London School of Economics

College Search & Lists
41

<p>“I really do not see how that proves anything. Most of those “heads of state” seem to come from fromer Brittish colonies.” </p>

<p>Yes, this includes Kennedy for instance….Pal, the larger part of the world has been at some time been a British colony :)</p>

<p>“By the way, Michigan has 5,000 international students from 125 countries. “</p>

<p>Sure, but how many students in TOTAL does Michigan have? Almost 40,000 according to the information provided by Michigan. LSE has almost 8000 students, you see, the international atmosphere is just incredibly more intense at LSE.</p>

<p>“Michigan is pretty good in the Social Sciences too. In the US, it is around #10 in Economics, #2 in Political Science and Psychology, #4 in Philosophy, #1 in Anthropology, #3 in Sociology and #6 in history. Obviously, Michigan’s strengths are not merely limited to the Social Sciences.”</p>

<p>This comment is just a little sad. Look at your own comments posted previously. It was YOU, who wanted to discuss GLOBAL reputation, and impact, and now you come up with national figures? LSE is 11th in the world, being a specialist institution…so only with its specialisation in the social sciences, it still has as much impact as universities with a broader portfolio. This is reflected in the fact that it is second in the world when it comes to social sciences.</p>

<p>“As you point out, the FT ranked Michigan’s MBA program #12 (not #24 as you claim) among US MBAs in its last ranking. And the Wall Street Journal ranked Michigan’s MBA #1. BusinessWeek Ranked Michigan #6 and the USNWR ranked Michigan’s MBA program #10. As a Business program, it is generally considered one of the top 10 in the World.”</p>

<p>Did you actually click on the link I provided? I acknowledge that Michigan has a great B-school, but sorry….again in GLOBAL terms, FT ranked it this year 17th, and as an average over the past three years 24th…again GLOBAL impact. </p>

<p>“You conveniently forget to mention Michigan’s top 5 or 6 school of Engineering, its top 10 Medical School, its top 5 or 6 Law School.”</p>

<p>I did not forget to mention them, I could not find an appropriate ground to compare it in terms of global impact with the LSE. But still, yr talking in terms of national figures….But hey, let’s take that first of all to a global level, and than let’s see which uni’s that DO have those departments figure alongside LSE….ah, that would be the top 10 uni’s in the world……and Michigan is not there my friend. </p>

<p>“Michigan also has top 5 programs in Dentistry, Geology, Music, Nursing and Pharmacy and top 10 programs in Architecture, Education, Mathematics and Public Policy and Affairs.”</p>

<p>See above comment :)</p>

<p>“You also seem to neglect the fact that Michigan spends more on research ($750 million/year) than Oxbridge and the University of London combined. “</p>

<p>Hehe, the University of Rotterdam or the university of Utrecht (Dutch Uni’s), ehh…the university of Birmingham…they all have a bigger budget in absolute terms than the LSE….because they have far more students!! Michigan has 40000 students, LSE has 8000….the average amount of money per student devoted to research and the percentage of the total budget that goes to research at the LSE is the absolute top in the world :slight_smile: Next to that, research in the social sciences tends to be much more cost-efficient (in terms of costs and resulting impact) than hard sciences. The presence of the school of engineering, and the number of students skews the figure you supplied and hides the true importance of research….Listen, more than half of the students at LSE are postgrads, a quarter of all Nobel price winners in economics can be linked to LSE, and even your former president Clinton has said that the world turns to LSE when it is looking for the next thing in politics….</p>

<p>“The LTs ranking of universities is certainly valid. So are several others. For example, the USNWR ranks Michigan 4th in the US are the graduate level. The NRC also ranks Michigan 4th. The SJTU rankings has Michigan at #19 in the World. The USNWR ranking of America’s best colleges does indeed rank Michigan #22, but the peer assessment score of that ranking, the academic ranking of institutions according to university leaders, places Michigan in the top 10 annually.”</p>

<p>Yes….Michigan is a very good uni!! I have said so several times…but YOU wanted to discuss global impact and reputation….and in those terms the LSE is just in another league!! In the 100 years the school exists, it has produced this enormous list of alumni of the highest reputation, it has attracted worldleaders, and for such a small uni the number of Nobel prices directly linked, and weakly linked, is just astonishing. I can think of many reasons why I would choose Michigan over LSE if I were an upcoming undergrad, but again, we were discussing global impact!</p>

