Imperial College, what's it really like?

[amirrorimage]

Ideally I would prefer my DCs to make evidence-based decisions for their university choices rather than from whims and possibly unfounded rumours (most arising from classmates with no direct knowledge of places). I realise that I may be fighting a losing battle though.
Imperial College is a bit of a dilemma. My DC applied there for physics without going for an open day. Recently had interview (which did not go badly) liked the interviewer but put off for several reasons. The first is that the tutorial groups are of 20 facilitated by one senior academic and one PhD student. DC is from a state school with very large sixth form classes for the maths and science so would really like smaller tutorial groups at university (as well as good quality academic teaching of course)
The second reason ars the rumours about the lack of social life at Imperial backed by the interview group being almost all international students (with international sounding American accents).
Has anybody got anything positive or reassuring to say about IC?

amirror I have a PhD in physics and can honestly say the standard of student IC produces is far above that of many other universities (I didn't go to Imperial). If your DC is mainly concerned about having an excellent social life while doing a degree in physics and/or the size of a tutorial group (which can vary widely throughout the same university) I would perhaps say that physics isn't for them. This may be a little unpopular to say but such a degree is really challenging with lots of labs to attend while many other students studying other degrees have a larger amount of free time. If the experience of uni is just as important than the quality of degree they seek then perhaps another degree subject should be considered? Is your DC a girl? It goes without saying that there are hardly any girls that do physics also so this will also impact upon the types of socialisation/friendship groups that can be formed when studying this subject any any university but especially an elitist one such as imperial.

Thanks
kateblackham certainly the survey statistics (as shown here www.imperial.ac.uk/admin-services/strategic-planning/statistics/nss/nss2016/physics/)
particularly for feedback and academic support are rather bad for Imperial This would be explained by the UG tutorial system being a low priority for the department.

trippingoverrainbow I am sure that physics at IC is an intensive course but students in other time intensive courses, for example medicine at any university or Cambridge natural sciences, work hard but that does not prevent sociability, both during and outside course hours. My DC is not bothered by the intensity of the course but whether the stories of many students not coming out of their rooms or being hard work to talk to are true. The male to female ratio is a fact for any physics course but that is already the case for sixth formers.

The male to female ratio is a fact for any physics course but that is already the case for sixth formers.

This is not entirely true. There are variations in the gender ratio between different UK physics courses. A lot of foreign students come to study physics in the UK. In many other countries physics is much more valued than in the UK and the gender ratio is not as bad as at it is for us at physics A level. So, courses with more international students can often have better gender ratios than those with more home students.

(There are countries where approximately half of physics undergraduates are female. This puts to rest the argument that women simply don't want to do physics or aren't capable and shows that it is predominantly cultural factors that put women in the UK off physics.)

Good point user721, however in sixth form the ratio of male:female is decreased slightly by girls doing physics despite not wanting to do it as a degree. From what my DC says the ratio for FM is higher than that for physics. UG admissions for physics at IC is ~20% female (just checked from online FOI data). That is certainly no more than at DC's sixth form despite IC's international intake.

I hope Trippingoverrainbows just meant that physics is hard work with a lot of lab hours. Any suggestion that you can't have a social life and enjoy university AND study an intensive subject at an elite university would be just plain rubbish. Presumably we are all agreed that an 'excellent social life' does not mean spending all day shopping and all and every evening clubbing.

Dustylaw I would think that even those doing the 'slacker' degrees would find it hard to fit in that sort of 'excellent social life' .

Wow first and last time I post on something like this...why is everyone so angry?!
Of course I am not suggesting that someone that studies a 'tough' subject will have zero social life but it is important to be realistic.

why is everyone so angry?!

Sweeping, long out of date generalisations?

I too have a PhD, I work in a university and I don't recognise the stereotypes that you described.

I guess this just further highlights the different experiences at different institutions. This was my experience and experiences I learned about from others I did my PhD with. Unfortunately not out of date I'm afraid as I completed my PhD only a few years ago.

You can't get angry because others don't have the same opinion as you. Perhaps your experience is the reason you still work at a Uni whereas I do not.

