Columbia vs Cambridge (UK)

Compare College Acceptances
1

Hi! I was lucky enough to be admitted to both Columbia (Applied Physics in SEAS) and Cambridge (Phys NatSci) and I am having a lot of trouble deciding where to attend between the two. Probably want to go into grad school in physics afterwards, but ofc that might change. Sorry for the long post. Here are my thoughts. + for Cambridge, # for Columbia

Academics:

+ Cambridge moves faster (3yrs BA instead of 4yrs). I’ve gotten very bored with the pacing of my HS-level physics classes and I like the idea of faster pace. Also come from a British HS curriculum so the transition will probably be smoother in terms of less repeated content.

+ Cambridge has supervisions (very small group teaching), which I imagine will be very useful

# I do like the idea of being able to take electives in different things beyond just my major, getting to try out different disciplines, have more flexibility, which Columbia is better at.

# I’m in applied physics at Columbia. Throughout HS (and when I applied) I was torn between physics and engineering. Lately I’ve been leaning towards pure physics though. I’ve checked and the coursework is very similar between pure and applied physics, main difference is SEAS vs CC + like one or two courses

Experiential stuff:

+ ur not allowed to work during term-time at Cambridge, which includes research/internships. I think broadly the culture of experiential learning is much more prevalent in the US. Some people still do research/intern over the breaks though (which are long bc Cambridge has 3x8week terms)

# Columbia has much more cool stuff going on experientially that you can actively get involved in as an undergrad; much more resources dedicated to learning outside classrooms. Worried that this could be affected by current govt actions though

Grad School outcomes:

I couldn’t find good statistics. I think Cambridge will be more competitive for UK PhDs, and Columbia for US ones? Cambridge has more course rigor + an integrated masters + a bit more prestige, whereas Columbia has more chances to get involved in research. Also idk if the ‘applied’ label will be a negative if I don’t go for an applied PhD.

Lifestyle/Culture:

Having visited both, I love NYC. I think Columbia would probably be less insular, which I like. And there is so much more to do. Cambridge UK is alright, a little small and less electric. London is 45 mins away by train though.

Culture could be a big differentiator but I really don’t know how to externally judge it.

# At the Columbia admitted students day I was quite put off by how many of the people I talked to wanted to go into finance/consulting. Maybe I just got unlucky with the people I hung out with. I’m more of a nerd. Have heard that culture is competitive/individualistic. Also worried if govt pressure, and admin might make the campus culture unpleasant.

+ I’ve heard the culture at Cambridge described as more laid back and intellectual, which I prefer. Don’t have any firsthand experience though. Have also heard complaints about elitism and excessive focus on tradition which I don’t really like.

Both schools are about the same cost of attendance.

Any thoughts are much appreciated!

2

Which college at Cambridge?

2 Likes
3

Have you plotted out the classes you would take each term at both schools? Which appeals to you more?

Is the Cambridge offer contingent on achieving certain AP scores this May/June?

Cambridge insights?@SJ2727 @HazeGrey @MYOS1634 @Twoin18

4

Certainly more than Cambridge. But Columbus has a very structured Core, which limits electives.

Most, though, are using the breaks to play catch-up on academics, given the fast pace of terms; term breaks and vacation/holiday are not synonymous

2 Likes
5

I would personally suggest by far the most important consideration is the difference in the curriculum structure. There is a reason it takes longer and likely you will still not get quite as advanced in the Columbia structure, namely all the other “general education” they want you to do outside of your major. But, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, indeed some people very much want it. The expectation in the US system is if you need more education in your specific academic field, you will then continue on in graduate school.

And yes, top students at Columbia will be very competitive for top US graduate programs–if that is what they want. It is true that quite a few Columbia students will NOT want that, they will want to go into business, or into professional schools, or government, or so on. But there will also definitely be plenty of people, not least in fields like Applied Physics, interested in grad programs.

In terms of Applied Physics versus Physics, first, you are right that there is so much overlap at the undergrad level it isn’t really a concern anyway. But second, you are not at all stuck with Applied Physics at Columbia. In fact, SEAS students don’t even declare their major until the beginning of sophomore year.

Moreover, you could potentially transfer from SEAS to CC. This is not always as easy at Columbia as it is some places, but in your particular case, as I understand it there is one Physics Department that serves both SEAS and CC. So my guess is this could be a smoother transition than usual.

But if you did choose Columbia and were interested in possibly switching to CC for Physics as opposed to Applied Physics, I would start discussing this with your advisor immediately. They may help you put together a plan to make that option as easy as possible.

2 Likes
6

If you have not studied or lived abroad, then Cambridge is the easy answer as living abroad is an education in and of itself.

1 Like
7

Columbia is toxic and has been since October 7. It’s a great school, but the turmoil is very much still alive. For that reason, I’d personally opt for Cambridge.

