The Student Room Group

Which UK universities apart from Oxbridge are comparable to the Ivy Leagues?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by dj1015
Continently you left out the fact that Manchester is the largest university in the UK, and thus covers a wider range of disciplines than any other institution. So there are some areas that are lacking. But on the whole, a highly regarded and respected institution both nationally and internationally.


Largest doesn't necessarily mean good.

What is so good about paying GBP45k to sit in a lecture theatre with 213 students with tutorials of 20. No I don't think so.

The consequence of overcrowding is as you say yourself
' lacking ' !

Original post by dj1015

Also if you took the 10 strongest departments at manc, and compared them to any one else below 7th place. Manc comes out on top every time.


Right.... so says a Manc student, turkeys don't vote for Xmas you know.
Reply 281
So Manchester is good!!? I was thinking it wasn't tbh.
Source QS WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS http://www.topuniversities.com/unive...-rankings/2011These numbers were produced after thourough formulaic considerations with all things taken into account, not what feelsright, disagree then go to the mathematicians who had to sift through data for days to produce them

90+ universities, The Elite world class institutions that take only the best of the best: Cambridge 100 Harvard 99.4, MIT 99.21 Oxford 98, Yale 98.84 Imperial 97.64, UCL 97.33 Chicago 96.08, Pennsylvania 95.73 Columbia 95.28 Stanford 93.44 Caltech 93.02 Princeton 91.91 Michigan 91.28 Cornell 90.72

4 UK 11 USA

80+ universities, internationally leading: John Hopkins 89.96 Duke 89.25, Edingburgh 87.83 California Berkely 87.64, Northwestern 85.91 Kings College 84.96 Manchester 83.97 Bristol 83.65, UCLA 81.86

4 UK 5 USA

70+ universites, highlighy sought after nationally and in other countries: Brown 79.23 Wisconsin Madison 79.98 Carnagie, 78.46 New York 77.71 Warwick 74.86, North Carolina 73.62 Washington 72.94 Glasgow 72.12 Illinoi 71.89 LSE 70.52

3 UK 8 USA

60+ universities, highligh valued nationally : Birmingham 69.89 Boston 69.67, Sheffield 69.6 Nottingham 68.79, 68.75 Southampton Texas 68.73, UCSD 68.49 ST Louis 68.74 Georgia 68.14 Purdue 67.06, Leeds 65.65 Pensylvania state 65.4, Durham 65.21 York 65.18, Andrews 65.12 Dartmouth 64.92, Davis 64.36 Minnesota 64.32 Southern California 63.24 Ohio 61.53 Rice 60.97 Emory 60.44 Maryland 60.2

8 UK 15 USA

Each grouping is of Uk and its Us equivalents

and the only reason the USA has so many more in each grouping is beacuse of the fact its population is 5 times as high as the UK and pumps tens of billions more into its higher education system (Harvard on its own gets more than the top UK 10 combined) but after taking that into consideration the fact the UK has such strong numbers in each for its size leaves no doubt we have pound for pound the best in the world
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by dj1015
Continently you left out the fact that Manchester is the largest university in the UK, and thus covers a wider range of disciplines than any other institution. So there are some areas that are lacking. But on the whole, a highly regarded and respected institution both nationally and internationally.

Also if you took the 10 strongest departments at manc, and compared them to any one else below 7th place. Manc comes out on top every time.


No doubt Manchester is a fine institution but I don't think anyone for one moment would suggest it was amongst the elite of UK/International universities. Certainly not in the same league as the Ivies and Oxbridge.

Manchester doesn't have a history/tradition of being academically selective or having a rigorous admissions process and indeed there is such a huge discrepancy in selectivity amongst its courses as opposed to say somewhere like Cambridge where pretty much every single programme is selective and rigorous in the admissions process.

Also Manchester compared to Oxbridge or the Ivies doesn't have a tradition or producing Nobel Prize winners, CEOs, World Leaders, experts in their fields. Most of the Nobel Prize winners associated with Manchester have been faculty members who studied elsewhere e.g. Oxbridge.

