The Student Room Group

MA International Relations - Warwick or King's College?

I have been accepted for MA International Relations at both Warwick and King's College London. I would be grateful for any advice anyone has to offer.

Which university has the better reputation - for the university, for international relations, for the department (War Studies and PAIS)?

I am hoping to ultimately pursue a career at the Foreign Office, and perhaps later the UN. Would one enhance my career prospects more than the other?

I much prefer the idea of living in london rather than warwick campus/coventry for a year, but I am leaning towards the course offered by Warwick. It seems to have more of a focus on international comparative politics, and less on strategy and conflict management than King's.

Many Thanks
Reply 1
Kings is more internationally regarded no?
Warwick is generally regarded as having the better reputation as a university, both nationally and internationally. I don't know much about international relations but from what I've heard on these forums, St Andrews, LSE, Warwick and Sussex have great reputations for the subject. I have family and friends working for the UN in Geneva, Switzerland. Warwick is a pretty big name within the company.
Reply 3
The Orientalist
Warwick is generally regarded as having the better reputation as a university, both nationally and internationally.

Say what? Compared to Kings College London?
Democracy
Say what? Compared to Kings College London?


Yep. KCL doesn't have as much an international rep as Warwick. I'm an international student by the way.
Reply 5
National Reputation: Warwick > King's College

International Reputation: Warwick >>> King's College




International Reputation of Warwick is = UCL, not KCL.
Reply 6
According to the renowned Times-QS university ranking, I can see that King's college is ranked 21st next to Australian national university, whereas I could not locate university of warwick anywhere in the table, i assume it is around 100+, which are still excellent unis. UCL is ranked as 4th best university globally and there is no comparison between warwick and UCL in terms of international reputation.

Summary - Kings > Warwick
(edited 14 years ago)
I work for an NGO abroad and whilst I have been taking advice of where to do my masters Warwick was never mentioned by people working for the UN, World Bank, IMF, UNICEF etc.. KCL was. Not sure what this says...leave it up to your own interpretation.

Most importantly I would advise that experience is probably the most important thing...not where you have done your degree. There are people who work for INGOs who have masters from unheard of universities and are doing well for themselves.

If you want any more advice on a career in the 'international arena' (sound stupid saying that) then please post away!
I think that KCL has a much better reputation. Their department is very well known. Warwick, not so much.
Original post by studentadvice21
I have been accepted for MA International Relations at both Warwick and King's College London. I would be grateful for any advice anyone has to offer.

Which university has the better reputation - for the university, for international relations, for the department (War Studies and PAIS)?

I am hoping to ultimately pursue a career at the Foreign Office, and perhaps later the UN. Would one enhance my career prospects more than the other?

I much prefer the idea of living in london rather than warwick campus/coventry for a year, but I am leaning towards the course offered by Warwick. It seems to have more of a focus on international comparative politics, and less on strategy and conflict management than King's.

Many Thanks


hey i've been offered a place at warwick for MA in international relations.seeing that you too faced a similar choice can you advise me which one of the two did you choose and how was your experience ?

Quick Reply