As Emma Watson receives an offer from Yale, we ask how to go about studying in America...
Hermione Grainger was always top of the class at Hogwarts. But it now seems that Emma Watson, Hermione's alter-ego, is just as brainy as her fictional counterpart. The actress twittered today that she has been accepted into Yale.
She’s not the only Brit contemplating a move across the pond for university. More and more students are intrigued by the possibilities of a liberal arts degree. But many don’t know how to go about it. Emma, it appears, has a difficult decision to make: she's also been offered a place at Cambridge.
Here my friend and colleague Alice Fishburn, who just so happens to be co-author of Uni in the USA, offers her advice on how to go about studying in America:
Problem: Isn’t America prohibitively expensive?
Solution: Although you don’t have to sell an internal organ to pay for four years of tuition, it would certainly help. But what many Brits fail to realise is that the Americans have far more extensive financial aid on offer than we do. Not every college offers a blank cheque to international students but many will have a system in place that allows you to attend without breaking the bank. Call up their financial aid offices, explain your position and see what they might have on offer.
Problem: I don’t know what I want to do at university
Solution: If you’re undecided about college courses, the US is the place to go. The liberal arts system doesn’t demand that their students pick a degree until their second, or even third, year of education. So a major in Middle Eastern art and minor in mathematics is completely possible. Unlike the UK, you apply to the university, not a specific subject.
Problem: Won’t the SATs be too difficult?
Solution: Multiple choice tests do require your brain to change gear. So leave plenty of time to study for the SATS, get a practice book and make sure you do some timed practice tests. You’ll have to do a verbal test, a math test and a series of subject specific exams. Whatever you do, don’t schedule them during a season of A-level stress. Try to get them out of the way beforehand.
Tip for the innumerate: If you’re not so keen on equations, try to take the SAT I as soon after your maths GCSE as possible. If you’re really stuck, Kaplan Centres in London offer tutoring, as do a number of private services.
Problem: There are too many colleges. How do I pick?
Solution: There are thousands of academic institutions to choose from in America so if you can possibly avoid it, don’t apply blind. Narrow it down to your top ten and then persuade a friend or family member to take a road trip. Go and bang on the admissions tutors’ doors. Get them to put you in touch with current students. You might even be able to schedule some interviews while you’re out there. If you've actually seen the place, you’ll have far more of a feeling for it.
Problem: The applications are too difficult
Solution: US college applications make UCAS seem like a walk in the park. Prepare to answer questions on everything from your favourite snack to how you came through an ethical crisis. And leave a lot of time to do so. Every form is different. Every one has its tricks. And each of them requires a good deal of thought.
There’s also a difference in tone. Now is not the time to adopt traditional British reserve. American high school students are taught to sell themselves. You have to do the same. Shove on all those extra-curriculars, the volunteer work you were made to do that holiday and the time you ran a half-marathon for charity. US admissions tutors want it all. Make sure you give it to them.
Looking for more information?
The Fulbright Commission is a good place to start.They hold a USA College day on October 3 where you can ask questions to representatives from the various colleges.
All the details you might need on the SATs.
Make sure you don’t neglect the university websites. They often feature Q and As with current students, interactive tours and all the pointers you could possibly need."
Update: It appears that Emma Watson doesn't actually have a twitter account (oops) and hasn't decided which university to attend at this time (not that we said she had!) Thanks to Duncan at Lazy Student for pointing this out...
Update 2: It looks as if Emma Watson will be going across the Atlantic after all, but to Brown, not Yale. Thanks to all for pointing this out, but the body of the piece still stands - tips on how to study in the USA.
Read School Gate on:
Why do so many American students study in the UK?
As it grows increasingly hard to get a place at a British university, have you thought about studying in the USA?
Selling teeth to pay for college? Just why are American universities so expensive?
Why all the fuss over the new A*?
The best TV shows set in school
The best universities in the world, and why Britain should be proud
Please. I do not know I can elucidate my scorn for the child, so I will just say this: in my opinion, which I am legally entitled to have, is that Emma Watson has received offers from Yale and Cambridge because of her undeserved fame. Her acting skills have deteriorated, based on the 'Potter' films, and I feel that a proportion of Brits are also academically outstanding. Because of the girl's fame, she can more easily gain offers than other, but indeed better, academic brains. Emma, you may feel a certain amount of animosity towards me now, but it really doesn't matter to you, does it, because the condescending manners in you will make you turn your nose up at this comment. I do apologize if I have offended any of Emma's fans who succumbed to her absent-mindedly.
