HPE UCL or Political Economy KCL {HELP!!!} 2018

UCL is definitely more prestigious than Kings. I'm a first year at LSE, and I recently attended a first year event at a top London law firm - LSE and UCL were the only London universities that they invited students from. They only recruit from Oxbridge, LSE, UCL and Edinburgh.

Thanks! That's very helpful advice. Although, I know LSE and UCL are extremely high for law. Do you think when it comes to politics or a new degree such as HPE, it will still have en edge due to being UCL? Also, because The SEES department in ucl is lesser known than the rest of the departments at UCL, will that make any difference? Or do they just look at universities as a whole? Thanks again for all your help, despite not being a student at either.

How are you finding LSE? That's an amazing university.

I was predicted A*A*A and I didn't mention Russia/Eastern Europe simply because it wasn't of my interest. I'm sure admissions want to see your passion rather than simply following what most people would do (mention East Europe) to merely to impress them. When did you send off your application?

Where else did you apply? And what were your grades? If you don't mind me asking.

I do think KCL and UCL are both targeted unis within professional careers. UCL does have the edge, beating KCL. However, it's Political economy department seems to be well renowned and SEES seems to be the lower point of UCL departments as it specialised in science. This has me stuck in choosing.

Thanks for your response!

I forgot to add. I looked at economics and business at UCL and it's hard to compare it's graduate prospects to HPE because it's more economic based than HPE. It states that Maths a-level is required unlike HPE. I'm guessing it's more maths heavy and thus people graduate onto jobs such as banking, investment and working for the Big 4. I hope this insight was helpful to you in some way. We really have to consider the nitty gritty before we decide. It is hard since nobody has graduated from this degree yet. Are you planning on firming it?

I have looked at the modules. Political economy does actually have economics and both politics modules. This includes, econometrics, quantitative method. Some of which are compulsory especially when doing the bsc. I would say HPE does have a lot of interesting modules but the East Europe ones are putting me off slightly. Do you think a bsc is more favourable than Ba? Thank you for your help!

Which in your opinion is the better option? I've been told KCL is better for social sciences but it has been dropping in league tables compared to UCL. Thank you for your reply!

Hey, if the Eastern Europe modules are putting you off I would definitely not apply to UCL. The entire HPE degree is structured around the context of Eastern Europe and post-USSR economics, politics and history. Sure, you could pick modules to work around this a little bit but it's very difficult. I personally chose and will be studying Political Economy this September at King's because I love the diversity of the modules, and I can learn about the Middle East, South East Asia, America and the UK throughout my time there. I think it's really early to know whether you want to specialise in Eastern European studies, so I wouldn't do it.

I hope the OP does not go to UCL just because it is UCL. HPE @ SSEES is not a course one should do without a genuine interest in the region. Read the module descriptions carefully, do you really want to study them? https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ssees/history-politics-economics-ba-structure

No it's not. Kings has low student satisfaction and that is why it ranks lowly because it's in London. LSE and UCL have poor satisfaction but their entry requirements pull them up. Kings don't benefit from this because of the huge nurse intake. Please look at league tables like the times and QS which place more of an emphasis on prospects.

I would say go for the one you want more, unless you want to go into IB then go UCL.

May I ask what university you go to? I have seen that KCL's students satisfaction is low and that it doesn't deal with students issues accordingly.

In the Time ranking globally. UCL is ranked 16 and KCL 18. Seems fairly similar to me. However, domestically, Kings usually has a poorer score for some reason. It makes me wonder if it's a quality experience there.

Different ranking table is using different methodology, learn which one suits your needs.
Again I hope you dont choose UCL because of the little differences of data, unless you can explain that slightly 10 overall score away will give you huge wage boost and employability boost.

May I ask what university you go to? I have seen that KCL's students satisfaction is low and that it doesn't deal with students issues accordingly.

In the Time ranking globally. UCL is ranked 16 and KCL 18. Seems fairly similar to me. However, domestically, Kings usually has a poorer score for some reason. It makes me wonder if it's a quality experience there.

I'm not really an idiot to rely solely on rankings. Nor did I say that was the drive behind my final choice. Some don't make sense, while others aren't always reliable. For example, the guardian ranks KCL so poorly that anyone would know that's not the case in reality. Though, for every ranking it shows UCL is higher consequtively, this shows they do have the edge when it comes to ranking. Then there's looking and comparing when it comes to course structure, topics , grad prospects etc.

No one takes the guardian seriously. Their rankings are awful take on look and your see that. They rely heavily on their 'guardian factor' KCL ranks poorly because of a scandal to fire staff to buy the east wing of Somerset house.

Ultimately it's your decision. But do not pick one over the other unless you want to go into IB then UCL is the obvious choice.

It's student satisfaction is similar to UCLs. But due to nursing at the Florence Nightingale school of nursing it's not inflated by high requirements whereas UCL is. UCL edges reputation but KCL is very close behind besides what people on TSR say.

I have offers from SEESS and the King's politics department like you. I will be firming KCL due to Kings having the nicer campus by a mile and also because I prefer the course.

Domestically, UCL is usually ranked around 7 and KCL is usually mid 20s. I was also comparing 2017 and 2018 ranks to find UCL has rised in almost all league tables while KCL has slightly fallen. Of course, I won't reply on league tables but it makes me wonder is the quality of KCL slipping? I have heard from students there that they weren't always pleased with the support from the staff. So this does worry me slightly.

I definitely agree that their campus is much nicer. I would rather be walking around there than UCL which I don't find attractive in the slightest. However, I obviously can't choose a university because It's buildings are nice, haha. When it comes to the courses I am torn as both programmes have aspects that interest me and disinterest me.

I don't know how many times I have to say this but the Complete uni guide and the Guardian are not a great way to pick a uni. UCL and KCL have low student satisfaction. Many students are overwhelmed by London and don't enjoy it as much as they think they would. So they both naturally rank low. But UCL has average grade requirements of A*AA to AAB so this inflates it higher in the tables. KCL whilst its academic subjects have a similar grade offer rate its huge intake of nurses pulls it down.

KCL is not in decline. Its one of the founding members of the University of London and one of the oldest unis in the UK. Firms are not going to see it's fallen by 1 place and stop targeting its graduates, it's a ridiculous concept. People are very tribal about their Unis on TSR if someone tells you KCL is bad its simply not true.

HPE at UCL is with SEESS. Its focused on East Europe. Go there if you like East Europe. But be warned that SEESS has a very high drop out rate because people are attracted by the UCL factor with no regard to its specialisation.

As someone said the focus you have on league tables is ridiculous and if thats what you are going off you aren't approaching your choices maturely. If you look at the Guardian it lists Loughborough above ICL and Lancaster above UCL. This doesn't mean employers will target Lancaster grads over UCL or ICL grads. Prestige does not vanish with a move in the league tables.

Regarding the students complaining this is not just isolated to KCL but to every institution in the UK pretty much. With 10s of thousands of students people are bound to complain.

A lot of people are offering helpful advice and you seem to be dismissing a lot of it which makes me wonder why you started this thread in the first place.

I clearly say after mentioning what I observed on league tables that I DON'T solely rely on the information. I know rankings don't mean much. I said the Guardian is rubbish and is an example of league tables being unreliable. I mentioned pro's and con's about both universities. This included ranking, course structure and campus opinions etc. You're clearly taking this too personally. I took everyone's advice, even those being harsh. I made counter points so I can hear more about their views, which they provided me with. You seem to be the only on this thread getting butt hurt when the slightest unfavourable comment is mentioned about KCL.