2 Likes
8

The key question is whether you want to take a variety of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences, or not. These will be taught by world class professors and the goal is for you to broaden your general understanding the field as well as be broadly educated.

That’s very different from Cambridge where tour world class professors will focus on STEM only.

A Level scores of A*, A, or B will grant you advanced placement in subjects you’re taking, ie., Maths at least, Physics probably, so you won’t have to “repeat” anything in these subjects. Placement is immediate whereas credit is only granted after completion of the class you took in that subject or at the end of the first year (IOW you don’t get credit for A Level work if you don’t so well in your next-level Columbia class.) This advanced placement will allow you to choose more advanced classes during your senior year.

Then, beside specialized intense study vs. broad study, you have the cultural differences between being a student in NYC and in Cambridge (which college might matter to your experience there, too??) There’s no right or wrong answer, really, but the experience would be completely different.

Imho, an ideal combination would be Columbia undergrad+Cambridge PHD but that’s a very subjective opinion. You could wish to do specialist Cambridge then specialist graduate work for instance, or prefer the Cambridge environment to the City, etc. We can’t really tell you which one is the best for you. It’s definitely not as easy as “Columbia, obviously” or “Cambridge, obviously”. If you’re not sure, go with your gut :smiling_face_with_sunglasses: the good thing is that there’s no wrong choice!

4 Likes
9

I sometimes think English undergrad courses make the most sense for kids who would really rather just skip ahead to what in the US would be a graduate school vibe, both academically and non-academically, and not do the whole US-style undergrad thing. There are some US undergrad programs more in that direction–Caltech, for example–but even then the English university undergrad courses will be most like that.

As you point out, there is no inherent wrong or right to that, it depends on what you want as your next school experience.

That said–in the US system, a lot of people end up changing their majors, sometimes radically. Would more people do that in English universities if they could? No way of knowing for sure, but I think maybe.

So I do think there is something to be said for that kind of flexibility. But it comes at a cost–both in terms of years, and not infrequently in terms of cash out of pocket.

4 Likes
10

So as you know at Cambridge you are not going to be able to try out different disciplines. The pace there is intense. I am not sure exactly how natsci supervisions work, but in the subjects I’m familiar with they are both very useful and a lot of “extra” work (in the sense that you get assignments that are not being graded for your course), but it does mean you have a close eye on you all the time and any gaps in understanding are picked up and dealt with early. Typical supervision has 2-5 students.

They have been trying very hard to overcome the “elitist” impression (a lot more students from state schools, for example, than there used to be). Laid back.. not sure that’s my impression, the courses are intense, though of course people have time for recreation. You do also get the “work hard party hard” crew, and of course the drinking age is 18, so you can figure that part out. Intellectual, for sure. You are very aware of the “standing on the shoulders of giants” angle and the contributions the university has brought to the world. The “tradition” to me is one of the more, dare I use this word, magical aspects of Cambridge. There are very, very few places anywhere you would have an undergraduate experience that compares to Oxbridge. (And at least you don’t have to write exams in your gowns like you do at Oxford!)

Of course, there is a massive difference between living in NYC and living in Cambridge, but it really is an easy 45 minutes to London. It’s been a while but I seem to recall the trains are pretty frequent.

Which college have you been admitted to at Cambridge?

3 Likes
11

Would you prefer the liberal arts style of curriculum at Columbia, which features breadth of education while still achieving depth in one’s major, or the much narrower and somewhat deeper focus in one’s course of study at Cambridge?

Id est, do you prefer the American style of undergrad education or the British? (a little of a lot, or a lot of a little?)

Either way, congratulations on having two great options!

2 Likes
12

Compare the first year physics at Columbia vs Cambridge:

https://www.columbia.edu/~nhc1/UN2801/

https://www.columbia.edu/\~nhc1/UN2802/

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/natural_science_tripos_physics_e/response/2127325/attach/html/3/FOI%202022%20639%20Sullivan%20materials.pdf.html

Unless you somehow managed to both apply to and get into Columbia while thinking you wouldn’t enjoy the core (unlikely), odds are quite likely you do, so I would recommend Columbia.

1 Like
13

Thanks for all the responses!

Pembroke

I plotted out the first two years-ish worth of classes at each. I actually progress faster at Columbia initially (there are classes I can place out of, whereas everyone at Cambridge doing a given module takes the same classes.) Cambridge catches up and overtakes about halfway through soph year. The humanities core in Columbia SEAS is reduced compared to the full CC core; its just a writing course, one of art hum or music hum, and a two-semester progression in either lit hum or contemporary civilization + electives. The courses sound interesting but not really to the point of being a deciding factor. Overall I think Cambridge has a somewhat better academic structure for me.

Its contingent on my A-Level results, which are I guess the British curriculum equivalent of APs.