But yes I will give you that Manchester is a large university with a big research endowment. But it's certainly not 'elite'. That tag belongs to Oxbridge and the Ivies, MIT, Caltech, Stanford, Chicago, LSE, maybe Imperial and maybe Johns Hopkins.
The only UK universities comparable to the Ivy League in terms of selectivity and endowments are Oxbridge. In terms of selectivity then perhaps LSE and Imperial, maybe UCL.
Reply 285
Original post by Gridiron-Gangster
No doubt Manchester is a fine institution but I don't think anyone for one moment would suggest it was amongst the elite of UK/International universities. Certainly not in the same league as the Ivies and Oxbridge.

Manchester doesn't have a history/tradition of being academically selective or having a rigorous admissions process and indeed there is such a huge discrepancy in selectivity amongst its courses as opposed to say somewhere like Cambridge where pretty much every single programme is selective and rigorous in the admissions process.

Also Manchester compared to Oxbridge or the Ivies doesn't have a tradition or producing Nobel Prize winners, CEOs, World Leaders, experts in their fields. Most of the Nobel Prize winners associated with Manchester have been faculty members who studied elsewhere e.g. Oxbridge.

But yes I will give you that Manchester is a large university with a big research endowment. But it's certainly not 'elite'. That tag belongs to Oxbridge and the Ivies, MIT, Caltech, Stanford, Chicago, LSE, maybe Imperial and maybe Johns Hopkins.


Why LSE and maybe Imperial. They are arguably as good/reputable as each other abroad
Reply 286
Original post by 08rbut
Imperial, LSE, UCL, St Andrews, and a few other Russell Group unis? In a foreign country though, the ones that people will know about are Oxbridge.

Why the negs? All of these unis are great, and comparable to Ivy League, the ones listed are pretty much the best in the UK. And its true, in a foreign country, Oxford and Cambridge are the universities known, even above Harvard/Prineton/Yale...


Not above Harvard, Harvard is the top dog of unis, and i doubt it is more prestigious than CalTech, MIT and Yale
Original post by Dr00n
Not above Harvard, Harvard is the top dog of unis, and i doubt it is more prestigious than CalTech, MIT and Yale


Oxbridge is just as prestigious as the above mentioned if not more so in some respects purely down to the fact that they have been around much longer and produced more Nobel Prize winners (well Cambridge has) and I may be wrong but I think they have produced more world leaders/heads of state than the above mentioned.

Although Harvard is top in terms of finances and research output.
Original post by Avshua
Why LSE and maybe Imperial. They are arguably as good/reputable as each other abroad


No doubting LSE's pedigree. Imperial is a tricky one as from what I have gathered it doesn't appear to be as well known in the US and in Asia as Oxbridge and LSE.

What I was trying to say was yes I know Imperial is a very good university and in the UK a very selective and prestigious one at both undergraduate and postgraduate level. It's just for some strange reason it doesn't seem to carry as much prestige in the US but then again any academic who hasn't heard of Imperial College isn't worth their salt.

Also I'm sure that some of Ivies like Dartmouth and Brown would be unknown to the vast majority of the British public. Let's be honest, why would the Average Joe need to have an extensive knowledge of elite universities?
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 289
According to this article, an "English Ivy League" could be created and top students are concentrated in an "elite" of just 12 universities. They include Manchester, Durham, Oxbridge and Nottingham.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8635891/Top-students-concentrated-in-just-12-elite-universities.html

Edit: Manchester's wiki page brags about this article: "It has been described as part of the English "Ivy League" by The Daily Telegraph"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Manchester
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by thecakeisalie
Source QS WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS http://www.topuniversities.com/unive...-rankings/2011These numbers were produced after thourough formulaic considerations with all things taken into account, not what feelsright, disagree then go to the mathematicians who had to sift through data for days to produce them

