From what I heard from academics that undergrad education in the UK is better for students to develop critical thinking skills but I’ve never understood the reason why.
I’m aiming for Ivies and Oxford, and from what I’ve read (and experienced while working in the UK), England and especially the rest of Europe is not for someone like me - top of that the UK academics I’ve interacted with were super rude and ironically lacked critical thinking skills.
Am I making a mistake if I choose the US over the UK?
UK universities lean more toward immediate specialization to one’s major, and have more emphasis on student self motivation, leading to a high stakes final exam (those in UK high schools may be better experienced for that compared to those in US high schools).
Costs may be significantly different based on your citizenship and residency.
I’m wondering why you are considering applying to Oxford when you have nothing positive to say about the UK academics you have interacted with, who appear to be rude and lack critical thinking skills. I think you are making a mistake in contemplating doing a degree in the UK.
The experience at a UK university is very different and much more self-directed. Your whole grade in a course might be determined by a single test, or a paper you’ll hand in at the end of term. There is a lot less student collaboration overall. If you are just interested in the social aspects of life in the UK, study abroad there.
In addition, you will need to be extremely well prepared for the interview, should you be offered one. Should you get an offer of admission, you also have a good chance of not being admitted to your first choice college, depending on the one you are aiming for. Oxford itself is not particularly cheap. The train to London is expensive. If you apply and get in, be sure you understand that it will be very hard work.
Since academics are my strong suit, I have a better chance in the UK admission cycle. Additionally, I want to study Economics and Political Science, fields in which the UK excels.
I’m sure there are people out there who could make up for the awful experiences I had.
This, along with my desire to study PPE, is why I attended Harvard Summer School and took two introductory political science courses—though one of the visiting academics from Oxford (and other British students) found them useless. They collectively stated that the interview aims to assess a candidate’s teachability rather than their in-depth prior knowledge of the topics.
Thank you. I attend a feeder school in my home country that admits only the top 0.1-0.5% of students, so I understand the value of hard work, from a very early age.
“Teachability” as in the ability of a student to figure things out with some guidance but without handholding, yes. (I have had some long discussions with a Cambridge interviewer on some of his experiences.) This goes back to the point made above about needing to be more independent and self directed, though bear in mind the tutorial system also means there is excellent support at Oxbridge. There is definitely some “education culture shock” for American students in the UK system, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be very successful- if it’s the right environment for them.
To me, the American system seems the more independent one - as in students are on their own journey, it’s up to them if they study a topic in depth or not. The British system reminds me of a surveillance system, not in a bad way, of course, but kinda like a parent who constantly holds their kid’s hands. This is the impression and the vibe I get, but I could be wrong.
US universities do allow for more exploration of academic topics before choosing a major to study in more depth (although some very voluminous majors need to be chosen from the beginning), compared to UK universities.
However, within the context of each course, the UK tends to have less hand-holding and progress monitoring than the US.
Interesting. I always thought that at Oxford, professors are more accessible and you spend a large amount of time with them in tutorials. I imagine you would be on your own even when you stumble on a topic you don’t really get well. It seems like with the tutorial system it’s less likely for students to get behind the schedule.
There’s a difference between the concentration of a topic within a degree structure and the amount of spoon feeding (for want of a better phrase) that students get.
Yes, but tutorials are not spoon feeding/hand holding. Some subjects - and PPE is likely to be one of those - end up requiring a huge amount of work - that has no effect on your grade other than through increased understanding - for tutorials.
To be clear, I’m not trying to say one is the better than the other. I went through college in the UK and my oldest kid has completed a degree in the US. They are just different methods and especially if someone - as you seem to - is not automatically being funneled into one or the other, it’s definitely worthwhile trying to figure out which system suits you better. I would discount stereotyping personalities as part of that decision process however, as you are going to get all sorts anywhere you go.
It sounds like you are at a highly selective feeder school, so I am assuming you have a school counselor who is experienced at comparing students from your country for both of these and can help you figure out which is best for you.
Typically, a freshman at a US college will take 4 courses (generally worth 4 credits each or 8 ECTS) OR 5 courses (generally worth 3 credits or 6 ECTS). This will encompass 3 hours of class, plus sometimes a 2-hour science or language lab (or 2 hours+1h “recitation” or small group class), plus optional “office hours” 1-on-1 with the professor, plus student-led review sessions and study groups, plus any tutoring you wish to arrange. In addition, you have about 2 hours of preparation per credit (reading¬e taking, problem sets, exercises, etc .)
Typically it means 15-18 “contact” hours and as much scaffolding as you wish to have on top. At LACs, classes are small (15-22 people in a class) so professors may get to know you and provide even more support for your personal interests or in case of a problem.
In the UK, there are few “contact hours” - 8-9 would be common for PPE - and most of the work is done independently (reading, etc.) Preparing for A levels prepares students well.
So I think it helps to understand many of the most famous US colleges (and also others less famous, and schools within others, and so on) are part of what is sometimes called the Liberal Arts and Sciences tradition. In this tradition, college still at least starts off as a general education, where the goals are to develop fundamental skills and a broad understanding of many different academic areas. Eventually you do spend more time focusing on a particular area, but even then there may be a lot of emphasis on a broad background within the discipline, interdisciplinary connections, and so on.
Real specialization then comes in graduate or professional school, or indeed training on the job. But the idea is you are supposed to come out of college potentially prepared for a variety of possible next steps.
In its own way, this can produced people as elitist and self-satisfied, aka rude, as any system, including Oxbridge. In fact, this is a fun little illustration coming out of US pop culture:
But I think approached with the right spirit, you are definitely supposed to emerge from this sort of education with very well developed critical thinking skills. But you will typically be something like 1-2 years behind your UK peers in terms of applying those critical thinking skills to some specific discipline, even though your degree took one year longer (outside of Scotland, at least).
Indeed, this is why an equivalent Masters might be just a 1 year program in the UK, versus 2 years in the US. And then professional degrees for law or medicine and such that can be undergrad degrees in the UK are postgrad degrees in the US (so many more years). Just very different systems.
Would Yale EPE would put me behind the Oxford PPE students? Since applying critical thinking skills seem like something I already picked up from my high school.
In this case it might strike you as actually more similar than different. And I think an interdisciplinary subject like this is one of the areas where the UK approach is likely to have the least additional depth, if any really, because that is playing to the strengths of the US liberal arts and sciences tradition.
I note, though, this is a bit of a known problem with PPE-type courses/majors–you might not be as well-prepared for, say, graduate work in any one of those disciplines versus just picking one. In the UK, picking a specific course could really limit your exposure to the other fields, but much less so in the US where often you could potentially choose a secondary major, minor, or just take courses in the other fields.
So fair warning, the US tradition I am discussing, which again includes a lot of the most famous US colleges, is in part based on a real skepticism about how far teenagers can actually get in terms of their general education and intellectual skill development. So, they tend to see even the best educated teenagers as still just part of the way through that process, and they intend to continue that process as an integral part of their educational program.
Of course you are free to disagree with them. So if you think you would really like to be done with all that by the time you finish secondary school, and get straight to a more specialized program, then the US system might be a poor fit for you, and the UK system a better one.
