UCL Vs. Edinburgh

All good schools but with the exception of Michigan, they don't really have that truly global brand. Duke might argue it does but beyond basketball.


Never said UCL was a bad university, it isn't. One of the best in the UK top 10 probably top 5. It's just not one of those truly world-class brands that people would give up their right arm just to attend and UCL from a "cultural" and "social" perspective never really had the impact say Oxbridge and LSE have. Indeed I would say Edinburgh beats UCL in that respect but it's location far from any meaningful centre of finance and culture etc means it loses out.

Edinburgh is hardly the financial hub of Europe though and the networking opportunities are limited compared to London.

Nobody would suggest otherwise. However on many other measures Edinburgh life is better in Edinburgh.
I see many opinions here but is there anyone on this thread, other than me, who has experience to make valid comparison?

A brief word on world rankings. Look carefully at what is measured and how measures are made. Even rankings which purport to be appropriate for student experience have very serious weaknesses....such as asking students for their opinions. When I was doing my first degree my priorities revolved around the opposite sex, food and music. Not meaningful.

say Edinburgh beats UCL in that respect but it's location far from any meaningful centre of finance and culture etc means it loses out.

but the climate and the remoteness would put me off every single time.

I made the same decision between Edinburgh and UCL for undergrad and chose UCL. Edinburgh felt like all the bad bits of London - the expense, the traffic etc - without its benefits both from a job perspective and a cultural perspective. Not to say that Edinburgh doesn't have those things, but I pretty much decided that I was picking between London and almost-London-but-not-quite. Obviously this is just disregarding extra costs etc as undergrad tuition is the same price.

I also preferred the feel of UCL. It was by far the friendliest university I visited - not the best and newest facilities, maybe, but definitely welcoming and comfortable. Edinburgh didn't have that home-y, close knit feel that I felt from UCL.

Really? That's the first I've heard about Edinburgh being bad from a cultural perspective. What did you study at UCL if I can ask?

Edinburgh is a capital city with ever increasing political power

one of the most uniquely beautiful cities in Europe

and it has a huge amount of cultural activities that go far beyond hosting the fringe in August.

London is very different in the sense it is more akin to NYC, Paris or Shanghai but to dismiss Edinburgh as having 'no meaningful culture' is patently ridiculous.

That's debatable.




You probably haven't travelled much around Europe if you consider it amongst the most beautiful in the same bracket as Paris, Rome, Berlin, Munich, Barcelona, Madrid, Vienna heck even London etc. There are prettier towns and cities in the rest of the UK to be honest. Architecturally Edinburgh is nothing to scream about other than the castle.



Maybe but I'd never say it was huge and you'll get similar opportunities at the best UK universities.



All of those except Edinburgh are world-class global cities and have their own unique identity and to bracket them together is rather ridiculous.

Then again Oxford or Cambridge aren't exactly cities on the level of Tokyo or NYC but London is a short bus or train ride away and more so than Edinburgh, they are global centres of academic excellence.

That is not to say Edinburgh isn't a great city or university but I find it silly how people think it's on par with Oxbridge or the LSE or even UCL except in a few areas like Medicine for which Edinburgh is up there with the very best.

Not quite sure why there's such a downer on UCL on this thread, it's been interchangeable with Imperial on most year by year league tables for a while.

To be honest it's hard to say to you OP whether it's worth it or not. I don't think that UCL will magically guarantee you a better job v.s. Edinburgh, but there are plenty of other things to take into account. Getting an internship automatically at Edinburgh is a massive plus as you can cite work experience when you then apply for a job, and they like people with experience. On the other hand, London is a bigger and busier place and by organising your own internship in London you might actually find more/better opportunities for what you're doing (if I understood you correctly that UCL isn't offering one - if it is offering one, then London > Edinburgh for opportunities).
Edinburgh is a more relaxed-type, pleasant quality of life, but London has more going on and is more vibrant. Edinburgh is also much cheaper to live in. The weather is warmer in London! Probably easier to fly back home to the US from London.

There's no right or wrong answer. If both costed the same I'd say pick UCL. However the differences are pretty slight.

How interchangeable are UCL/LSE? I get the idea that LSE edges out UCL, but not by much. Am I wrong? Or is LSE really that much better than UCL?

You're missing the point which was not that I meant they were bad universities but that they are not perceived as prestigious as any of the Ivies. That was to counter the claim that Edinburgh or UCL would be seen as more prestigious or sought after than UPenn or Cornell by employers and students alike. In fact in terms of history and prestige I would regard Edinburgh as more prestigious than UCL but no difference really.

LSE yes I would pick over UCL as LSE is synonymous with academic excellence the world over and is one of a handful of universities that employers etc would know are excellent without the need to look at stupid tables or rankings. Even if Manchest was ranked 1st for Law and Oxford say 10th not many (sane) people would decline Oxford for Manchester or any of the other 8 unless it were Cambridge and they had applied to both either as an organ scholar or affiliated entry student.