90+ universities, The Elite world class institutions that take only the best of the best: Cambridge 100 Harvard 99.4, MIT 99.21 Oxford 98, Yale 98.84 Imperial 97.64, UCL 97.33 Chicago 96.08, Pennsylvania 95.73 Columbia 95.28 Stanford 93.44 Caltech 93.02 Princeton 91.91 Michigan 91.28 Cornell 90.72

4 UK 11 USA

80+ universities, internationally leading: John Hopkins 89.96 Duke 89.25, Edingburgh 87.83 California Berkely 87.64, Northwestern 85.91 Kings College 84.96 Manchester 83.97 Bristol 83.65, UCLA 81.86

4 UK 5 USA

70+ universites, highlighy sought after nationally and in other countries: Brown 79.23 Wisconsin Madison 79.98 Carnagie, 78.46 New York 77.71 Warwick 74.86, North Carolina 73.62 Washington 72.94 Glasgow 72.12 Illinoi 71.89 LSE 70.52

3 UK 8 USA

60+ universities, highligh valued nationally : Birmingham 69.89 Boston 69.67, Sheffield 69.6 Nottingham 68.79, 68.75 Southampton Texas 68.73, UCSD 68.49 ST Louis 68.74 Georgia 68.14 Purdue 67.06, Leeds 65.65 Pensylvania state 65.4, Durham 65.21 York 65.18, Andrews 65.12 Dartmouth 64.92, Davis 64.36 Minnesota 64.32 Southern California 63.24 Ohio 61.53 Rice 60.97 Emory 60.44 Maryland 60.2

8 UK 15 USA

Each grouping is of Uk and its Us equivalents

and the only reason the USA has so many more in each grouping is beacuse of the fact its population is 5 times as high as the UK and pumps tens of billions more into its higher education system (Harvard on its own gets more than the top UK 10 combined) but after taking that into consideration the fact the UK has such strong numbers in each for its size leaves no doubt we have pound for pound the best in the world



Thank you for this post. The disparity with Domestic rankings is outrageous at times. Its an injustice to institutions like Manchester who rank so lowly in 'newspaper' rankings, but then flourish internationally. Prospective undergraduates need to consider the international rankings and not get hoodwinked by flawed domestic rankings.

N.B. I say flawed because they give such conflicting results. There is a consistency with global tables.
Reply 291
Original post by Meat is Murder

N.B. I say flawed because they give such conflicting results. There is a consistency with global tables.


I'd actually consider this false, and consistency doesn't mean the 2 or 3 tables are better than domestic. Global tables have far less criteria than domestic, making them less insightful, and they collect enough data imo. And actually, they're not really that consistent if you look properly. For example, in QS, Soton is ranked 75th, and in the THE , 127th. The top 30/40 maybe, but in domestic tables usually the top 5 are pretty similar. TBH, they're all flawed but I don't suggest telling prospective students to only look at international tables.

Original post by oj234
According to this article, an "English Ivy League" could be created and top students are concentrated in an "elite" of just 12 universities. They include Manchester, Durham, Oxbridge and Nottingham.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8635891/Top-students-concentrated-in-just-12-elite-universities.html


It's good to see Notts, Leeds, Manc and Soton in this Ivy League thing, simply because they have massive nursing schools which usually skew data in the domestic tables.
Original post by fnm




It's good to see Notts, Leeds, Manc and Soton in this Ivy League thing, simply because they have massive nursing schools which usually skew data in the domestic tables.


Yale, Pennsylvania and Columbia also have nursing schools.
Original post by fnm
I'd actually consider this false, and consistency doesn't mean the 2 or 3 tables are better than domestic. Global tables have far less criteria than domestic, making them less insightful, and they collect enough data imo. And actually, they're not really that consistent if you look properly. For example, in QS, Soton is ranked 75th, and in the THE , 127th. The top 30/40 maybe, but in domestic tables usually the top 5 are pretty similar. TBH, they're all flawed but I don't suggest telling prospective students to only look at international tables.