Posted by: Tamanna | 3 Mar 2009 17:56:16
Tamanna, how on earth can you possibly know whether she deserves her place or not? I'm not particularly a fan of Emma's (although I do like the Harry Potter series); but it annoys me when people make judgements based on pure speculation. She may have had an advantage; she may, for all you know, have had a disadvantage. As someone who has attended both Cambridge and Oxford I can promise you there are many admissions tutors who would hate the idea of a "celebrity" in their college. Don't speculate on something you know absolutely nothing about. Leave the girl alone.
Posted by: Graham McManus | 3 Mar 2009 18:30:03
Re Tamanna:
You wouldn't happen to have recently been rejected by Oxbridge/Ivy League/mediocre university, would you? Because there is more than a touch of resentfulness to your tone... :-)
I couldn't agree more with Graham McManus - Watson comes from an extremely bright and successful family, has had an enviable upbringing at one of the best schools in the country, and has handled the entire issue of teenage celebrity outstandingly maturely - yes, I can totally see why she only got in because of her recognition factor.
Best of luck to you - you might be needing it more than she will.
Posted by: Aneirin Williams | 3 Mar 2009 19:02:42
Tamanna, what a wonderfully inadequate command of the English language! I can only assume that you used a hideous online translator. Surely young Emma has worked harder than the rest of us given the enormous amount of time that her film career consumes. Furthermore I have no doubt that she could conjure up a superbly crafted rebuttal herself, so will stand aside. Congratulations, I say.
Posted by: Peter Davies | 3 Mar 2009 20:05:40
Peter: oh, I don't know - I thought 'succumbed to her absent-mindedly' was really rather gorgeous!
I agree with Tamanna. EW is demonstrably beautiful, rich and talented. It's not fair that she should also be clever, so therefore she isn't. Obviously.
Posted by: Cathy | 3 Mar 2009 20:27:29
One option in Britain for those who are not yet decided on what subject to study (but are ready for uni) is the oft-maligned Combined Studies. Different universities organise the courses in different ways, with some more flexible than others, and it pays to shop around for a well-designed course with plenty of options. I know people who have studied Maths, Fine Art and English or History of Art, Spanish and Psychology. Like the American system, you can often choose a major/minor split after the first year, or joint honours. It's a great way to keep breadth, and though some people suggest it's an easier course, studying three subjects is challenging both in terms of flexibility of the brain and time management. It's definitely the equal of traditional courses (but as a Combined Studies graduate I would think so! It's certainly never held me back. I chose a relatively complementary languages/historical studies combination, but more unusual combinations can certainly demonstrate flexibility and breadth of knowledge).
Posted by: LD | 3 Mar 2009 21:02:15
Having experience of both the UK and US university systems, I would strongly recommend that staying in the UK is going to be far more intellectually stimulating.
I have 2 degrees and a masters from good British universities, and also studied for a significant amount of time in a US uni. In every course I took in the US, I was extremely dissapointed about how spoon-fed students are. You are told which book to buy, read a chapter at home per lecture, attend the lecture to have that same chapter read to you and then have a tick the box test on very minimal material. I was never once asked to write an essay or do any external research other than reading the chapter in advance, which would be covered in the lecture anyway...so what's the point?!
In contrast, both degrees I obtained from home were far more focused upon self motivated research. Text books were just back bones which were to be fleshed with external reading and research. I don't remember once having a chapter of a text book read over by a lecturer. All tests were written, as opposed to "tick a,b or c", and I have lost count of the number of essays we had to research and write.
I don't know though. Liberal Arts...it's not a if she'll have to use much brain power with that.
Posted by: Carrie | 3 Mar 2009 23:41:51
I can't say I know much about Emma Watson, either personally or professionally, but she is one of several young actresses who combine their careers with serious academic study (Natalie Portman being perhaps the most famous). Most of them seem to do well and I'm sure she will, too. Good luck to you, Emma! :)
Posted by: Elliot Kane | 4 Mar 2009 00:09:05
come to yale. there will always be oxbridge.