Anyway I'm sure the OP didn't intend for others to hijack the post by having a virtual argument so I am bowing out.

trippingoverrainbows you are right, it is important to be realistic about any degree. It is also important to know that the adage of work hard play hard is perfectly possible for many doing intensive degrees.
I would say that the experiences of what else can be fitted in for socialising outside course hours during something like a physics degree or medicine or natural sciences will vary according to a student's ability plus ambitions. If students have to put in far more hours of private study as they are consistently at the limit of their comfort zone or because they maintain a 16 hour work ethic then they won't be appearing for societies or sport or even a quick drink. Possibly IC has more of these type of students than similarly intensive courses elsewhere.

I gave up ages ago, essentially at the point where views seemed to be based on a one poster's experience of a DD studying fashion at a completely different college, and her other DD's experience of having nothing in common with a Chinese roommate somewhere completely different.

I sort of get what tripping is saying.

It depends on what you want from University.

Imperial/other top London colleges are truly fantastic if you want, either,

a) to get completely engaged in your subject. Lots of really interesting things going on, lots of very bright peers, and fantastic opportunities to develop interests (including a good programme of language and philosophy/humanities type supporting courses).

b) you want an internationally recognised degree, that will open lots of career doors.

It is probably not the place to go if you want a trad English University experience, and/or are not a self starter. There is a wider issue about marginal STEM students who struggle to make the step up to University level work, but I suspect it applies less at selective Universities, especially those who have not been through the fairly brutal tutoring regimes sometimes found in East Asia.

I first started posting on this board, because I felt it was sad that students might be discouraged from taking the opportunities London colleges have to offer because of the views of a few posters.

It really is horses for courses.

DS has been very happy at LSE. His idea of hell would be a traditional freshers week. Instead he is happy attending the astonishing array of public lectures and talks, voluntary seminars etc (at some point everyone worth listening to will pass through London) with his friends, be active in a couple of societies, do some sport, and head off to China Town with friends. He works very very hard, but he wants to. In retrospect he feels LSE was better for him than Cambridge (not that he had the choice) because he has been able to specialise a lot more. He is more than happy with the support he has had with the Economics UG tutor, from whom he has good individual advice on course choice and his Masters application. He suggests she is equally engaged, though less popular, with those who need to raise their game. The international aspect does not bother him. In part because students come from everywhere and "the Chinese" are a pretty diverse group, but also because his friendship group tends to be based on shared interests, mainly subject and society, rather than nationality.

In short he is having a world class educational experience, which is what he wanted from University. This appears equally true for his close friend, and also his cousin, who are both at Imperial.

Imperial is relatively well off. It is generally able to offer better accommodation for first years, and has better sports facilities. League tables have caused London Universities to look closely at their student satisfaction rates and do what they can to improve them. London is expensive, but students do find ways to live cheaply. It may seem overwhelming for a first year, but others can find themselves stir crazy in a third or fourth years at Warwick (waiting at the bus stop in Leamington Spa), Bath or St Andrews. I get those posters who did not enjoy their time in London. However, many years ago, London was the right place for me.

I hope people don't consider Imperial as an option based on previous posts. It really is the sort of place where the right student will meet "their people". But equally it is worth giving some thought to what you want from University, and factoring that as well as League Tables into any decision.

(And fwiw, both LSE and Imperial have their work-hard play-hard types. I understand that pre-loading for the annual LSE Athletics Union bash started at breakfast.)

Needmoresleep your posts are always great for sharing your experience.
I would agree with a) and b) from all the info that has been gathered here and now from second hand info from present students at IC. I also think that 3- 4 years in an insular location can become restrictive and London will never have that problem.

I would qualify a few points though that you have made as there is IMO a bit of positive spin in what you say.

IC is generally able to offer better accommodation for first years -possibly but at the price of 30-40 minutes commuting and potentially being based in West Acton. Not a deal breaker but to be aware of. Ditto for commute time to sports grounds.

League tables have caused London Universities to look closely at their student satisfaction rates and do what they can to improve them. I have been around for too long to believe positive generic sound bites from university management which are often not backed up by resources and better organisation. Only time will tell if improvement is actually happening. NSS is a very blunt tool but it will be interesting to see (in this case for IC physics) what the scores are for 2017.