It's good to see Notts, Leeds, Manc and Soton in this Ivy League thing, simply because they have massive nursing schools which usually skew data in the domestic tables.


I take your point. What I was referring to in terms of consistency is that the rankings of UK uni's, within international rankings, is usual consistent. You are right in saying that one uni will rank 75th in one but 150th in another, but regardless of the league table, that uni will always rank in comparatively the same place when looking at UK uni's only. UCL for example, will be ranked very differently between tables, but will always be about 5th in the country.
Reply 294
Top Unis in the US:
- Harvard
- MIT
- Yale
- Stanford
- Princeton

Top Unis in the UK:
- Cambridge
- Oxford
- Imperial
- LSE
- St Andrews
- UCL
(edited 11 years ago)
Just wanted to add my 2 cents, hope it's not bring up a dead thread but I think this one was interesting from my perspective.

I'm just going to work off the original title of this thread "Which UK universities apart from Oxbridge are comparable to the Ivy Leagues?" which is a straightforward question I can answer.

I am currently at Penn which is an Ivy league university (did you know that?) and I'm a full time student from Edinburgh on exchange here. That's a pretty good compare I think. I've also taken a business course @ Harvard.

The first thing is that the educational systems are completely different. The average '3rd year' or 'junior' student in a US university knows a lot more in GENERAL than a 3rd year UK student, while in a specific subject like CS the US student would be laughably behind.

This is a big deal because most other universities in the world follow the UK more specific model, at least in say South Africa, Australia, NZ.

There is also a fundamentally different culture. Remember Ivy League universities are private, none of the UK ones we are talking about are. This is a big deal. The reason why US universities are more 'heard of' is that people are in general more proud of them, former alumni more often will name drop and promote their previous schools because there is more of a culture of a life long attachment because these US universities are seen as part of someone's identity. It is NOT just a place of academic learning. Many people come to these Ivy Schools just because they are Ivy schools and it's about the brand, prestige etc and they spend the rest of their lives going on about it. Seriously. People generally don't go on about it as much in the UK, because it's not seen as this huge attachment to your ego.

Anyway, simply put, the academic standard of these Ivy Leagues is a bit of a joke. It is no where as near intense as Edinburgh for example, because they must cater to a general audience of students. Yes, I'm taking an undergrad level course with PHDs, masters students in different fields etc. There is little structure. Some may like it, some may not but there are definitely very different structures and a UK university will be much more field intensive and specific. This university does not cover anywhere near the depth of an Edinburgh CS degree.

It's also quite easy to get an A. There are open book tests and many team projects.

So do not for a second think that UK universities are not comparable to ivy leagues. I'd say all of the Russell Groups + more. In terms of prestige, many professors at Ivy League universities work with or have even studied at the Russell Group. Many of the students have heard of tons and studied at or applied to many. Especially Imperial, UCL, Oxbridge, Edinburgh, Warwick, Durn, St Andrews, LSE.

If you are an undergrad I strongly recommend studying in the UK, you will get a much more solid foundation in a subject than any Ivy in the US. If you want to meet people at a huge expense and harp on about it for the rest of your life, go to an Ivy.

NB: Also, in terms of selectivity you forget a VERY important point. ANYONE can apply to an Ivy League university. EVERY application is considered. Yes, you can apply if you 'A levels' sucked and many many many people apply and get rejected just 'to try'. People in the UK do not all apply to Oxbridge if they know they have no chance. People in the US definitely apply to Ivy's just because they are Ivy's and it would be amazing if they could actually get in. There is no minimum requirements for universities like there is in the UK! % Rate acceptance numbers are hugely misleading. The UK is far more selective as it is based purely on academics. You can get immediate access to an Ivy with bad marks as a 'legacy' student (ie your family went to the university before). I know some of these students and they are less than stellar. You will not find that at Edinburgh. US universities are more about if they want you around, UK have strict policies that they follow with no flexibility.