Posted by: stuart gardner | 4 Mar 2009 00:28:35
come to yale. there will always be oxbridge.
Posted by: stuart gardner | 4 Mar 2009 00:30:06
She should go to Cambridge, the Ivies are after all just a shadow and an echo of Oxbridge greatness. :P
And to Carrie, I highly doubt Yale will be like that. Yale has strong undergrad programs that prepare people just was well as the high fliers in Britain, Emma is in a win win situation whatever she chooses.
Posted by: Javal | 4 Mar 2009 00:43:00
Carrie, I have completely opposite impressions on the UK-US university system - and I have both been a student and taught at Ivy League uni's on both continents. I suppose you may have been at a community college in the US, an ivy league institution it cannot have been. US undergraduate students are perhaps less deep in specific disciplines but their overall knowledge far excels that of UK students. US students also - as is commented in the original article - are far better at self presentation and oral skills than their UK counterparts. It is simply not true that multiple choice tests are the norms in the US - they write lengthy essays, exam papers, and are expected to give oral presentations and master a range of audio visual equipment at the same time. So, I welcome Emma Watson's choice of Yale over olde Cambridge - too much up their noses with white, upper class british boys who can't even hold a conversation about the weather with a person of the opposite sex.
Posted by: martha mead | 4 Mar 2009 02:05:09
Generally out of my friends it is obvious that the ones who go to ivy league university in the states are the ones unable to get into the top univeristies in the UK (Oxbridge, UCL, Bristol, Edinburgh etc) but still want to go to a well know and prestigious institution. Thus it may be the case that like we are more accepting of high fee paying American students (st andrews in particular), they welcome the diversity with accepting british students
Posted by: Francesca | 4 Mar 2009 02:20:52
Hmmm. Martha claims to have been a student and to have taught at "Ivy Leagues uni's on both continents". This is worrying, as she seems not to known that the term "Ivy League" is only used of US institutions, and she does not know how to use an apostrophe.
Posted by: David | 4 Mar 2009 02:32:10
I graduated from Yale. It's an international school with students from around the world, both at the undergrad and graduate level. If someone thinks learning at Yale is regurgitated text chapters, that's being a dolt. The OxBridge system has a different focus but different does not mean better and the US system produces vast amounts of original thought and research.
Posted by: jonathan | 4 Mar 2009 04:58:53
"I have both been a student and taught at Ivy League uni's on both continents."
Ha ha ha ha ha!! Of course you have Martha Mead, your comment oozes intelligence!
Posted by: James | 4 Mar 2009 07:34:07
I lecture and conduct seminars at a top British university with plenty of American exchange students. In general, I find that American students are far better at critical thinking, original research, and overall knowledge. In contrast, British students have a better subject-specific understanding.
In terms of international reputation and overall quality the US is far superior to the US. Besides South Asia, a few African countries and perhaps New Zealand, a degree from any top-20/30 American institution is better regarded than those of any top British university, Oxbridge included. In fact, British degrees carry very little weight in regions such as East Asia and Latin America, where the present and future of the international economy are.
In the globalized world we live in, it is a (very) wise investment to study in a top American university. Here in the UK we simply do not have the material and human resources to compete. Not to mention the fact that three-year degrees and one-year masters are only standard here, something that should change if we do not want to fall further behind the US.
Posted by: Albert | 4 Mar 2009 09:11:07
I was interested in the article's comment about US students having to sell themselves on the application form, unlike British students. It was drummed into us over and over again at school that the most important thing on the UCAS form was the personal statement, because it enabled admissions tutors to pick out the best from among the thousands of students applying with the same predicted 3 A grades at A-Level. (This was a while ago, the form may have changed?) If other schools aren't giving their students this priceless piece of advice, that's really sad.
Posted by: Laura | 4 Mar 2009 10:29:29
Martha, your assumption amuses me greatly. I attended a reputble university in the US, not a community college. Are we to think that you believe there are only two forms of higher education institutes in the US? Ivy league and community colleges only? My gosh, you're not that bright, are you?!
The education I received in the US university was, as stated previously, under par when compared to British universities.
