I don’t think you have any idea quite how strong the admitted students are at LSE and Imperial.
The U.K. is not like top US universities, where once you get in almost everyone graduates with a good GPA and if the major they started in is too hard, they just switch to an easier major.
In the U.K., if you fail out of your major, you fail out of the university. And if you don’t do well in your end of year exams and don’t get thrown out, you have to retake at least the exam and possibly the whole year. Then your final degree class follows you for the rest of your career, you still put it on your resume 30 years later.
That means it’s a very bad idea to overmatch in the U.K. where even if some universities need the money (though not Oxbridge, LSE or Imperial) you will be competing against more capable domestic students who have been succeeding in high stakes exams for many years. My nephew had 22 exams (mostly 2 hours each) over the course of 4 weeks for his GCSEs at age 16.
Wishing your son luck with this plan. He sounds terrific.
But two points of information for you:
1- LSE is broadly known in the US; Imperial less so. Do not over-estimate what it will do for your son prestige-wise; regardless of what the International “rankings” say about it, you may find that among US recruiters it is akin to Fairfield, Villanova, Seton Hall, Providence (I’m assuming these are the types of schools you are disdaining?) or Bucknell/Lehigh. So be careful with your assumptions. I’ve been recruiting for large global corporations for 35+ years; American companies (for roles in the US) can be surprisingly parochial. Most have their recruiting target schools-- they may shift around a bit, but not massively so. And certainly not based on a rating even if it’s from a well known publication. Fudan (for example) is a perpetual favorite of my current company. It has slipped in some of the “magazine type ratings” but nobody cares. We have hugely successful, brilliant hires from Fudan in the US-- its ranking can go up or down which nothing to do with its educational rigor and the quality of its student body. It is not an easy place.
2- If the Plan B is to come home after the first year if he is asked not to return (which WILL happen if he doesn’t keep his performance up; there will not be wiggle room or the sympathetic ear), accept the fact that he may get credit or not. It is entirely up to the RECEIVING university as to which credits they will take. And therefore you may be in for the five year plan, not the three year plan which you’ve budgeted for.
I know kids who went off to the UK after solid HS careers and the homecoming was a pretty dismal outcome. If your description of your son’s academic prowess are accurate (and you aren’t being modest) do not under-estimate what his peer group would look like at LSE and Imperial. There are many, many places in the UK and Europe for the “well rounded good student”, but not these two places-- perhaps broaden your list? And his EC’s and athletics will not save him- there won’t be a coach keeping him on the study hall schedule, making sure the dining hall stays open late when practice runs late so he can get a balanced hot meal.
Yes, our neighbors kid at St Andrews experienced this. Had to take an extra year after failing classes, and even after that barely graduated (had to retake finals after the summer and delay graduation even further). Now still at home and looking for a job almost a year later (with a CS degree).
Despite that the younger sibling also went to Scotland. Again has had the failed exams, resit in August experience and is taking an engineering major that may not have an easy path to jobs back in the US. Working in the U.K. is no picnic either, given how much lower the salaries are there: none of my brother’s kids have any chance of ever affording to buy a house unless their parents gift them a huge sum of money.
It all seems dispiriting, but our neighbors like the prestige and historical setting (plus the chance to travel there for visits). And the colleges their kids got into in the US wouldn’t have impressed their friends. But there’s no point in boasting about that prestige when they now have a kid that failed to launch.
University abroad is much tougher. This point I note. There are a lot of American kids at LSE so they are getting in and surviving.
A $60,000 price tag for LSE in my opinion is well worth it. It gives you access to finance firms in London. Investment Banks, etc. I think a price tag of $85,000 for NYU is worth it for the same reason.
But how about shelling out $80k for RIT vs $10k at University of Toronto or UBC. The money saved can be used for a down payment on a home? Cap off the undergraduate degree with a masters in the US to be paid by the parents.
4.5% of LSE undergrads are from the US out of 50% international overall. More than three times as many are from China and Hong Kong. Are the US kids just “surviving” or thriving in that ultra-competitive environment?
Just like at NYU, only the top kids get “access to finance firms” in London. It’s not enough to just “survive” if that’s your objective. And is the price tag still “well worth it” without that?
Yes I think the price is worth it. It gives you a chance. If you work hard and excel it will open up that door. Many other schools even if you work hard and excel you will not have a shot. It’s the price tag associated with getting a chance.
