diversity of its applicants, and having the best athletes is definitely part of that. (I mean, why shouldn't Harvard or Brown try to strive towards not only academic excellence, but excellence in athletics as well?)

I know of a few athletes who managed to get in with ca. 1800 SAT scores. They just excelled in other areas. :smile:

(And athletes tend to be some of the hardest workers, so many of them do tend to hold their own weight. Also! Many athletes who are not as well academically qualified go onto doing something Business-related, so it's not like they detract from the most rigorous of subjects).

:smile:

Reply 39

Aspiringlawstudent

Original post by air-ninety-one

he said he applied for leeds and mit didnt he? lol you failed so hard right there

He's acting as if he is a student at MIT. His location setting "united states" certainly suggests that also.

He also says he did a BTEC and got DDD, and was accepted. "i had to do two extra exams for mit but they stil acepted me".

Yet when he speaks of applying to Leeds for Physics, he requires "AAB, with A in Maths and A in physics", clearly showing that he's doing A-levels.

You failed so hard right there.