Imperial College London Applicants 2018

Mine was 63 and I got an A*A*A offer

Hey guys,

Has anyone re-applied to imperial after getting a rejection letter? if so , did you get an offer the second time?

The departments at Imperial usually consider applications from rejected applicants from the previous cycle with no prejudice - so yes, it's very much possible; I recommend asking for feedback on why you were rejected and then try and improve on the points in the feedback given to you.

I did ask for feedback, and they just copy pasted the following: which is basically a copy pasted formatted email. so i re sent them an email asking them for a personalised feedback.

Thank you for your email.

When reviewing applications, the selectors will take into consideration a number of different factors including academic ability, professional experience (if any), future potential, career planning and commitment to the programme.

Many of the applications we receive meet our minimum criteria; however entry onto the programme is extremely competitive and the majority of applicants are unsuccessful, with only the strongest candidates being offered a place. As such, rejections are not necessarily reflective of any major shortcomings with an application.



Please note that the decision of our academic selectors is final and it will not be possible for your application to be reconsidered for this programme for the academic year 2018/2019.





We would like to take this opportunity to wish you the best of luck with your future endeavours.

Wow, not very useful at all.

What was the subject you were applying for?

Also, what were your GCSE grades, A Level predictions and AS grades?

And were you invited to interview?

Master in Strategic Marketing.
I am an international student, so we use the gpa system. I have a gpa of 3.3 and as international students they only want a gpa between 3 and 3.15 as mentioned on their website.

And yes i was invited for an interview.

Anyone know if there is a Chemical Engineering group chat for Imperial yet?

Apart from MIT, Caltech, Stanford, Berkeley Harvard - every other uni is debatable

They also cost a lot more and last longer. It's also not ideal If you don't want to spend the first year of uni learning about A Level Maths, FM(goes into Y2) and Physics again.

If you want breakdown of the TSR opinion of top UK and US unis - check here https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=5295710#primary_content

They learn A-Level material at uni level?
Unbelievable.

Apart from MIT, Caltech, Stanford, Berkeley Harvard - every other uni is debatable

They also cost a lot more and last longer. It's also not ideal If you don't want to spend the first year of uni learning about A Level Maths, FM(goes into Y2) and Physics again.

If you want breakdown of the TSR opinion of top UK and US unis - check here https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=5295710#primary_content

Well, they don't specialise after Y11 like we do - so they're following a broad curriculum up until the age of 18 when they finish high school.

Even at uni, they don't study one subject all the time like we do - if a guy who wants to do maths - he'd do more maths classes than anything else, but he'd have to do some humanities, a language, a natural science etc

Consequently the degree is 4 years long

And for a uni comparable to Imperial, that's $50,000 a year for 4 years

£150,000 in total vs £27,750 lol

More like MIT, Caltech, Stanford, Princeton, Columbia..not sure where you got Harvard from cos everyone knows it's trash for engineering. It's like third tier for eng, defo worse than Imperial for it.

You can get financial aid and end up paying 0 for unis.

Why would you give a link that contains a poll of other students' biased views on unis....uhh like 95% of TSR is from the UK = MAJOR bias. Plus prestige is going to play a large part in the polls as most UK students barely have a clue what the US unis are like beyond biased rankings.

Haha the 'learning A level maths again' thing isn't very correct. Most of the classes are induction classes, to get everyone to the same level, just like IMPERIAL does for half the first year. Secondly, you're not forced to do those classes, you can pick the levels you want mostly. Also, if you get certain A level grades, you can skips a chunk of those 'A level' classes.



The longer degree means that, more times than not, you learn more than a 3-year (UK uni) maths grad will learn. US uni students also academically grow in a few other academic areas that they would not have had the chance to explore if they went to a UK. This personal growth factor is turning the tide and, on the low, lot of UK unis are copying this and introducing Liberal Arts degrees. Also what if you went into uni wanting to be a maths grad, but realised that you actually wanna do physics?? You're f***d. In a US uni, you can do this with relative ease, learning and growing from the process. People switch from Physics to Political Science, from Mechanical engineering to pre-law. If you're at Imperial and at this position, you're even more f***d cos no humanities degree options.. better drop out, go thru UCAS again, and pay off all your debts from the wasted first year...

In terms of uni prestige/quality comparisons, it's Oxbridge=Ivy League. Imperial is a notch below and probs on the level of Berkely (Imp is a bit lower than), Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Rice, UChicago (Imp is a bit lower than this too). All of these unis are actually around $67,000 per year. US unis are many times richer than Imperial and offer Financial Aid a lot: you pay what you can afford. In the US you can walk out of Cornell with a stronger Engineering Education than at Imperial without even paying a dime...

