Edinburgh, Aberdeen or St. Andrew's Medical School?Watch
I've been lucky enough to be offered a place in the Medical school at Edinburgh and St. Andrew's and am still waiting to hear from Aberdeen. I've been looking at the prospectus for the three of them (just incase Aberdeen likes me!) and have been thinking about which one I should go to.
I like the St. Andrew's course but Edinburgh looks fantastic and I really like the Aberdeen structure. Could anyone help me and give me their views? Is there any make or break's or things to look at for? What are the teachers like, the course content and the community?
Thanks a bunch
I'm in the same position! (with Glasgow instead of Aberdeen though) I also prefer the course in St Andrews but I'm leaning towards Edinburgh because I think I'd prefer living in a city... Still can't decide though!
I think there are many things I would choose St Andrews for
If you want the extra 2-4 points when applying for FY1 since you automatically get to do an intercalated degree at St Andrews whereas at Edinburgh i know 40% get to do it
If you want to spend time at two different universities and get a feel for both. St Andrews depending on your route offers a plethora of options for clinical years: Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, Dundee, Manchester, Barts. Every year a few go to Cambridge, Oxford and other London schools.
St Andrews offers full body dissection from semester 1, Edinburgh has prosection
High student satisfaction on course
Reasons why I would choose Edinburgh:
Bigger city, very livable and well rated by students
Lots of well known alumni, long, arguably famous history in medicine
You can complete a degree in 5 years instead of 6
St Andrews gives you the most opportunities.. You can experience both unis, and get BSc Hons!
Biggest thing is 5 or 6 years??
For me the choice comes down to course structure and location. I understand what many are saying regarding St Andrews, however with the new Foundation program applications, an Intercal degree is of less value than before and I don't think it should be an overly important factor in choosing somewhere to study, IMHO.
I wanted to do the degree in 5 years and not 6, with the thought of doing 3 years of essentially a science degree not filling me with enthusiasm. The amount of clinical exposure in the first 3 years at St Andrews was a deal breaker for me. Especially when all that I would do after that is join one of the Med Schools I had turned down and be a year behind where I would have been.
We get St Andrews students joining us and the level of knowledge is very good, and as such would never tell anyone not to go, it scores well in Satisfaction Surveys and is generally very well thought of by the students. It just wasn't for me.
Edinburgh is very didactic and the heavily lecture based course did not appeal to me, especially as an Edinburgh Graduate already. I love the city and would highly recommend it and the course to anyone. There are fantastic opportunities to do research/intercal as QMRI at Little France is world renowned for Biomedical Research.The med school is steeped in tradition and ERI is a fantastic hospital, but be prepared for some pomp, it is very pretentious...I should know I am from Edinburgh and an EU graduate lol. The city is first class and has been voted as the "Best Small City in Europe" and "The Best City to Live in UK". The university has a huge sporting tradition so if you are keen on ANY sport then Edinburgh is absolutely first class. The facilities, clubs and support are second to none.
Dundee....let's face it....who wants to live in Dundee for 5 years??? I jest, the Med School has a great reputation and is very clinically oriented. The one thing that many of the graduates have said is that they feel MUCH more comfortable as an FY1 than their counterparts as they have had the most clinical exposure. However, they feel a little behind with preparation for postgraduate exams as their scientific knowledge is not as in depth (in general) as the other schools. They feel the clinical gap is closed within the first 6 months so can feel at a slight disadvantge after the first few months of working. This has been the opinion of 5 or 6 graduates I have spoken to so may not be the general consensus. Regardless, it is a great school with a lot of happy students and a great structure to the course.
Glasgow has historically been a PBL based course and has suffered as such. This has been in large part dropped from the curriculum, however 1st and 2nd year students will still do some, it's importance however has been drastically reduced. The number of lectures and fixed resource sessions has been increased to bring the course more in line with others. Ward based PBL has been dropped for CBL in 3rd year, which is a great addition. The course offers a lot of clinical contact time and some wonderful resources in the West. The placements can be a bit of a pain, as some of the travelling can be arduous, but I guess that is the same with any of the schools. The changes to the course have been very positive and this has been recognised by the local NHS staff.
It is a tough choice, I hope I have given a little bit of an insight, by talking through my reasoning. It all comes down to personal preference, what you value most and how you want to study/learn. The city is also a valid factor, you can't really go wrong with Edinburgh, Glasgow or Dundee, all major cities with vibrant night life and plenty to do. St Andrews is much smaller and as such when term ends...it is a desolate waste-land lol. Cracking for golf and good fun during term times though, by all accounts. Oh and close to Dundee, which has "The best Union in Scotland".
I hope this has been even slightly helpful.
What's the real benefits of having a Bsc Hons in Medicine after you graduate from St Andrews?