Which offers do I accept?

Have had a thought on this one and am a little surprised there's not been much talk about Imperial, after all it is part of COWI.

The reason is that for a university as a whole, I think it has more prestige than Warwick but for maths Warwick would be more prestigious.

However, for an 18 year old who does not know whether or not they'll do well at uni, they should choose the one that will open more doors for them at the end of it.

Suppose choose Warwick and do well, then

can continue in academia (at Warwick or anywhere else) or get job in real world.

If academia, Warwick will open doors else job, Warwick opens fewer doors (than Imperial)

if not do well then job and again Warwick opens fewer doors (than Imperial)

On the other hand, if choose Imperial and do well, then

can continue in academia (at Imperial or anywhere else) or get job.

If academia, Imperial will open doors but not as many as Warwick

else job, Imperial opens more doors (than Warwick)

if not do well then job and Imperial again opens more doors (tha Warwick)

The critical point is that if one chooses to remain in academia, academics will know about both Imperial and Warwick, with Warwick given an edge.

However outside of academia, Imperial would have a bigger edge, especially in the Far East.

Like to hear Warwick / Imperial students / grads view.

I would disagree that Warwick has an academic edge over Imperial. I also disagree that going to Imperial makes it easier to find a job. I think that is skewed by those of us who are lucky enough to find good jobs in finance that tend to pay well. Everywhere I've gone, Warwick people have been there too

Sounds like you're leaning towards the converse!

I'm refering to maths which the general consensus (on TSR, so it's not exactly a fair representation) is of the view that it is.

Nationally and especially internationally, surely Imperial is better known (not just for maths but overall)?

I'm going by:

- my experience at Imperial
- my experience of people at Imperial
- my experience of people at Warwick
- my understanding of how the courses compare
- Imperial's research record versus Warwick, in pure

Clearly apart from the last, everything else is subjective and therefore should be taken with a pinch of salt. What I do know is that the experiences I got at Imperial are parallel to none (well, maybe the undergrad research projects at MIT / Harvard).

The real differences between the two universities are:

1) Academic: Warwick's course allows for lots of flexibility, whereas Imperial's is very rigid for the first two years. You have to be sure that you like Maths, because Imperial's course is very rigorous right from the start. In Warwick, it seems like you can get away with doing courses more in line with what you like (e.g. a lot of Business courses... which Warwick itself admits will tend to be easier options than straight maths options)

2) Social life: where would you be most happy to be: in a 'closed' campus (Warwick?) or in a city campus (Imperial?)

This rubbish about prestige is annoying. Who cares? Go to the place you'll be happiest in!

Maybe you don't care about prestige but (un)fortunately a lot of people do, especially decision makers.

A lot of Oxbridge's "aura of invincibilty" is based on perception rather than hard core facts, experienced by those in the know.

Well, as far as I can tell, the key decision makers interested in your degree will be employers. And let me tell you, I've recommended Oxbridge candidates get rejected in favour of people from much less prestigious candidates, if they are better suited to the job on offer.

I'm not denying there people don't think about prestige. What I'm denying is that the difference between Warwick and Imperial's prestige should be the deciding factor in where you go and spend 3+ years of your life

Unless you're insinuating someone is 'ruined' by going to Oxbridge, the debate is pretty pointless. Someone who is good enough (and would get the recommendation) after graduating from Warwick/Imperial is not going to not get the recommendation just because "they went to Oxbridge" - they're still the same candidate.

1) Academic: Warwick's course allows for lots of flexibility, whereas Imperial's is very rigid for the first two years. You have to be sure that you like Maths, because Imperial's course is very rigorous right from the start. In Warwick, it seems like you can get away with doing courses more in line with what you like (e.g. a lot of Business courses... which Warwick itself admits will tend to be easier options than straight maths options)

Where does this odd rumour come from that Warwick is somehow easier and less rigorous because we have options? It's not like we do a math degree and spend our day doodling about dividing by zero while doing the supposedly "easier" business modules! We do just as much rigorous stuff as people in Imperial. Look at our core modules in year 1, I can bet that this covers the same amount of math as core modules in year 1 at Imperial. Any options are additional on top of that; so if anything, we do more "stuff". When we say that e.g. 70% of our modules are math doesn't mean we do less, it means we do more on top of our core math requirements.

I honestly doubt the average Warwick 1st year maths undergraduate is doing 40% more work than the average Imperial 1st year undergraduate.

Also, this isn't even what shamika was implying. He was merely pointing out that Imperial undergraduates do not have a choice in regards to modules, whereas you can 'get away' with doing less maths in Warwick because of the wide variety of modules that aren't directly related. Since Warwick and Imperial are both top universities for mathematics, it'd be pretty ridiculous if there were more than a minor difference in workload.

That is right, the average math student at Warwick does more or less the same as the average student at Imperial (probably). But, you CAN take more than the normal workload, and then yes, you do more work. I.e. if someone says that 70% of his or her modules are math, doesn't mean that she does less math, it means she does more than the normal workload.

That should also be a reply to your second point. You can't "get away" with doing less math, you need to do AT LEAST everything that is required, PLUS more if you want.