Also US should not be compared to China. US has a lot of very prestigious universities and immigration out of US is negligible. China and elsewhere people are actively looking for a way westwards.
I think the point about students from China was NOT about whether or not US based Chinese students go to the UK for college- it was about the level of their preparation for U vs. that of US students. This isn’t a debate about which educational system is better- but there is no question that a college bound student in China is taking MUCH more math and science (and at a more rigorous level) than the college bound US student. So aspiring to hit the minimum level required by a UK university ignores reality- most overseas students at LSE and Imperial have far exceeded the minimum-- and performed exceptionally well. They aren’t “hardworking but not the top” student at their HS- they ARE the top student!
I am puzzled by the doors you think will be open to a US citizen studying in the UK vs. that same US citizen studying in the US- even at one of the universities you disdain.
Nobody would argue about the value of a top Canadian University. But you aren’t asking about Canada- you are asking about the UK and specifically about these two U’s.
I don’t “disdain” them. The question is what is better value for money? My opinion is $80k a year for a lower tier US university is not worth it. One is better off going abroad for their undergraduate degree and saving the money. And then doing a masters in the US.
We agree- I would not have paid full price for a “lower tier” private US university either- although I suspect my tiers are a lot bigger than yours because my be-all and end-all is academic/intellectual rigor, not rankings. But that’s why a state flagship was my kids safety school-- guidance counselor assured us it was 100% guaranteed for admissions, and we could 100% afford it. And it had the educational quality (if not the magazine “prestige”) far better than the list of schools the guidance counselor deemed safeties.
I’ve seen too many students head overseas with “not great” outcomes to have ever considered that. And paying for a four year U in the USA AFTER paying for a not great first year at a UK university was not going to happen on my dime. I know people who have done it- but wasn’t my plan.
These two things don’t follow from one another. There are plenty of US options that cost less than $80K per year, including your instate public. There was no way we would have been willing to pay $320K for any university. If you don’t want to pay that much then don’t.
For my kid, three years at Oxford would have been about the same as four years in-state at UCLA or Berkeley. If he’d got into Oxford he would have gone. But there wasn’t another U.K. university (not even LSE, which actually costs more than Oxford due to the expense of living in London) that was better value and had better post-college outcomes than our domestic options. And going to college here didn’t require the added expense of a masters degree to get a job.
Most financial aid in the US is need based. We won’t be getting anything for sure. So effectively I will have to foot the full bill for a lower tier university….if it’s NYU or something that can potentially open doors I don’t mind. There are non Ivy League schools I would consider as worth it.
But below a certain point I think it’s just better to go abroad, get your undergraduate degree and save the money for a down payment on a home. If it works out great, else come back and do a masters in the US.
I do think LSE and Imperial are top notch and better than most US universities.
This. There is a 2 year visa you can apply to on graduating a UK uni (which will cost around £2000) so the initial visa issue is dealt with, but you still have to be a top student at that uni (also competing with Oxford, Cambridge etc) to get that job in the first place (goes to preparation vs others), and then you have to be a top performer to get that company to consider sponsoring you for a visa afterwards… all against the background of IB being a shrinking sector in the UK. So that’s a lot of “ifs”, starting with the if of being accepted to a highly competitive program in the first place - I am still confused as to why OP thinks this would be significantly easier for someone with his son’s profile in the UK than the US, for all the already reasons mentioned earlier. He seems to think meeting the minimum requirements is enough, but that’s not at all the case. But by all means let him shoot his shot.
I would very happily pay full out of state tuition for UC Berkeley.
We don’t live in California though. So if the choice is between in state tuition at UCONN and LSE then it’s a no brainer. King College, University of Toronto, UBC, McGill, etc…
OP has posted in another thread that his son has “90th percentile” on math SAT. College Board has this as 650. On the face of it it would seem meeting these requirements /doing well on TMUA would be difficult?
Potential work visa issues in the UK are noted. I see a masters degree as pretty much a requirement. If it doesn’t work out though the option of doing a masters in the US exists and would provide a gateway into the US job market. In fact an LSE or Imperial degree should help get into a top US school for masters!
Only if he has done very well there. Otherwise it is not any better than a very good degree from any of what you consider the lower-ranked US colleges. A 2/1 is not going to get him into a top masters in the US.