You can =/= you will - for most people, Imperial is better value - most people on this thread aren't going to get any meaningful finical aid - don't twist probability.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/05/17/heres-a-look-at-financial-aid-in-the-ivy-league-by-the-numbers/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.39fded68306f

Most students at Ivies aren't getting need based grants and when they do, most don't get an amount to cover fees, or to cover fees enough to make them comparable with Imperial (which is roughy $14,000 a year for 3 years).

The financial aid is generally poor for internationals; in fact a girl who was on one of those threads for the top US unis last year applied and got poor funding even though she wasn't particularly well off.

Because this is a British Website and it is assumed you would know it would be British opinion - most people on this site are British too - do you want me to spell it out for you?

In every ranking in existence, Imperial is beyond Ivy League universities - even on USNews Global Rankings - is that bias too? I think it's more bias how someone who is applying to US unis is going on a huge tirade defending them, even if multiple sources say otherwise.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings?page=2

An American website puts Imperial College at 17th in the world, above UPenn, Duke, Cornell, Northwestern, NYU, Brown, Cornell, Vanderbilt (dozens of places above it - ironic after what you said). Oh dear...

No, they are A Level Maths classes - you can get through university there with very little math ability - even do BA degrees in physics/chemistry which are joke. Calculus I and II are genuine A Level Maths classes g, not to mention differential equations too. There's a reason why when you go to a year abroad at a US uni that you study in the year above. Cambridge cut off their MIT-Cambridge programme because mathematicians were coming back unprepared for next year's work. Now it's the Imperial-MIT programme and again, people go study with the year above. So you're admitting there are A Level classes lol? If you can skip COLLEGE level courses then that shows the first year is just a lot of A Level. A lot of A Levels also don't get that benefit of skipping either, seems that way with APs too.

Imperial doesn't do catch up classes like that, and when they do, it's for Further Maths classes (something you want see until second year) for half a term. Imperial requires you to come into mathematical courses with good mathematical ability (often an A* in Maths). Why would they spend half a year doing A Level Maths? Doesn't seem logical at all. They require Calculus BC (AP covering a large proportion of Calculus II) for all mathematics based courses at a minimum with grade 5 in it.

Give me the stats that you'd learn more? I can make an argument that studying the same thing more frequently in a smaller time interval means you're more better than someone who studies it less frequently with an extra year in length? If you want to grow in other areas, do an A Level in humanities in your spare time - thats the detail they go to (if you're talking about the sort of humanities modules a STEM major takes). Then you avoid spending the probable $50k dollars.

Universities introduce anything to make cash - even gender studies degrees - if they stripped their single subject degrees, that argument would work

You can often transfer to a subject like that, if not, you can just do a Maths BSc then a Physics MSc in the same time length for a cheaper price. How do you"grow" as a person from taking a mildly different degree? It seems you're using generic propaganda m9.

You can do a GDL from a BSc here, again taking the same length and being cheaper. If there was a significant number of people changing from Physics to politics, again, that argument would work - but there isn't, is there?

Any debt from dropping out at Imperial would be cheaper than an elite US uni lol.

No, heres the thing about the Ivy League. It's like the Russell Group (not in terms of prestige or selectivity, but in terms of marketing). Some unis get a lot out of being an RG that aren't really in the same tier. If Durham, Oxbridge, ICL, LSE, UCL, Warwick, KCL all left it, do you think the status would mean as much?

Harvard, Yale, Princeton are on Oxbridge's level, the rest.. not so much. Americans also rave about Oxbridge more than we do about Ivy League (well, except from you). The other Ivies ride on their reputation. How are you gonna compare a near 100 Nobel Prize behemoth in Cambridge to Cornell, Brown or Dartmouth? Like they would be anything without those three.

Berkeley is better than the lower tier Ivies, same with University of Chicago - whether you think Imperial is better or worse is your opinion. I only challenge the points you made that were dubious.

*and again, as mentioned, the probability of you attending Cornell and not paying a dime is low - and I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone in Europe that considers it better than Imperial for engineering, or anyone here that knows what a Vanderbilt or Northwestern is*

And to touch on what you said on the other thread about money and selectivity - over 80% of Americans finish high school. Only 30% of students who finish GCSEs get 3 A Levels at any grade, so actually the number that reach A Level is lower. Getting A*A*A (A typical requirement Imperial courses) is the top 4% of A Level attainment.