Why are people over here so obsessed with prestige? I don't have an overwhelming desire to go to only the top of the top. It's like you're saying i'm choosing between a community college and Harvard, when in reality i'm choosing among two of the best in the world. I don't really care about that OMG WOW YOU WENT THERE factor. Sure, having it would be great but I didn't get into Oxford. I'm still waiting on one program for LSE, and I've been waitlisted at the other one. I honestly don't understand why you're all trying to tell me how "not absolutely amazing" UCL is.

Not to mention the fact that there are ONLY a few universities that are known the world over..... and most people do not end up going to those, yet they end up having jobs.

Actually I think "you started it" by comparing Edinburgh and UCL with UPenn and Cornell hence why this debate on prestige.

I never suggested for one moment UCL and Edinburgh were bad, they're very good and both world-class and you'll (hopefully) land decent jobs. I just don't think they enjoy the "brand power" some of the top US universities and the top 4 in the UK (Oxbridge, LSE and Imperial) enjoy.

I mean ok Cornell and Brown aren't Harvard or Yale but they are viewed as very very prestigious in their own right and doing well at Brown undergrad can often be a route to postgrad at Yale or Harvard or vice-versa.

The impression I get from some of the big universities in the UK outside of Oxbridge, LSE and Imperial, is that they seem to constantly compare themselves to Oxbridge even their press releases, promotional material e.g. I've previously read Manchester and Sheffield 'bragging' about how they had certain departments rated above Oxford and Cambridge. Why do they need to compare themselves in that way? Why be an Oxbridge clone? Just be a St Andrew's or Manchester or a Leeds etc.

I mean I believe people associated with Durham refer to it as "The Princeton of Northern Europe". Firstly it's nowhere near in that league and secondly and again, why have to belittle yourself in that way?

Hey everyone.

So, I'm lucky enough to be offered a chance to do a masters in public policy at either UCL or Edinburgh. I'm in a pickle... I'm a US student so I can't visit either of them, and I've got to deposit relatively soon.

Can anyone comment on the two schools, whether UCL is worth about 7thousand more dollars than Edinburgh, whether landing an internship and then full time work from UCL wil be easier than from Edinburgh (Edin comes with a 3 month internship placement).

I'm ok with taking on more loans, if my career prospects come out better than if I had taken out less loans.

So 55k loans at UCL is preferable from 45k at Edinburgh, if I can get a job out of UCL but not out of Edinburgh.

Thanks in advance for the help...

Best,

-Gnomgnouch.

Well the first comment was someone wondering why in the world would I attend UCL/Edin over a US school, but that's beside the point. The argument is nonetheless legitimate, I just value prestige a bit less.

Well, the Russell group is def not as academically elite as the ivy league, but i'm not attending a random Russell school, but one of the better ones lol. Again, not as amazing but still quiet good.

I don't get those comparisons myself, for example in the South Duke = Harvard. Why, i've got no idea, but the south LOVES Duke.

And I don't quiet agree with you, doesn't it make sense to strive to compare yourself to the top of the world.... sure it sounds stupid, but if enough people say it, it might eventually be true. For example, NYU isn't that great a school, but hey people I know are obsessed with it.

The RG was only ever a grouping of universities with the largest research endowments but somewhere along the line people seemed to associate that tag with meaning they were "elite" universities in the academic and selectivity sense when in reality other than say subjects like Medicine or Dentistry or the the very best colleges like Oxbridge, LSE, Imperial and maybe UCL, anyone with as low as BCC or CCC could study some crappy subject at say Leeds or Liverpool and claim to be a part of the academic "elite". That's stupid. I would give more merit to a Dartmouth undergrad claiming to be amongst the academic elite because it's Ivy League (and the proven selectivity) than a similar run of the mill RG student. Maybe because there's more than 20 or so RGs the tag has become meaningless but even at Cambridge there were a couple of tutors I knew who for graduate study would give "preference" to Russell Group graduates (and obviously internationally renowned colleges abroad) even over and above someone with a 1st from a mid-ranking university like say Keele (no disrespect). It's silly but that's how branding, tags, banners etc can affect certain mindsets.

WRT Duke, it's really the only other big university in the South maybe alongside Vanderbilt, neither of which are really outstanding in terms of global reputation and people seem to go crazy for Duke more so because of their basketball team. It's ridiculous to an extent as when I went to Durham NC for a Rugby tournament recently, even the hotel I stayed at they were selling Duke Basketball merchandise in the lobby (this was a Hilton hotel) and everywhere around the town it was Duke Basketball this and that.

Yes you should strive to compare yourself with the best but in doing so you shouldn't denigrate your own standing or achievements. By branding as a "Princeton of the North" shows that X college somehow views itself as inferior to Princeton.

Whilst many will argue that not all the Ivies are equal, Cornell certainly does not promote itself as the "Harvard of NY state" or view itself as second to Yale etc. As I said before the Ivies though originally a sports group have now become engulfed in this idea of being amongst the most selective and elite colleges in the country. I wouldn't have thought that a student at Brown would feel a sense of inferiority to someone at Harvard even if it is Harvard. They've each forged their own identity something which the US colleges are good at doing and I wish some of the top UK universities would do rather than relentlessly trying to compare themselves to Oxbridge.

Durham is the biggest culprit as are places like Bristol and Nottingham with this whole "Oxbridge rejects" banner.