AIBU to ask what is better for undergrad economics? Cambridge or LSE?

[downtonabbeyfan1234]

If MNHQ want to move this to higher education that is fine with me.

Fortunate that DS has offers from both unis and I know they are both excellent (no issue cost wise with us thankfully). Anyone has any information as to what has the better undergrad course?

We've both looked at as much info as we can online. Apparently LSE has a new economics curriculum (and that interests DS very much) but Cambridge has a mix of maths and essays. Rankings wise Cambridge is higher up in the UK subject rankings but LSE is higher up in the global rankings for economics. If anyone has any DC currently doing economics, relaying their thoughts would be great.

I know that Cambridge is excellent but DS has heard of some cases where people turn down their Cambridge offer to go to LSE.

They're both excellent for economics, surely? (Have friend whose DC applied to both.)

I get the impression that for Economics LSE has 'equal' kudos with Cambridge so staying in the field the 'uplift' you might usually get from the Cambridge name probably wouldn't be relevant.

What about the London v Cambridge living?

@TeenPlusCat we can help DS with living costs for both. DS likes the Cambridge/college grounds a bit more and says they feel more homely than LSE. But he also feels London as a city is more exciting and has more 'stuff' going on.

I can't see that having attended either is going to be a disadvantage! Do employers really decide they're going to give preference to graduates of one over the other?

If he can't decide from what's in the courses, perhaps think about whether he would prefer London/Cambridge as a place, or things like facilities for hobbies, etc.

The LSE course is better regarded but a relative is a graduate of this course and wishes he had gone to Cambridge due to the networking opportunities.

What DS has heard from people is that at LSE there is a heavy culture of people just applying for banking internship after banking internship.

DS currently has no idea what job he wants to do and just wants to study a subject he likes.

LSE is super competitive (I remember students taking razors to cut pages out of books), think the library used to be open 24/7 at one point too. Also would he rather live in London or Cambridge? Tbh I would go with Cambridge as a more welcoming and student-centric town, class structure v good, very easily accessible sports and clubs, campus on a pretty site and he might meet a wider range of people (more disciplines in Cam), he can always move to London later.

They’re both great.
DS needs to do a pros/cons list (or just a list of positives) and decide what he wants to prioritise out of all of this eg pp mentions networking.

I should say, three I know from LSE all vaguely wanted to do academia to begin with… within a term had focused on getting those all important banking internships. Fast forward a few years and all completely corporate in banks, no plans of leaving. Not sure if that’s an LSE thing. Two regret going to uni in London though.

Depends on the type of economics surely? If he wants to study development then I don’t think you can get better than SOAS if you actually want a good job at the end of it. LSE is extremely good if you like econometrics & want to work in finance / build mathematical based models for a living - it’s location is particularly useful if he wants to take short contract jobs in the city during the holidays. A nephew of mine is earns 600/day doing economics research for a major bank during Christmas / Summer. It’s not an internship or a grad scheme but a proper job. Something he got by developing his own investor insights webpage.

Both will give him a very high quality education and a very well respected degree. He should choose on the environment, lifestyle and teaching style, which would all be very different.

(I'm an academic economist)

LSE is great but I would pick Cambridge. It opens many more doors.

@Backstreetsbackalrightdadada might I ask why they regret going to uni in London? I know LSE has quite a few commuters. DS would obviously be in LSE halls (if he choses LSE).

DS has worries about the 'brutality' of the Cambridge term lengths. From what he has heard (at least in Year1) there are essays due every week AND mathematical problem sets. He is worried he'd have little free time to enjoy being at Cambridge. Is it actually that bad? Or more of a case of 'just manage your time well'?

I am a maths-heavy STEM academic and I agree with @irregularegular, he really cannot go wrong. It comes down to a set of preferences about curriculum, location and lifestyle.