I’m not from the US so both are abroad for me!

I think, were it down to just the curriculum structure, Cambridge would win. But I feel like there’s a lot I could gain from doing more hands-on stuff, which seems to be more accessible at Columbia.

This is a big differentiator for me right now; it just feels like such a big decision on so little information. I have talked to a friend or two from each and I have sort of a vague impression that Cambridge’s culture is less competitive/toxic than Columbia. I don’t really know though. Any suggestions for how to probe this further?

What do you mean by this? In what sense?

1 Like
14

As an Ivy/Oxbridge grad (not going to be more specific), I agree in principle with the above comments.

While it’s been noted that both CC and SEAS have physics departments, I don’t think it’s been mentioned, however, that “Core” requirements at the College are twice as onerous as at SEAS. Therefore SEAS may give you the best of both worlds in terms of liberal arts exposure without compromising on an accelerated physics path, while also offering the possibility (not guaranteed) of transferring internally if you want to lean more liberal arts after you arrive. Students can also pursue a dual BA/BS or BS/Master’s in five years, if those options appeal to them.

As for Cambridge, you haven’t answered the fundamental question: WHICH COLLEGE? To a degree unappreciated by outsiders, the Oxbridge undergraduate experience revolves around the particular constituent college to which you matriculate. Not just academically (Tompkins Table), but socially (toff quotient, posh vs. diverse, public vs. state, May Balls) and logistically (do you want to live in a dump off-site for a year?), studying for three years at Trinity, Emma, Peterhouse, King’s, Girton, or Lucy’s means very different things to very different people.

As a cool bonus, after a fixed period (~2.5 years after you earn a BA) all Cambridge grads can “incept” into the Cambridge MA, conferred by right and not by examination, without any additional coursework. Basically you get to put “MA (Cantab)” after your name on a CV. This is a privilege available exclusively to Oxbridge & Dublin grads for historical reasons. It’s not considered a postgraduate qualification, but most employers don’t know this – one reason the Oxbridge MA hack is sometimes criticized as “fake” or a “scam” by people who didn’t go to Oxbridge or Dublin….Don’t even ask about the Scottish MA as that’s a whole different topic.

2 Likes
15

Let me talk to this point from personal experience.

I started university undecided between math and physics, and also for freshman year took two mechanical engineering classes so that I was on track if I decided to switch to ME. Sophomore year I continued taking classes to be on track to major in either math or physics. I liked everything up through special relativity. It was quantum physics that got me to decide to be a math major. Then my first job was at a cyclotron, doing some combination of software engineering and mathematics (there is plenty of math in getting a cyclotron to work properly).

I liked applied physics. Key here is that you can come up with experiments and verify that your theories make sense. We know that special relativity works because we can accelerate particles relatively close to the speed of light and see how they behave. We know that time dilation works because again we can run experiments and verify it (eg, mesons only live long enough to get from where you make them to where you use them because of time dilation). When you get to more theoretical physics at least to me it becomes less real. To me it looks like people come up with elaborate theories and try to outdo each other with elaborate explanations, where winning the argument does not have much to do with being correct. Personally, speaking only from my experience, I liked applied physics quite a bit (where this includes relativity), but I did not like theoretical physics at all.

But that is just my personal opinion based on personal experience.

You will get a very significantly faster pace at either Columbia or Cambridge. You will also get a significantly faster pace at any one of at least 100 and probably 200 other universities in US and just as many outside the US.

Is it possible that you might want to change your major, for example to either math or software engineering or to some form of engineering? If so then my understanding is that it is way easier to do this in the US versus the UK.

I think that either of these excellent universities will get you very well prepared for graduate programs. Frankly you could go to an undergraduate program at any of a wide range of other universities including much lower ranked schools and still be very well prepared for excellent graduate programs. I have known quite a few people who have studied in rather highly ranked graduate programs in a range of fields (including physics, although that was a while ago) and they all say that the other students in their graduate programs came from a huge range of undergraduate schools. It is very, very common to switch universities between undergraduate and graduate programs, and not unusual at all to “switch up” to a higher ranked school (assuming that a student did very well as an undergraduate student, wherever they were).

I was only at a research program somewhere near Cambridge once, but I did find this to be true. After I gave a talk we all went out for beer which might have contributed to the laid back atmosphere. The beer was very good.

You should avoid debt and budget for a possible master’s degree, but this won’t matter between these two schools. If you have a third option that you are also considering this might come up.

I would expect this to vary quite a bit, particularly among classes outside of physics.

At a minimum with a physics major I would want to have some math classes (at least through multi-variate calculus, linear algebra, and probability theory as an absolute minimum) and preferably some CS classes (something about algorithms and data structures might be helpful).

This I agree with, although I might say this plus flexibility if you decide to change your major.

