<p>A close family friend strongly recommends that our son do the “year abroad” program in his junior year. This friend was a high level banking executive for many years, and claims this would make his resume stand out. He recommends the London School of Economics, Oxford or Cambridge. </p>
<p>Then again, having gone on several college visits for our younger child…every single one boasts about their year abroad programs. So many kids go on these. One school even said 70% of their juniors are abroad. It doesn’t sound like it would be unusual on a resume any more. Now I know there are many reasons to do this otherwise, but my son is not terribly interested. He is not enamoured with foreign travel, having traveled quite often already, but he would do it if it would enhance his resume. I would have done it in a minute, if I’d had the chance, but he is more logical than spontaneous.</p>
<p>For background, he will complete his degree in a 3 year timeframe at an extremely tough school (economics major/computer science minor), and probably will start an accelerated MISM immediately after. He’ll have a couple of internships at major companies under his belt, and has worked quite hard. This would not extend his graduation date. I personally think that his hiring prospects will not be enhanced that much by this experience, but if he wanted to do it, he’d have our full support. He is not looking to take a break (anyways, these are challenging schools, so they wouldn’t be easy). Anybody know if this really does make you stand out anymore, in today’s world of extensive travel?</p>
<p>As someone who once hired BA economics graduates I would find a semester abroad at LSE or similar interesting and worth talking about in an interview, but not compelling one way or the other. Experience living abroad (which is different from experience traveling as a tourist) would make more of a difference in a job where interaction with or knowledge of other countries is an important part of the responsibilities. But I’m not sure that describes all that many jobs and your son’s career path seems to be going in a slightly different direction, anyway.</p>
<p>My daughter did consider studying at LSE or Oxford for a year, especially LSE. She visited her girlfriend at LSE, and was not thrilled with their college life, in contrast she really liked her own college. She said to me that she only had 4 years of college, why would she want to spend a whole year away. Instead she went to Sydney for one semster. In her case, it was important for her to get a finance internship junior summer, and she wanted to be on campus for the recruiting season.</p>
<p>If I were your son, I would do it because it is an experience he wants, but I don’t think he would be disadvantaged by not going, especially if he is currently going to a top tier school.</p>
<p>A friend whose S applied to top MBA programs last year tells me that they seem to be fixated on international experience–usually work experience, I assume, but perhaps LSE would be seen as contributing to that. Certainly, your S could look for internships and jobs abroad in coming years if that interests him. I think that the experience of living abroad is invaluable though, and could be undertaken for its own sake.</p>
<p>“My daughter did consider studying at LSE or Oxford for a year, especially LSE. She visited her girlfriend at LSE, and was not thrilled with their college life”</p>
<p>I am curious, what was it about LSE that was unattractive to her?</p>
<p>I agree, the experience of living abroad certainly has appeal for an entire host of reasons, but at this time, the only reason he’d do it is for employability. And since he’ll only have 3 years at his college, which he loves, it doesn’t seem like a great idea to turn that into only 2.</p>
<p>My daughter’s girlfriend was going to LSE. She went home every weekend, and didn’t have many friends at LSE. She said the school had a lot of internationals, most of them kept to themselves. I met this young woman - very pretty and out going - so I was surprised to hear that she had a hard time making friends at the school. She is now a very well know vblogger (is that correct?) in London.</p>
<p>All my friends who studied at LSE has the same issue- they did not like it because it was a city based campus and the social life there sucked- most people keep to themselves and it does not have the campus community that is found in typical US colleges. Its great though for a mature student who is focussed on just studying.</p>
<p>None came back with any real british friends too.</p>
<p>Man but LSE must be making bank with their general course study abroad programs I must say.</p>
<p>However your friend is correct, a study abroad at LSE looks very good on ones resume</p>
<p>Also going to LSE would give him the opportunity to get internships in London which has been the case for my friends who got internships at various firms while studying abroad</p>
<p>My cousin went to Boston College and spent a year at the London School of Economics. He loved it and made many friends. He graduated from BC and got a job on Wall Street. He worked for a few years and recently got his MBA from Wharton, and has returned to his previous employer for an even better position. I don’t know any more more details than that, but it didn’t seem to hurt.</p>
<p>Also you do not need to go to a particular school to do the LSE exchange program- you can go to any school and I think work something out from there. Its a General Course and students from any university can partake</p>
<p>D’s best friend took a gap year after graduating from college (worked at Anthropologie). Then went to get her masters at LSE. She did not have any real complaints about the program. After graduation she got a big $$ consulting job (did not hurt that she got the lead from one of their friends from undergrad who recommended her for the job).</p>
<p>Another close friend, econ major did study abroad at Oxford junior year. Had done IB and consulting internships junior year, took a consulting job after graduation (did not hurt that she graduated pbk).</p>
<p>The experience of students will vary enormously and is entirely subjective. It is impossible to compare the experience of one student to another, especially since there is a wide range of colleges in the United States. When going abroad, As can be expected the experience of a student attending a small residential LAC in the United States will be different from a student attending HYPS. Then you can add the “dollar” value of going abroad … agin a very different proposition for a full-pay student and a student on very generous financial aid. Some programs are revenue neutral but others expect payment of full tuition in the US --although the cost of going abroad is usually a fraction of the cost in the US.</p>