Edit: I also want to emphasise not to rely too much on university rankings. It's like ranking countries or even ranking people. A university is a big place and its really hard to quantify everything down to a number. Department specific information is way more valuable. For example, Harvard is NOT the 'top dog' university. I know at least 4 students who turned down Harvard for Penn because a specific department at Penn is better (ie the Wharton School is considered the best business school in the world). Again, MIT CS is very strong, most would choose over Harvard. This is a more reasonable way of looking at things and easily confirmed by talking to students in the US. This isn't *so* apparent in the UK but it's there.

By the way, the Ivy League universities are modelled off Oxbridge to an extent (Colleges, traditional, architecture etc). You know why Oxbridge has such a huge rep? Because they also try to more follow an Ivy pattern of creating a sense of community that students are more likely to self identify with for their entire life. No other university in the UK does this because they fail to implement a similar style College model which is present at Ivy's through the informal links with professors, alumni etc. Just today I had lunch with three top professors from Penn, that would never happen at Edinburgh - it happens at Cambridge though. This is a bigger deal than you think.

Edit Edit: I also just wanted to add I also studied in South Africa for my first year at a really bad universities you've never heard of. It's not ranked in the top 1000. It stands up shockingly well to Edinburgh and Penn across the board. My personal advice is that comparing universities is really like comparing countries. There are just too many variables and personal differences. As long as you go to a university with a computer lab, library, professors and the base departments don't for a second think that Harvard or MIT is some magical kingdom that's a million times better. It's easy to think that. But it's just not true. Get your self confidence from somewhere else and don't let university rankings ever define you, your knowledge or your university!

Edit Edit Edit: Also want to add I studied at Keele University, not a high ranked English university. Guess what? The CS assignments for 1st and 2nd year are the same assignments at Penn, Edinburgh and Caltech. Standard exercises from standard textbooks. Higher ranked universities do not have magically superior courses! Professors would rather be doing something else, everywhere! The only exception is postgrad - go to a good lab where they're doing specific research in what you're interested in! When you're doing this, you'll see the last thing you'll look at are rankings!
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by tiffanysims
Frankly, I don't believe that any non oxbridge school can compete with the likes of Columbia, Penn, and Duke let alone Harvard, Yale and Princeton. These schools are perpetually ranked among the best schools in the world, have won many nobel prizes in the last few years, and are extremely selective. I go to St Andrews and was rejected from all the above schools without even being wait listed. Furthermore, we cannot complete with their massive endowments and great research output.


I would argue that UCL can match Duke as an academic institution offering top-quality academic programs. And, although UCL has lower endowment funds than Duke has, UCL augments their finances through the British government's support.
Original post by Astronomical
I'm certainly not confusing them. :curious:

If I had offers to go to Yale, Stanford or UCL, my order of preference would be Stanford, UCL, then Yale. I don't think Yale carries all that much prestige at all with the "layman".

With respect to the "big players" my preferences would be Cambridge, MIT, Harvard, Oxford, Imperial, then finally Princeton. I think anyone remotely interested in academia would have heard of all of these and have similar "respect" for them.


So you're saying UCL carries more prestige than Yale? :confused: Granted, UCL is a fantastic uni but internationally more people are likely to have heard of Yale more than UCL. I always thought it was on the prestige level of Oxbridge.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by pink pineapple
So you're saying UCL carries more prestige than Yale? :confused: Granted, UCL isa fantastic uni but internationally more people are likely to have heard of Yale more than UCL. I always thought it was on the prestige level of Oxbridge.


I have to agree with this. Yale is superior to UCL and many more people worldwide would view it as a superior uni to UCL. Yale is a peer uni of Oxbridge, in general. That said, UCL is close behind.
Original post by Mr. Roxas
I have to agree with this. Yale is superior to UCL and many more people worldwide would view it as a superior uni to UCL. Yale is a peer uni of Oxbridge, in general. That said, UCL is close behind.


Exactly. Nationally, UCL is just behind if not on par with Oxbrdige. Though, internationally I doubt many people would've heard of UCL.

Quick Reply

Latest