I assume that you are lying when you say you have been a student and have taught at "Ivy League" universities in the US and UK, considering that we don't have "ivy league" universities in the UK. Please check your facts before you make a complete fool of yourself again.
One final point from me, my husband actually turned down a phd program in Harvard to attend one in the UK. Why? Because the education system was better for his very specific field of scientific study. That just about says it all.
Posted by: Carrie | 4 Mar 2009 17:07:54
In reply to Graham, Areinin and Peter, you may want to know that I am a mere fourteen years of age. Not that it was obvious to you lot.
This is to Areinin: I'm really flattered that you think I am at an age where I can be declined by a university, so that makes it apparent that my intellect demonstrated with my language is powerful. By the way, I am in NAGTY (National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth). I do not need your luck either.
This is to Peter: You cannot assume that EW has worked harder than the rest of us. Also, I took the hint that you were not impressed by my language. Whether Areinin admits or not, he surely thought I was at the age to have been rejected by a university. This insinuates that my language is highly advanced for my age. Additionally, in my legal opinion, my use of language was far more precocious than that of yours. It is plain that you were unable to understand my complex language thoroughly.
This is to Graham: Did I not make it BLATANT that my comment was my opinion, not fact? Therefore I believe your statement (how on earth can you possibly know) is invalid because you have made it seem as though I stated my opinion as fact.
This is to Cathy: Thank goodness there is at least one, sane human being who has not 'succumbed to her absent-mindedly'. Thanks for your comment, by the by.
Contrarily to my somewhat condescending tone utilised in this comment, I would like to congratulate Graham, Areinin and Peter for been so courageous as to contradict me (in approximately nine years time I am going to be a barrister. This profession demands high skills in arguing).
Posted by: Tamanna | 4 Mar 2009 19:05:16
Tamanna:
Oh dear.
Posted by: Cathy | 4 Mar 2009 19:10:09
Tamanna, Emma Watson probably doesn't really care what you think so there's no point apologising to her. You've obviously been drinking a lot of haterade...and a lot of young people are gifted and talented, they don't feel the need to brag to the world about it online...
Posted by: Lauren | 4 Mar 2009 20:19:56
I don't actually think Tamanna actually apologised to Emma Watson. If I recall correctly she apologised to Emma's fans wha have 'succumbed to her absent-mindedly'.
Posted by: Natasha | 4 Mar 2009 21:13:47
Natasha: It's beautiful, isn't it? You just couldn't make it up. Bless her (him?).
Lauren (urgently): What is this 'haterade', which interests me so strangely? Can I have some?
It's the 'in 9 years I'll be a barrister' that gets me, from a 14-year-old. Why does it make me think of the X-Factor? And just look at the relative timescale! Blimey, my baby's 13. Better get on with it!
Posted by: Cathy | 4 Mar 2009 21:50:29
Oh, right, of course lol. Either way...Tamanna sounds like a right bundle of laughs. I wish I'd been that charming at 14...
Posted by: Lauren | 4 Mar 2009 21:50:39
Tamanna may be able to display a great range of vocabulary with ease, but it's very clear she hasn't yet gained more adult qualities such as humility.
Also, I'd hazard a guess that the reason many other posters thought Tamanna is of a similar (if not older) age to Emma herself is because she referred, condescendingly, to Emma as a child. Simple logic.
Congratulations to Emma.
Posted by: Kat | 4 Mar 2009 21:51:43
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=haterade
there you go cathy!
Posted by: Lauren | 4 Mar 2009 21:53:53
Lauren:
Oh, go on! You know you were!
Posted by: Cathy | 4 Mar 2009 21:57:28
Lauren:
You rotter! What a big disappointment that was for an old lady with a thirst. I hope I can quote you?
Posted by: Cathy | 4 Mar 2009 22:04:52
As someone who went to a US university, sadly just on a one semester exchange, I would advise "Just do it".
Don't worry about the academic standards of the American students which are surprisingly low but be prepared to work, work , work.
Posted by: Ben | 5 Mar 2009 09:00:33
Tamanna:
When you get to uni you will meet original thinkers and people of true intelligence. You will discover that bin men can be smarter than barristers.
IF you really are 14, make sure you take a gap year. Get away from the adults who have filled your poor brain with this corrosive nonsense.
Posted by: judy | 5 Mar 2009 11:15:14
Oh, Tamanna.
