Imperial vs. Manchester

This is the average UCAS points which students have when they arrive. Imperial students on average achieve way higher than their offer, at 553 points, whereas Manchester ones get 421.

Cambridge offers are roughly the same as most other top RG unis, but their students arrive with significantly better grades. Oxford are at 572, Cambridge at 589 (with 600+ for several courses, for example).

that does not mean the university demands less though, or that it is sub par, it simply means, for various reasons, people probably choose Imperial over Manchester. That is personal to them though, i'd bet a lot are swayed by the "prestiege" though, like you, or it could be that london is a much nicer city than manchester or more practical.

it also depends whether this figure is an average amalgamation over all subjects, or just concerning life sciences. i'd say imperial is stronger in other areas than manchester which will warp the figures.

Anyone choosing a university based on so called "prestige" is an idiot. I preferred Manchester - the university itself, the course & the cost of living - so I firmed Manchester and declined Imperial.

Also, to the absolute c*** who said you'll be amongst "more intelligent, more motivated students" I'd say my Manchester offer was higher than my Imperial offer.

A Manchester Physics offer is higher than an Oxford or Cambridge offer. I rest my case.

Anyone choosing a university based on prestige is just thinking ahead and considering the fact that at the end of the day, if you just wanted to learn you could sit there reading a book at home. You go to university for a degree, and where you get the degree matters.

My uncle did physics at Imperial - he said those were the worst three years of his life. Sure, Imperial has prestige and may have marginally (yes, marginally better job prospects) but at the cost of your happiness, would you still choose Imperial? My uncle would've chosen Manchester because based on what his friends/colleagues say, the course is more enjoyable.

If you choose a university based on prestige alone rather than factoring in everything else such as satisfaction, etc and you end up doing worse at imperial because the course content isn't to your liking, then what? A first from Manchester is much better than a 2:1 from imperial.

Nice..

Imperial students achieve better grades and study more difficult courses. They've probably done better to get to Imperial.

Plenty of rankings

Plenty of people I know didn't even consider Manchester as a fifth option, choosing, say, Oxford, Imperial, UCL, Warwick, Bristol.

Average UCAS points of Imperial students: 553, vs. 421 at Manchester..

Don't be stupid.

That's just a ranking of how many firms pitch up to careers fairs, and has absolutely no say on how employers target universities.

Nobody is going to pick Warwick graduates over Oxbridge/Imperial graduates unless the Warwick ones actually proved themselves to be better.

Why else do you think that Oxbridge/LSE/Imperial/UCL students enjoy access to prestigious careers which no other universities will grant access to? You won't find very many Sheffield students at the Bar in London, you won't find many at MC law firms, or at top banking jobs.

Look at the list again and tell me you managed not to burst out laughing.
Warwick
Nottingham
Manchester
Cambridge
Bristol
Durham
Oxford
Birmingham
Bath
Leeds
Sheffield
Imperial
Lougborough
LSE
UCL

Clearly LSE and UCL graduates are just sub-standard compared to the elite folks over at Sheffield

When Cambridge and Oxford take world top 5 spots for employer reputation (and overall reputation, too), you have to question a ranking's accuracy when they are placed #4 and #7 in the UK..

So you're saying somebody who achieves AAA and goes to study physics at Manchester is stupider than someone who goes to Imperial to study the same thing with the same grades?

The minimum entry for Physics at Manchester is A*A*A, therefore your question is not valid.

Alright, A*A*A then.

I also applied to Durham and Bristol, but neither were as good as Imperial or Manchester.




The main issue I have with Imperial is the accommodation costs, which is why I am leaning towards Manchester, as it is so much cheaper. The Life Science Faculty at Manchester is huge, which brings the benefits of lots of choice regarding modules, placements as well as excellent facilities and academic staff. Manchester seemed friendlier than Imperial.
However, Imperial has an excellent reputation and is in the science hub of the UK. The university gets lots of funding for research and is obviously very science-orientated!

Imperial Student >>>>>>>>>>>>> Manchester Student

Any day.

EDIT: I AM NOT BIASED AS I APPLIED TO MANCHESTER.

On what basis though? How is a student from Imperial more academic than someone from Manchester if they have the same grades?

Grades do not = intelligence. Applicants for Physics at Imperial are generally of a very high quality. Applicants for Physics at Manchester ,though, are usually unintelligent people... the amount of times I've heard people say "I applied to Manchester because it has the highest entry requirements, therefore it must be good" These are the people that end up getting offers and although they may get good grades, lack the common sense and intelligence IMPERIAL student have.

Grades do not = intelligence. Applicants for Physics at Imperial are generally of a very high quality. Applicants for Physics at Manchester ,though, are usually unintelligent people... the amount of times I've heard people say "I applied to Manchester because it has the highest entry requirements, therefore it must be good" These are the people that end up getting offers and although they may get good grades, lack the common sense and intelligence IMPERIAL student have.

On what basis though? How is a student from Imperial more academic than someone from Manchester if they have the same grades?

High grades are a mixture of intelligence, the ability to sit an exam and hard work. Moreover, I have never heard of anyone saying that they applied to Manchester because it has high entry requirements, and I have also applied to Manchester, so i'm going to dismiss that as bs the same way you have just dismissed everyone from Manchester as of lacking common sense and intelligence. So please explain again how somebody who got A*A*A is unintelligent, and somebody from Imperial is superior.

Err maybe the course is much better, maybe they don't have to share facilities with 45k other students ?

or maybe being situated in S. Ken is 10 x better than Oxford Rd Manchester (Yes so desperate they couldn't avoid copying)