<p>Regarding the LSE --as you know-- the program that targets international students is a full-year program (three quarters/trimesters) and the system of education is hardly comparable to what is offered at selective US schools == although the program offers a large lecture+small class model. Although students will typically be housed in a LSE facility, there is again no comparison to a US residential college. Students have to arrange for their own meals and there are no “cheap or healthy bargains” in the City of London. As far as life, this will be totally dependent on the student. All in all it could be a very isolated life centered around attending a couple of short lectures, a couple of sections, and spending an enormous number of hours … reading reams of papers and preparing for class. </p>
<p>As far as the program itself, it is undeniable that LSE enjoys a formidable reputation. Again, its value remains in the eye of the beholder. It is, however, extremely important to ascertain the value of attending an undergraduate institution that is part of the new European system education (where the model is often 3 years UG with 2 years Master.) In general terms, it is reasonable to be prepared for programs that oversell and … underdeliver to internation students as most programs are cash cows. </p>
<p>On a (totally) personal basis, I do not think that a student who could enroll in the accelerated MISM at his current school might benefit much from spending one year in London as an UG, unless time and money are ZERO factors. </p>
<p>Lastly, while there is no doubt that employers or reviewers tend to value international experience, one has consider that an American spending a year in London hardly qualifies as an immersion in cultural or language diversity … unless one wants thinks that such diversity is found in talking to the owners and employees of convenience stores and restaurants.</p>
<p>The experience of students will vary enormously and is entirely subjective. It is impossible to compare the experience of one student to another, especially since there is a wide range of colleges in the United States. When going abroad, as one can be expect, the experience of a student attending a small residential LAC in the United States will be different from a student attending HYPS. Then you can add the “dollar” value of going abroad … agin a very different proposition for a full-pay student and a student on very generous financial aid. Some programs are revenue neutral but others expect payment of full tuition in the US --although the cost of going abroad is usually a fraction of the cost in the US.</p>
<p>Regarding the LSE --as you know-- the program that targets international students is a full-year program (three terms – Michaelmas, Lent, and Summer) and the system of education is hardly comparable to what is offered at selective US schools – although the program offers a large lecture+small class model. Although students will typically be housed in a LSE facility, there is again no comparison to a US residential college. Students have to arrange for their own meals and there are no “cheap or healthy bargains” in the City of London. As far as life, this will be totally dependent on the student. All in al,l it could be a very isolated life centered around attending a couple of short lectures, a couple of sections, and spending an enormous number of hours … reading reams of papers and preparing for class in a clean but no-frill environment. </p>
<p>As far as the program itself, it is undeniable that LSE enjoys a formidable reputation. Again, its value remains in the eye of the beholder. It is, however, extremely important to ascertain the value of attending an undergraduate institution that is part of the new European system education (where the model is often 3 years UG with 2 years Master.) In general terms, it is reasonable to be prepared for programs that oversell and … underdeliver to international students as most programs are cash cows. </p>
<p>On a (totally) personal basis, I do not think that a student who could enroll in the accelerated MISM at his current school might benefit much from spending one year in London as an UG, unless time and money are ZERO factors. </p>
<p>Lastly, while there is no doubt that employers or reviewers tend to value international experience, one has consider that an American spending a year in London hardly qualifies as an immersion in cultural or language diversity … unless one thinks that such diversity is found in talking to the owners and employees of convenience stores and restaurants in Central London. :)</p>
<p>My son was an econ major (concentrator) at University of Chicago and spent his junior year at LSE. In the case of LSE my son thought the instruction was at a high level – even, in some courses, better than he received at UofC. He got a position with a major economic/management consulting firm upon graduation. (Now he’s moved onto a different career path, but draws heavily on his background in econ and stats.)</p>
<p>My son wasn’t interested in credential-building as such and that was definitely not a major motivation for his study abroad. My advice, FWIW: If that’s all you want from the experience, don’t bother. I think a semester or year abroad – wherever it might be – helps young folks to break down parochial feelings, to get a better chance to meet people from very different backgrounds, and gain a better perspective on your own country and future life/career-choices.</p>
<p>Great advice, I really appreciate all the input. In fact, discussing it with knowledgeable people has pretty much confirmed my underlying feeling…for my son, right now, this probably isn’t the right direction. LSE is definitely where our friend was pushing him to go to. But replacing his last year in school (which would be his third year in college) entirely with an overseas program that may or not make an impact, doesn’t sound worth it. I agree, it would be a completely different story if he wanted to go for the experience alone.</p>
<p>'On a (totally) personal basis, I do not think that a student who could enroll in the accelerated MISM at his current school might benefit much from spending one year in London as an UG, unless time and money are ZERO factors"</p>
<p>Time isn’t really an issue, as it would be an even exchange with his third year, as far as credits. Money isn’t a factor either. But I just realized that it could be more challenging for him to get into the MISM when he isn’t even at school, working with his instructors and advisors, during the year of application. Thanks for your very insightful advice, Xiggi.</p>
<p>MY S is considering LSE, Kings College or University College London for a Masters in International Development and/or Security Studies. Any opinions?</p>
<p>Ouch! Everyone is sharing lots of negative stories about the study-abroad program at LSE, but I have quite a different perspective. My nephew graduated in 2009, at the height of the recession. No one was hiring. But, he had gone to LSE for a semester and loved it. He then got an internship at one of London’s premiere hedge funds and was hired straight after graduating. He’s still there and making tons of money.</p>