<p>“At any rate, this is a pointless debate. Depending on one’s interests, LSE and Michigan will obviously attract different people. Michigan is more likely to attract students interested in studying in the US, particularly in the fields of Engineering and Business. LSE is more likely to attract students who wish to study in the UK, in the fields of Economics or Political Science. But that does not answer the all-important question. Which was has a great international reputation. I do not believe either one has the edge over the other. I personally respect LSE a great deal because I know it inside and out. You obviously know very little about Michigan. Take the time to know it well before passing judgement.”</p>

<p>Hahaha, come on. The fact is that from all the sources supplied, and all the comments you received by both me and many others, it is clear the LSE has a greater reputation, but that you just do not want to admit it. I really wonder why…I mean, if you made a conscious decision to study at Michigan, I can only support that! There are many very good reasons to study at Michigan! The fact that another uni has a greater reputation and has had more global impact does not make the former untrue or less in any sense. </p>

<p>And please, do not come up with this ad hominem argument, it is below your standard. Of course I inform myself before passing on judgements. In fact, I spend half a year at Berkley (a public uni, like Michigan, hello?), I have been at conferences at both Harvard and Princeton, and next year I will study for 6 months at MIT. I am quite comfortable with how American uni’s stand in comparison with each other and to the world. And having studied at the LSE as well, and currently at Cambridge, I can give you a very obvious reason why I am not very familiar with Michigan, it is because it has a lower reputation and lower impact than the beforementioned universities…Thank you for pointing that out yourself…Well….again, Michigan is a great Uni, but please save yourself the embarrassment of taking this any further…I know I won’t :)</p>

42

<p>We can certainly agree to disagree. You are entitled to your opinion. I will maintain that Michigan and LSE have roughly equal, albeit different, international reputations.</p>

43

<p>And by the by, you claim that it was I who wanted to “discuss global reputation”. That is not true. If you go back to the first page of this thread, you will clearly see that Hatingtonyblair, in post #12, said that “LSE has a global name and Michigan does not”. My first post on this thread was #15.</p>

44

<p>Can’t disagree with that.</p>

45

<p>Maybe I’m just an ignorant American, but in my experience with political science, Michigan and LSE are pretty much in the same tier. Just my two cents.</p>

46

<p>BasBasics, you and I do have a common ground. We both seem to be mega-fans of Star Wars. And James Earl Jones is not the only Michigan alumnus to play a big role in the making of Star Wars. Lawrence Kasdan (only 30 years old at the time), another University of Michigan alumnus, wrote the screenplays of the Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi! hehe</p>

47

<p>Well, then I thank the stars for UMich’s existence, because those scripts were infinitely better. ESB, especially.</p>

48

<p>I’m a post grad at LSE and English, which puts me very much in the minority, LSE is a very international university.</p>

<p>LSE is not in the shadow of Oxbridge in the subjects that it teaches. I’m in the media and communications department and Information Systems reading New Media, Information and Society. LSE only teaches social sciences and at post graduate level it is advanced and theoretical (as you would expect).</p>

<p>LSE does not have a business school, but a very small MBA program called TRIUM, in fact LSE turned down the opportunity to run the London Business School when it was first founded.</p>

<p>If you want to be stretched further than you imagined possible LSE is the place for you at post graduate level</p>

49

<p>There’s a nice piece from June 12 in the Seattle Times, syndicated from the Washington Post, testifying to the kind of prestige LSE enjoys in elite governmental circles in the USA (what we might call the Westwing Factor). Talking about World bank staffers the piece says:</p>

<p>'They’re intimidatingly smart. It’s nearly impossible to get a job at the bank without speaking at least two languages fluently and holding at least a master’s degree. Multiple advanced degrees are better yet, preferably from Harvard, Princeton, the University of Chicago, SAIS or LSE (That would be, respectively, the School of Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins or the London School of Economics). “You know the Type A personality?” asks Lennart Dimberg, who heads occupational health at the bank. “Well, the people here are triple-A. They drive themselves. They push deadlines. They push the people around them. They were recruited to be achievers.” '</p>