However I find it interesting that your DS is concerned that C might be more brutal. I share the impression of @Backstreetsbackalrightdadada that LSE is super competitive. As for reputations, the C name will generate more respect at posh parties, but within relevant professional spheres LSE has at least an equal reputation

Isn't C known for academic rigour and also the shorter term lengths? Is LSE competitive on academics itself (as in the course material) or more so on the 'lets get into banking' job application side?

He should definitely go to Cambridge. The terms are short and intense but most students there find time to have lots of fun, too, and the range of societies and things to get involved in is brilliant. The college experience is special, the city is gorgeous, and he can experience big city living for the rest of his life if he wants. Don't hesitate!

Thank you all for your help. DS is now thinking of perhaps doing his masters at LSE (if he feels further study is for him) in a way to 'get the best of both worlds'. Experiencing Cambridge and LSE.

Son went to Cambridge, DiL went to LSE, Neither did economics, but here is what they've told me:
LSE's undergrad population is relatively small so socially it can be a bit isolating. Cambridge will be more fun! DiL always said it would be better to be a post grad at LSE.
LSE grads however have at least as good job prospects as Cambridge grads. They always top employability tables. This is possibly however because they don't do subjects like English which are notoriously not great for employability!

Definitely go to Cambridge.

LSE has a better choice of specialist economics modules [e.g. labour economics etc] and if you take the very hardest available options at each step it's a overall harder, more rigorous course, that gets you a little closer to PhD research. The Cambridge base course used to be way tougher than the LSE base course [i.e. if you chose all the easiest options] but this is a lot less true now - quite far into the 1990s it was possible to get onto LSE's BSc (Econ) without A level maths even, whereas now you need an A* .

Cambridge still has the tutorials/bits of small group teaching, but I'm not sure how valuable some of this is. Cambridge has loads more marked work/essays, which is a bit of a mixed blessing. Cambridge gives out more 1st class degrees and probably puts you at a small edge applying for funded postgrad courses and a slightly bigger edge applying for city jobs etc.

Cambridge is much cheaper [often possible to 'live in (halls)', paying for 24 week academic years only, which is a fair bit harder at LSE].

Being in London, LSE is that bit closer and more convenient for city job interviews & so on [though a fair bit of early round stuff does happen on man university campuses].

Social life at both is fairly dire by UK undergraduate standards. LSE is smallish & so dominated by foreign students and/or non-WASP types who don't drink etc that the modest number of white British undergrads end up mostly knowing each other & hanging around the one union bar loads. The lack of arts etc students generally means less interesting/diverse people. Cambridge is bigger and college centric, most kids there are so either bookish or hooray-ish, and the workload's so great, that there's not really a normal social scene in the way that you're recognise it from a modern campus university.

Overall I'd recommend Cambridge, on account of the lower cost and higher prestige.

DS also has an offer for economics at Nottingham and he does feel his social/party life would be better there. But he is hesitant to chose Nottingham as he thinks he would be making a mistake career wise and missing out on having a 'world-renowned' university on his CV. I've told him that Nottingham grads still do well.

If he wants to be a top academic and do a PhD in the US, the LSE course may be better. Otherwise, Cambridge every time. Job-wise, there's nothing in it, but the social life and experience at Cambridge would be much better.

Nottingham the town is a dump, however, and no match for the historic beauty of Cambridge or the multicultural metropolis of London.

Students have a laugh wherever they are.

I think your idea of Cambridge for undergrad and LSE for postgrad is ideal.

London is sprawling and there’s very little community in the big London universities as there’s no campus. Cambridge for sure. He will
have closer friends, there’s more investment pastorally. The name also means more internationally for an undergrad course. LSE is mainly lots and lots of foreign students working hard with no hobbies.

(UCL undergrad, Oxford postgrad, many of my friends did the opposite).

Nottingham is a terrible idea.

After chatting with DS he seems very excited about Cambridge now. He was considering LSE as it too is a good uni for economics. In the virtual offer holder days senior members in the economics dept say 'LSE is better for economics. We rank higher on global statistics'.

@rainyskylight mind I ask why you are against Nottingham (and what you studied? (Was it social science related?) Did you enjoy oxford more than UCL?