<p>I was thinking of applying to Durham, Imperial and St. Andrew’s. I’m not saying I would go or that I would get in to them, but I was just wondering what the general benefits of attending those 3 are. Is there any international recognition? (I can’t get into Oxbridge, definitely.)</p>
<p>SAT II: (really bad)
730 U.S. History
700 Literature</p>
<p>GPA: 3.7 cumulative, unweighted
Upward slope since Freshman year: 3.5 to 3.9/4.0 junior year</p>
<p>Positions:
Internship at a publication
Editor-in-chief of newspaper
Club officer, Model UN
Non-leadership positions in these clubs: Track, Cross Country, Peer Mentors, School Ambassador</p>
<p>So yeah, I was just wondering if someone could realistically tell me my shot and what the benefits of such schools are.</p>
<p>In the UK:
Cambridge/Oxford, Imperial, UCL, LSE have the most international reputation by a long shot.</p>
<p>Durham and St. Andrews then have good reputation, alongside fairly equivalent universities like Warwick/Edinburgh.</p>
<p>What course are you planning on applying for? Imperial obviously only really does the sciences.</p>
<p>Also, UK universities (the elite ones for sure) don’t really care about stuff which you’ve mentioned, like Model UN, Editor of a paper etc. Perhaps it might be relevant for an English/Politics application but even then the top 5-10 would prefer an academic focus.</p>
<p>Firstly you need to decide on a subject you are applying to study (effectively your major. Usually called a course in the UK). Then look for the international admissions requirements for that course. ECs are usually irrelevant unless highly specific and academic. Admission is mostly based on grades and ideally you need APs or IB.</p>
<p>Durham and St Andrews are small rural places. Imperial college is in London, population 8 million. Are you looking for a city environment or not?</p>
<p>Your SAT subjects are NOT really bad, they are really good. If you can get THREE SAT subjects at 700 or above, it would be worth applying to Oxford or Cambridge. But I think most UK colleges or unis wouldn’t be interested in your “US history”. If you want to study U.S. history, you should probably stay in the U.S. (And your SAT I is also high enough for Oxford/Cambridge)</p>
<p>If you have to ask what the point of going to college/uni in the UK is, maybe it isn’t right for you.</p>
<p>They really are looking at completely different things from U.S. admissions.</p>
<p>My son attends St Andrews. He has met kids from all over the world, something he would not have experienced at the University of Florida.</p>
<p>In the UK, you must basically decide on a major immediately, and you don’t get to take many elective courses.</p>
<p>Also, the story is that it is a bit easier to get into UK universities, because they want American tuition. Similar to your applying to an out of state, state university.</p>
<p>You are absolutely right, floridadad. A UK school will want you to specialize as soon as you start there (even before, because they expect you to tell them what you are going to be “reading” (majoring in) when you apply). So they are absolutely NOT interested in EC’s that have nothing to do with that subject. They are not looking for “well-rounded” applicants.</p>
<p>For some people applying to UK schools may be easier, but others will find it more difficult to take all the necessary tests (APs or SAT subject tests, which most American college students have NOT taken), or will find it difficult to commit to a single subject right away.</p>
<p>I’m from the London and although admissions aren’t as dependent in the UK as they are in the US, they are still pretty important. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to get into uni over here because there are a lot of people achieving the top grades so now you always hear about how we need to do ECs to make you stand out</p>
<p>Westwardbound, do you think that UK colleges and unis are now looking at extracurriculars that are completely UNRELATED to the subject the applicant wants to read? A typical college-bound American is going to have a whole list of irrelevant extracurriculars “Well, I was in the band, and a cheerleader, and I played sports, and had the lead in the school play . . .” Is a British college or uni going to want to hear about stuff like that from an applicant who wants to read, say, engineering?</p>
<p>At an American high school I attended, a group of kids got together and started a club they called the “PSI club”, the Greek letter Psi, which they believed had something to do with mind. None of them really knew what this club was for, because they started it just so they all could list one more extracurricular on their college application.</p>
<p>Please provide some links showing any evidence that any UK makes any admittance decisions based on any non-work experience ECs.</p>
<p>We all know some courses like medicine require practical work experience in that area of study. Plus we all know that by some amazing co-incidence a large number of Olympic rowers obtain admittance to Oxbridge. But other than that, ECs in the American sense of spending all your free time doing competitive activities so you look good for colleges are worthless in UK admissions. </p>
<p>There was even an article on the BBC website a year or so ago about this very subject (an Oxford admissions tutor saying students should stop wasting their time writing about their ECs on the UCAS form).</p>
<p>I was at a university talk at my college and the admissions officer said that the uni’s are looking for well rounded students (just like they do in the US) and they want you to talk about your EC’s as long as you describe how they will help you with the course so you could include that your leadership position has given you confidence to be able to talk to a group of people and shows that you have good team work skills.</p>