I do not think that you can go wrong either way as long as you find a school that is a good fit for you and do not overrun your budget. I am hoping that you are deciding between these two schools among what I expect are quite a few acceptance because these are the two that would be the best fit. This is an area where there are hundreds of very good undergraduate programs and ranking is not important. Finding a good fit is important.

1 Like
16

One of my favorites. Definitely a “true” Cambridge experience vs some of the modern colleges.

That may stem from a lot of the “pre professional” vibe at some top US colleges - competition for clubs, internships, etc. (I don’t know how much of that is dependent on your major though.) Cambridge doesn’t really work like that.

The residential college system combined with the traditions at these universities is unlike most of what you’ll find anywhere else. Some other universities have residential college systems of course, but most don’t have the same history.

It seems to me your main point of differentiation is down to how much you want a broader education vs the concentration you’d get at Cambridge. The other stuff is icing on the cake.

3 Likes
17

It’s well known in the UK and some countries who send a lot of students to the UK. It’s definitely probable that many US employers don’t know, but that said it should be clear from the educational part of the resume that it is not actually a separate degree.

1 Like
18

Any US employer which has operations in the UK (so a significant piece of the Fortune 500 for example) knows this. They hire folks for jobs in the US, they also hire folks for jobs in other locations where they have headquarters, regional centers, etc.

Trust me- we know. We know what a college is in India (not a college by US standards), we know that being the number 1 student from Fudan is a really big deal, we know what the various gradations of military rank are in countries which have mandatory service for post-HS. And the question I get very frequently- do US employers understand that IIT is prestigious (yes).

I remember managing a big project when my then-employer was opening up a shared services center in Eastern Europe. At the time, we had a very small footprint there- but this was going to be a gigantic hiring initiative with finance people, accountants, lawyers, procurement people, etc, some of which we’d transfer from other parts of the world and most of which we’d need to hire for.

The final document had tabs for each of the relevant professions- law school rankings, what the requirements were to get the Polish equivalent of a CPA, what honors societies were important at various country’s universities, etc.

Hiring isn’t as random as it seems.

2 Likes
19

it is tough because the truth is not a lot of people actually have a recent basis for comparison, and in fact the experience in CC is not necessarily the same as in SEAS, as others explained different constituent colleges at Cambridge might feel different, and so on.

If it makes you feel any better, most people are pretty adaptable and will find a way to make these sorts of universities work for them socially. Not everyone, but most. So the stakes in this area are not maybe as high as some people sometimes make it sound.

Yes, I meant to include flexibility in terms of major/course within the scope of curriculum comparisons.

But it sounds to me like this is perhaps becoming the heart of the issue. I note the Natural Sciences course at Cambridge does have quite a bit of flexibility–within Natural Sciences. SEAS obviously has flexibility within applied sciences, applied mathematics, and engineering (I also can believe it has more of a hands on component, although I wouldn’t say I know enough about the Cambridge course to really comment). And then Columbia CC could be an option too.

Only the OP can answer which they prefer. But if it were me, I’d focus on that, and not be too worried about the social stuff.

2 Likes
20

I’ve spent time in NYC (visited for work (including Columbia) and lived there) and Cambridge (visited Cambridge U on a number of occasions for work-related reasons and I currently maintain an affiliation with a post-grad institute there) and the differences between NYC and Cambridge are stark. NYC (and also London, where I was based for many years) are lively, cosmopolitan cities whereas Cambridge (and Oxford) feel like quaint, small towns. Correspondingly, Columbia (and LSE/UCL in London) campuses feel rather “urban” (in keeping with their surroundings) while Oxbridge colleges (particularly inside the older ones) feel like you’ve travelled back in time. I appreciate both settings but others might have stronger preferences either way.

Based mostly on my greater familiarity with Oxford (daughter is an undergrad there), I agree completely with SJ2727 that an Oxbridge undergrad experience is “magical” - I actually came to the same conclusion while wandering the narrow lanes of Oxford during my daughter’s first year there. For me, it’s the architecture, history/traditions, and unique teaching features of Oxbridge, particularly the individualized attention students receive via the supervision/tutorial system. I’d imagine that the “magical” feeling is even stronger for Cambridge physics students because so many of the field’s leading thinkers (Newton, Rutherford, Hawking, etc) came out of Cambridge.

While Oxbridge might be “less competitive/toxic“, being a STEM student there is highly stressful for many/most due to the pace and workload. The standard Oxbridge academic term is only 8 weeks and you actually spend most of your long “vacations” trying to catch up and better comprehend the materials presented during term time.

Also, note that NatSci is especially known for its heavy workload, including classes on Saturday morning. For my daughter, Saturday classes was the deal-breaker when she was considering whether to apply to Oxford or Cambridge. But Saturday classes have not put off many others!

5 Likes