50

<p>Nice post, BasBasics.</p>

51

<p>Mich and LSE are on the same level.</p>

52

<p>I’ve been accepted by both unis (law at LSE and considering economics major at Chicago) but i’m not sure where to go. in addition to academic considerations, job prospects etc… financial considerations are also a factor (LSE is only 1/3 of the cost to study at Chicago for me).</p>

53

<p>Wow…well, I would say it really depends on what you want to do with your life. The economics department of Chicago is in ‘in the academic world’ considered to be the absolute top (even the economists at the LSE would acknowledge that: and I’m from LSE haha!). As for law, well, LSE is really really great at Law, it’s one of the most competitive programs to get into,k and the jobmarket prospects are great. There is even a jobmarket organised at the LSE solely for the Law students, and believe me, like for finance and economics, every single big name will be represented. A city job is a given really. </p>

<p>About the status, well, you could read back on this thread, and make up your mind about the status of LSE, it’s really an extremely good name to have on your CV. I’m really not willing to engange in another status debate, but in my opinion Chicago is considered by most, safe for the economics department which is really great in academic terms, a very normal university. </p>

<p>So let your decision depend on what you wanna do with your life!! Research, PhD etc…go for Chicago economics, there is no better. Jobmarket…I really would go for LSE.</p>

<p>cheers!</p>

54

<p>BasBasics, I disagree with you slightly. I think fytong should chose according to fit, not reputation or quality. In terms of excellence, LSE and Chicago are both amazing…second to none. But they are very different in many ways. They have different graduation requirements, different approaches to education, different learning environments, different types os students etc… I think both would be great in terms of professional placement, but Chicago would be better for the US and LSE better for the UK. So I really urge fytong to do some serious thinking and in-depth research into the two schools to determine which one fits his needs better.</p>

55

<p>Well balanced post BasBasics.</p>

56

<p>Most people have heard of it and it’s got plenty of prestige. I know far more than I ever wanted to about it, but that’s because my history teacher studied there…but most people have heard of it. It’s considered a great school.</p>

57

<p>“Chicago is considered by most, safe for the economics department which is really great in academic terms, a very normal university.”</p>

<p>Can you define normal? Chicago has a top 5 Law school, a top 5 Business school, top 5 programs in Anthropology, Arabic, Chinese, Economics, English, History, Japanese, Mathematics, Philosophy, Physics, Political Science, Russian, Russian and Eastern European Studies and Sociology. The University of Chicago is generally considered one of the top 10 universities in the US. </p>

<p>Although I do not usually measure a university’s quality by the number of Nobel Prizes that have either taught or studied there, Chicago’s ties with the prize are scary and worth noting. </p>

<p>Physics: 26 winners
Economics: 23 winners
Chemistry: 15
Medicine: 11
Literature: 2</p>

<p>That’s a total of 77 Nobel prize winners…and very well spread out accross the academic fields. Clearly, Economics is not Chicago’s only strong program.</p>

<p>I would not describe Chicago as being “normal” in any way. I agree that the average Joe does not know about Chicago…but then again, the average Joe hasn’t heard of any university other than Harvard and the local college! However, anybody with a good education is quite aware of Chicago.</p>

58

<p>Ow I agree that fyteng should also take ‘fit’ into account. I did not merely try to give a total overview but tried to answer what seemed to be the thrust of his question, that was, how will my life look like after my study and what will my prospects be. But you’re totally right that fit is an important factor as well. As for a status debate, well, as I said I’m not going into that again, but I am willing to clarify what I meant with ‘normal’: safe for the economics department, studies at chicago are easy to get into, it’s not an accomplishment in itself, such as getting into LSE is for instance :slight_smile: Chicago is indeed a good research university, I personally like it alot, but then again, I’m a PhD student, so that explains :)</p>

59

<p>I’ve actually never heard of this school until today. but I did hear good things about it in another thread. The only UK schools I’d heard of before this were Cambridge and Oxford.</p>

60

<p>Basbasics, it is very difficult to get into Chicago. It may accept 40%-60% of its applicants, but the average student is extremely gifted and certainly equal to the average LSE student. And by the way, Chicago accepts undergraduates without considering their major. It is not harder for Economics majors to get into Chicago than it is for non-Econ majors.</p>