If we do calculations, 0.3 x 0.04 = 1.2%. You need to essentially be in the top 1.2% of students to apply - people with less won't, because you would get an automatic rejection.

Now that's greater than a 4.0 GPA - slice out anyone that doesn't and you have severely reduced the applicant pool for Ivies. Now, reduce your options to 5, just like UCAS - people won't choose 5 Ivies because they might end up not getting any offers.. Again, the applicant pool reduces.

Then you consider the Average American IQ is 98 and that of British is 100 and you also have a less able population there. It's not just that measure - anecdotally, we all know what people would people would say if asked about which developed country is the least smart on average.

Also giving significant weighting to admission in the form of a GCSE Maths test (Maths Section of SAT) is laughable too. You know that's an auto 800 for a lot of people on this thread?

On to the money - Imperial is comfortably a billion dollar university in terms of funding - so really, it's undergrad capability won't be comprised - factors like money affect postgraduate more than undergraduate - because the amount of money heavily influences the amount of research a university can do - doesn't stop it from conducting better research than most US universities though according to Reuters.

Not twisting probability. I said a couple of times that it’s a possibility – one that is the case for many.
Haha, you’re wrong – “At Yale, 50 percent of full-time undergraduates receive some kind of need-based financial aid, and the average need-based scholarship or grant award is $50,565 per year. At Princeton it’s around 60%. At Columbia, it’s 50% too.
I’m also going on a full-ride to Princeton so there’s that.
That’s also wrong – you’re quoting one case. For the most part (Unis better than or as good as imperial, the financial aid is excellent. Harvard, Columbia, Princeton, MIT, Amherst and Yale treat itnenatinal students THE SAME as citizens. The rest of the tops unis give excellent aid that is comparable, and a lot of the time, better than.

Because this is a British Website and it is assumed you would know it would be British opinion - most people on this site are British too - do you want me to spell it out for you?
That’s exactly my point…why is the poster of the poll making decisions based on what other students who know barely anything about these unis?? It makes no sense.
Well the Ivy League isn’t actually one university that that sentence doesn’t make any sense at all “Imperial is beyond Ivy League universities” – the entire Ivy League or just one?? It’s literally 8 against 1. Even so, Imperial is in the middle of the Ivies in the US News Global Ranking link that you gave. Here: http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2017.html, Imperial is 7^th (27 th overall) only above Cornell and Dartmouth. Also 7^th(34^th overall) here: http://cwur.org/2017.php. Don’t use ranking because their biased and stupid. What’s even dumber is that you used one ranking. There are always problems with making dictions based on one source. If you only took a statement from a guilty murderer who said he was innocent, would you really let him go free? But again, rankings are flawed and biased – they’re only good starting points.
I think the deal-breaker is that the barrier to get into Ivies and other top 15 US schools is a much higher than Imperials, and arguably, Oxbridge’s.
LOOL erm, you can all it whatever you want, but I got into UK AND US unis, as a Brit. I just chose one over the other. Since when was GIVING AN OPINION bias??

No, they are A Level Maths classes - you can get through university there with very little math ability - even do BA degrees in physics/chemistry which are joke. Calculus I and II are genuine A Level Maths classes g, not to mention differential equations too. There's a reason why when you go to a year abroad at a US uni that you study in the year above. Cambridge cut off their MIT-Cambridge programme because mathematicians were coming back unprepared for next year's work. Now it's the Imperial-MIT programme and again, people go study with the year above. So you're admitting there are A Level classes lol? If you can skip COLLEGE level courses then that shows the first year is just a lot of A Level. A lot of A Levels also don't get that benefit of skipping either, seems that way with APs too.
The stats you learn more at US unis? One is the sheer number of Nobel Laureates, CEOs and billionaires produced by these unis. Can’t say the same for Imperial. Very true, you CAN make a counter-argument, the exact reason why this debate is mostly useless and people should just choose that they prefer. Having said that, you have no idea or evidence that US uni student s study ‘less frequently with an extra year in length’. You have a lot of flexibility to choose classes you want to take, so can easily become more well-versed in a particular field.
I could make the argument that Universities introduce ‘anything’ to uhhh... better educated people in a certain field like they’re meant to?
You don’t know you will grow until you go to a US unis and actually grow, so unfortunetly I’m not qualified to speak on that. BUT, people I know at UPenn, Bowdoin and Dartmouth have absolutely loved their academic and personal experiences at US unis. LOVE, and wouldn’t trade it for anything. Sometimes I get the occasional ‘uni is good/uni is alright’ from my cousins.
Also, I literally gave the most radical example of the switching of degrees (Physics -à Pol Sci) and would went ahead and based your point and argument off Phys à Maths, smh. Uhhh, so why go through all that administrative stress, time, and money getting into Physics, when you can just change your degree with an A4 sheet of paper, in 10mins..? Not sure if you’re even listening to me at all..

