The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
No.
Reply 2
No
Reply 3
It's definitely unwise to decline your L100 offer at UCL for your Econs&Economic History Offer at LSE. Heck, it'd be unwise to take a gap year for L101 at LSE when you already have an offer for L100 at UCL.
Reply 4
(Though it must be said that LSE is way more presitigious than UCL, especially outside the UK.)
How much do you like maths?

(you get the picture from there I'm sure)

:smile:
Reply 6
LSE (but I am biased)
Reply 7
well it kind of depends what you plan to do in your year out, and whether you actually want to take a year out.
Reply 8
LSE my friend, however as noted above, I may also be biased. Also, the econ & econ hist program is very well-regarded because of the ridiculously low acceptance rate.
Reply 9
So how do you think UCL L100 - BSc Economics , is regarded?
John5000
So how do you think UCL L100 - BSc Economics , is regarded?


Very well, thanks.

Bear in mind, UCL L100 and LSE Econ & EconHist are going to be very different. One is going to be mathematical and the other, significantly less so.
Reply 11
President_Ben
Very well, thanks.

Bear in mind, UCL L100 and LSE Econ & EconHist are going to be very different. One is going to be mathematical and the other, significantly less so.

True enough, but it doesn't mean that one is regarded any less than the other. :wink:

Anyhow the L100 programme at UCL is pretty good - among the top in the country.
Bah...*another* IB-addict...dang, isn't anybody else in this world interested in management consultancy? I say they start the London School of Investment Bankers and throw them all into there<rant over>

Unless you actually want a year off, then it would be unwise to wait a year just to get into LSE Economic and Economic History. Furthermore, LSE Economics and Economic History isn't as quantitative as the students doing pure Economics at LSE - which might put you in a disadvantage if you're looking towards any career in finance. And like everybody says, UCL Economcs is among the top in UK, so unless you intend to seek work overseas straight after graduation you'll find yourself in no way inferior to an LSE student by holding a UCL degree....

...as a bonus you have better facilities at UCL (ex. the social science library)
Reply 13
hongkongstudent
Bah...*another* IB-addict...dang, isn't anybody else in this world interested in management consultancy? I say they start the London School of Investment Bankers and throw them all into there<rant over>

Unless you actually want a year off, then it would be unwise to wait a year just to get into LSE Economic and Economic History. Furthermore, LSE Economics and Economic History isn't as quantitative as the students doing pure Economics at LSE - which might put you in a disadvantage if you're looking towards any career in finance. And like everybody says, UCL Economcs is among the top in UK, so unless you intend to seek work overseas straight after graduation you'll find yourself in no way inferior to an LSE student by holding a UCL degree....

...as a bonus you have better facilities at UCL (ex. the social science library)


Isn't anyone else interested in education for it's own sake? Bunch of wasters, the lotta yer, with your fast cars, your flash suits, your posh coffee. What's the world come to, eh?
hongkongstudent
isn't anybody else in this world interested in management consultancy


Did risk management consultancy for a bit... it was ok - but it ain't banking. Nothing like.
Reply 15
hongkongstudent
Bah...*another* IB-addict...dang, isn't anybody else in this world interested in management consultancy? I say they start the London School of Investment Bankers and throw them all into there<rant over>

Unless you actually want a year off, then it would be unwise to wait a year just to get into LSE Economic and Economic History. Furthermore, LSE Economics and Economic History isn't as quantitative as the students doing pure Economics at LSE - which might put you in a disadvantage if you're looking towards any career in finance. And like everybody says, UCL Economcs is among the top in UK, so unless you intend to seek work overseas straight after graduation you'll find yourself in no way inferior to an LSE student by holding a UCL degree....

...as a bonus you have better facilities at UCL (ex. the social science library)


Actually pure Economics isn't that much more mathematical than the joint honours course - both have to take MA100 and ST102 in the first year, as well as an econometrics course in the second year.
Reply 16
zxczxc
Isn't anyone else interested in education for it's own sake? Bunch of wasters, the lotta yer, with your fast cars, your flash suits, your posh coffee. What's the world come to, eh?


I know ! It's all about money now... One has to take into account the actual studies, I mean I have a choice between the LSE and other stuff, and I'm really hesitating despite LSE's prestige because life ain't all about employability and starting salaries...
Reply 17
Pegasus
Actually pure Economics isn't that much more mathematical than the joint honours course - both have to take MA100 and ST102 in the first year, as well as an econometrics course in the second year.


Yea i suppose that if you choose a less mathematical route at UCL it would be about the same amount of maths as the joint course. Pegasus i take it you take the joint course at LSE? What's it like in terms of reading etc?
jakezg
Yea i suppose that if you choose a less mathematical route at UCL it would be about the same amount of maths as the joint course. Pegasus i take it you take the joint course at LSE? What's it like in terms of reading etc?


Metrics at LSE isn't as rough as it is at UCL.

UCL (100) forces more metrics/stats while LSE (101) forces more "pure maths" (or as mathmos might refer to it, "mathematical methods"). 100, even if you try to dodge maths like Neo tries with bullets, is still a degree where you have to like maths (rather than just 'be able to do it') if you want to enjoy it and comfortably do well in it.

"Low maths" in L100 is (seemingly) close to being canned (by the way) and Further Maths (following the butcher of A2 level Maths as it currently is, as well as increasingly - ridiculous? - demands from some element of the academics I presume) might become a pre-requisite sooner rather than later.
Pegasus
Actually pure Economics isn't that much more mathematical than the joint honours course - both have to take MA100 and ST102 in the first year, as well as an econometrics course in the second year.


Like you correctly said, the first year is exactly the same maths wise regardless of which economics course you are doing. However the Econ+Econ History does give you less options to pursue some more mathematical modules in the second and third year. In the second year the only option is an Economic History Option, and Econometrics is not part of the compulsary 2nd year modules - although nothing stops you from taking it in the third year of course. The pure economics degree offers more flexibility for those who want to pursue more quantitative modules such as PoF*, and econometrics is compulsary in 2nd year. None of the economics degrees are as intensive as the 'Econometrics and Mathematical Economics' course when it comes to quantiative stuff though since that course forces the student to do lots of maths. How much maths one chooses to do depends on how fond one is with maths/stats so different people will obviously prefer diffenent courses~

*PoF - Principles of Finance