The international aspect does not bother him. In part because students come from everywhere and "the Chinese" are a pretty diverse group, but also because his friendship group tends to be based on shared interests, mainly subject and society, rather than nationality. The latter part of that is a tad sanctimonious. I don't think that you will find very many young people basing their friendship group on nationality in university environments. However if students don't turn up to societies or for a drink or a meal or mainly talk in their own language that does create barriers.

Just to complete, I don't think you can group London universities together with IC with regards its reputation of being less sociable. UCL and King's for example have the reputation of being lively as well as international.

Mirror Image. I suspect we don't disagree much.

I have been clear that my experience is LSE which in many ways has a similar profile to Imperial. (And DS' degree probably has as many maths courses.) I agree KCL and UCL are different, almost certainly because of the wider range of courses. Even when I was at the LSE, back in the dark ages, I was the only UK student on my course. The rest were overseas. LSE current reputation is of being stuffed with would-be investment bankers. If anything duller than Imperial engineers.

My understanding is that Imperial is richer than other London colleges so can offer more social facilities. I know LSE have prioritised student facilities, the new Saw Swee Hock centre, because of their concerns about their dire student satisfaction rates. The Imperial sports facilities DD used to use are fab. So I think there is action/substance behind the generic sound bites.

I guess 30 minutes commute does not strike me as unreasonable. It is common for London school children. And less than students at, say, Warwick, expect. The great thing about transport in London is the frequency.

I also did not mean to be sanctimonious. I was essentially responding to a post up thread which suggested that Asians 'very much stuck together' unless they were 'stonkingly rich'. This has not been DS' experience, and I am glad you agree that most University students would not expect to base friendship groups on nationality. (To the extent there is a problem, it seems to be with mainland Chinese, who presumably have had less exposure to the West and whose English skills are less good, and the French, who see South Kensington as an extention of Paris.) The hugely international environments of both Imperial and LSE really are a positive, though like London itself, have the potential to be initially overwhelming for some.

his friendship group tends to be based on shared interests, mainly subject and society

This is unusual. isn't it? In many Universities, students find that friendship groups are based on location - i.e. the people they shared Halls with in first year.
I advised my DC to choose Halls that were large enough to have a big pool of possible future mates, but not so large that they would be a nameless/faceless statistic.

Senua, I don't know. Perhaps one difference in London is that many students live at home, and late night transport is so much better, so it is more normal to be involved in campus things. Perhaps also because of the diversity, you are more likely to find your folk through societies, even if it is the rugby club.

DS was unlucky in that in his first year he was allocated a place in a large "nameless/faceless" inter-collegiate Hall (LSE , Imperial and UCL all guarantee accommodation for first years even if they live within the M25, KCL does not). If he had been in an LSE hall he probably would have made friends there. I was, and did, though one of my friends was part of a very bonded group of netball players who are still close many years on.

It did not matter, as the University is very accessible, the library is open 24 hours a day, and there are plenty of active and sociable societies. (The main activity of one seems to be a weekly dinner in China Town.) Societies often share events or compete with other London Universities, or take advantage of things happening in London, using negotiated student/group discounts. In his first year DS also "belonged" to an Imperial society where a school friend was a member.

In short I suspect that London may tougher in the first year than somewhere like Warwick, and perhaps individual Universities do not have the range of facilities. However second and third years can be better, as you are not off-campus in the same way, things happen at the University, transport is good and London is your oyster.

And things are getting better. LSE now has a student centre, and boasts that they have the best student disco in London, and Imperial has some great student facilities. The difference is that you may need to find things rather than simply tag along with flatmates, but for the sort of young adult who thinks happy hour in the nearest student dive is their idea of hell, London offers a huge choice and fewer expectations of conformity.

Are all first years at Imperial now accommodated at their new Acton site?

Ha ha Needmore

"LSE now has a student centre, and boasts that they have the best student disco in London"

Off topic but I was at UCL in the early 80s and LSE had the best disco (Friday Nights) then, let alone now.

I realise that is not entirely helpful OP - apologies, but it looks like you are researching this all ways round, so one slightly chatty post won't matter .

jeanne no they are not but I think students will not necessarily get their first choice.

Basilik this thread has certainly provided all sorts of bits and pieces on London student life so your post fits into the historical context contribution category. .

Coming to this thread late, my limited but current experience backs up the Felix article linked upthread, that the key to a decent social life at Imperial is to focus on the societies. Either find one that fits your interests, and hence where you're likely to find like-minded people, like the world class ICSF group, or join a sports/having fun society which is mainly focussed on general socialising.