At all.. the point I’m trying to make is that there are people are out there, and it’s a real problem that’s on the rise. I had friends that were choosing between Civil Eng, Pharmacy and Maths, a day before the UCAS deadline.. got to uni – hated the course – dropped out – wasted money. Another I know dropped out of Maths and realised Chem Eng was his dream mid-way through the second year. Lots have no clue and take gap years to find out, but because they aren’t doing a whole bunch of classes, included a max of 10% of classed outside their direct field (like in the US oioi ) they still have no ducking clue that they wanna do.. not it’s time for UCAS again one entire year later and they haven’t moved and academic inch..

Maybe you should read up on US uni debt before talking about it.

That RG vs Ivy League point is true to an extent.. the ‘lower Ivies’ do benefit from the reputation that schools like Princeton, Columbia and Yale give, but it’s not as much as you think.. Cornell and Brown are still one of the oldest Colleges in the US and rightly have the reputation that they go. They are also better than the ‘upper Ivies’ for many fields. Like Cornell and Dartmouth beating Harvard and Yale engineering into a small hole in the ground.

Harvard, Yale, Princeton are on Oxbridge's level, the rest.. not so much. Americans also rave about Oxbridge more than we do about Ivy League (well, except from you). The other Ivies ride on their reputation. How are you gonna compare a near 100 Nobel Prize behemoth in Cambridge to Cornell, Brown or Dartmouth? Like they would be anything without those three.
I’m starting to question the substance of your comparisons. ‘How are you gonna compare a near 100 Nobel Prize…’ – this is straight up due to age and prestige.
Also, it’s silly to include HYP as comparable to Oxbridge and not include Columbia. Columbians reject Stanford and Harvard offers all the time. Can’t say the same for Imperial/Leeds rejecting Oxbridge. So you’re saying that there is a huge difference between Columbia and Harvard.. also, what do you mean by ‘on Oxbridge's level’? A Quora answer I found:
"
Here’s what I found in terms of rankings:
Top Universities in the World
Columbia (4th), Yale (8th)
Academic Ranking of World Universities 2017
Columbia (8th), Yale (11th)
Wall Street Journal/Times Higher Education College Rankings 2018
Columbia (2nd), Yale (6th)
2018 U.S. College Rankings
Columbia (2nd - 1st last year), Yale (6th)
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges...l-universities
Yale (4th), Columbia (5th)
"
‘Berkeley is better than the lower tier Ivies…’ what does ‘better’ mean lol. By definition it’s a subjective term.
Haha, you won’t find “anyone in Europe that considers it [Cornell] better than Imperial for engineering, or anyone here that knows what a Vanderbilt or Northwestern is” because they simply do not know!!! MIT, Stanford, Columbia and Caltech dominate the engineering rankings in the US. Oxbridge and Imperial do the same for the UK. These rankings and recognition get unduly perpetuated, so programs/unis that are a bit less well-known are made to seem worse, worse and worse over time. Prestige attracts prestige which attracts prestige.

Also there are 6 times more students in the US and 20 times the number of colleges. Further weight that ratio with the sheer number of exceptional international students that go to the US and you get many more times the talent and quality of.

Erm who tf told you that the Maths Section of SAT is a GCSE Maths test haha omg I’m laughing at the dumbness and the degree to which are uninformed. It’s easy, but it’s not THAT easy.
Lots of top maths students do well, yes but that’s just one metric used for admission into the best US unis. If you think US unis admit based on the SAT score or admitted all the smart people with 800s then you’re wrong. Princeton rejects 70% of people that got 1600/1600 on the SAT.. just some facts. How is Imperial is comfortably a billion dollar university in terms of funding? Are you their Finance manager that you know this?
I think you have to realise that Imperial a top, if not THE top destination for engineers to the UK. All the talent is concentrated there (London is also a huge pull), leaving other excellent comparable engineering unis like Bath, Leeds and Bristol in the dust. Money attracts talent which attracts the best students which attracts prestige.. the cycle repeats and never slows down. Just like financial inequality in the UK and the US, the gap will ONLY grow wider, except with the best unis, it happens at a faster rate.
Cool debate, dude

Has anyone received anything about accommodation yet? Haven't heard anything from Imperial but all my friends going to other unis have...