For a variety of reasons, geographical, demographic and possibly even related to over-representation of people on the ASD spectrum, this is a much more effective way of making friends for life at IC than the approach traditional in other universities of just buddying with the people who happen nearest to you (in tutorial groups or halls of residence). It gives you structure and a solid incentive to trek across London on a wet Tuesday evening.

Speaking here as someone who went to another university and is still good friends with twenty friends from societies but literally cannot remember the names of any of my hall co-residents, housemates or tutorial partners.

Mirror, so possibly slightly more helpful, my DS said - you pretty much know how prestigious Imperial is. And so does your son. If he is really worried about his time there then look again. It is one thing getting a place, it is another to spend 3 / 4 years there. If it takes this much time and effort to make him believe he could be happy at IC - then perhaps look somewhere else. No University IMHO gets you a free pass to success. You need to go to one where you will be happy. If what he wants is Imperial but the sense of a University which offers a wide range of Science / Arts degrees (e.g. UCL , Oxford , others etc ) it's trying to square a circle. At some point he just needs to decide. Again , probably not helpful. But realistic.

Thanks Basilik I agree with you but DC has n't been putting much though into it TBH, probably will do after mocks but at least then there will be plenty of information from everybody's input here [ and hopefully for others having the same dilemma.

I have to take issue with this "for the sort of young adult who thinks happy hour in the nearest student dive is their idea of hell, London offers a huge choice and fewer expectations of conformity." My child has friends at both Imperial and UCl, medical student transfers from Cambridge. The ones at Imperial complain of the drinking culture at sporting societies and the pressure they experience when they refuse to join in.

Not all universities mean living far from campus after the first year (Birmingham springs to mind or Exeter) and most university towns have student ghettos so your friends are likely to still be nearby. London is a different sort of student experience and while those raised in London may thrive on it others may be so unhappy they leave and start again elsewhere.

Alreadytaken, again I am not sure there is a disagreement. Perhaps the medics you know somehow expected London to be the same as Cambridge.

For whatever reason, perhaps because the rest of student life is relatively party-lite, London sports Societies can be very heavy drinking. This is an example, though I have heard the same of Imperial:

www.theguardian.com/education/2014/oct/09/lse-rugby-club-racism-misogyny

I think I mentioned up thread that this year the pre-loading for the LSE AU annual bash started at breakfast time. DS tried out for one of the 10 football teams, only to discover the top three were on merit and the other seven seemed to be on drinking ability. It did not matter as he was invited to join a seven a side team that played in a Central London league, and joined his friend at Imperial for a non team sport. For the past few years DD, whilst at school, has played for a good London ladies Club team alongside at least one London based student, who presumably preferred Club standards/atmosphere/commitment to that of the University team. (Top University teams can require huge commitment.)

Oxbridge with the college system, good facilities and resources, is able to offer a range of sports at a range of levels. You can also find any sport at any level in London. But not always through your University. Again it is a case of being proactive to find your place and your people.

(Off topic but the AU problem is one that seems to be left to student unions to handle. A pity. Tough on the student unions, tough on those students who want to participate in team sports without the associated drinking culture, and I have heard that sports clubs elsewhere are not immune from boorish behaviour. But easier perhaps than the not unusual experience elsewhere spending your first week alone as your flatmates go out till four every morning to get blind drunk, or having to cope with pot-heads or gamers, who don't seem to know why they are at University. This will happen in London, but a lot of students will be at Imperial to work very hard, and so it is relatively easy, if you are engaged in your subject, to find your people and avoid the partying.)

needsmore the implication of your posts is that there is outside London a drinking culture that doesnt exist in London because they are all terribly sensible and concentrating on their work. It isnt that clear cut. There are students everywhere who want to spend their first year or at least part of it, partying. There are students everywhere who drink to excess and those who work hard.

London can be a very lonely place for those who have not grown up there and perhaps still have friends outside university to draw on.

Off topic but I think the Cambridge students who have moved on do so for a variety of reasons - some believe the clinical training will offer greater variety, some want to experience a different city, some wish to be close to friends or family, for some it may be all of those things. They are the last year to have the choice.