I really have no interest in publically shaming a 14 year old, so let's just call this guidance from a grown up to a child.
NAGTY would certainly appear to have succeeded in helping to raise a delightful young man/lady. I would only encourage you to spend more time away from the thesaurus and a little more time on grammar. Also you might consider learning about irony, and perhaps even good old-fashioned humility.
"Additionally, in my legal opinion, my use of language was far more precocious than that of yours. It is plain that you were unable to understand my complex language thoroughly."
I don't know where to begin. Legal? No. Precocious? Quite right! Language? Well done - you have indeed run circles around me.
You may be gifted - I have no idea how many gold stars you got this term. But please don't overestimate the importance of this frankly abysmal institution of which you brag membership. Instead, maybe listen to some loud music with your friends - or gosh maybe even kiss a boy/girl. There won't be much time for that when you're on the Bar.
Posted by: Peter | 5 Mar 2009 15:18:16
Some say that 'bragging' is one method of getting yourself noticed in career life. Anyone remember the barrister on The Apprentice (Nicholas De Lacy-Brown)? Despite the fact he was fired first, he was undoubtably one of the notable candidates.
But... I wish I never even posted a comment. I honestly did not anticipate such a dire reception. I won't, however, allow the likes of you lot to slate me and drag me down disparagingly. That's the attitude, wouldn't you agree?
Posted by: Tamanna | 5 Mar 2009 16:51:21
This is to Peter: I am sorry, but I found it hard to let this slip: 'Legal? No'.
What was my opinion? Illegal?
For the record, I'm bored of commenting on this now.
Posted by: Tamanna | 5 Mar 2009 17:07:27
And to my eternal shame I cannot let "undoubtably" slip by...
Posted by: L | 5 Mar 2009 17:53:19
Tamanna: Dear, oh dear, love ... you're so 'undoubtably' clever that you really thought my earlier post about you was approving? But tell me ... is English your second language? Perhaps we all owe you a huge apology.
And as for that barrister on 'The Apprentice' ... er ... who?? What's he doing these days? Do tell.
Posted by: Cathy | 5 Mar 2009 18:12:02
Tamanna,
I noticed your desire to become a "barrister in 9 years". I myself have just gained pupillage in London, and have had the opportunity to make several observations. One of these is that hopefuls that swan around thinking "I'm good at arguing and getting impassioned so I'll succeed at the Bar" rarely get past the first interview, let alone attain pupillage. Let me tell you now, while you still have the opportunity to change, that your best path to success is humility combined with a calm and rational approach. In a nutshell, never rush rashly into an "argument". Maturity teaches you to always see BOTH sides of the argument, something which you do not currently demonstrate.
Back on topic, my apologies to those uninterested with Tamannagate, I made several good friends at university with American overseas students and researchers. As a medievalist, I came into contact with more than a few. I agree, in this respect, with the views previously posted on depth and field of subject. British Universities - selectively at least - seem to offer a far deeper and concentrated view of subjects, often at the cost of context and wider theory. This may explain why so many American lecturers visit Britain to write theses or books.
Posted by: Mark | 5 Mar 2009 18:24:14
Carrie,
The American university you claim to have attended cannot have been as reputable as you claim; you'd have spat the name out by now. Either way, these are just blog comments so we have no way of knowing who's speaking the truth.
Posted by: Coar | 5 Mar 2009 21:06:29
i'll just fuel tamanna's hate: watson's parents are both lawyers. awwww! precious! AND she's beautiful and young and smart and rich and . . . not tamanna . . .
sorry, i was just expressing my legal opinion ;)
Posted by: Awe Some | 5 Mar 2009 21:14:39
Dear Tamanna,
Several of your comments are highly amusing. I initially thought that English must be your second language, but it seems I was mistaken. In any case, here is a tip for the future:
"This is to Graham: Did I not make it BLATANT that my comment was my opinion, not fact? Therefore I believe your statement (how on earth can you possibly know) is invalid because you have made it seem as though I stated my opinion as fact."
You did indeed make it clear that your initial comment was your own opinion. However, as you yourself point out, it is not based on 'fact' or evidence. Rather, It is based on conjecture and idle speculation. Good lawyers work from the former; idiots work from the latter. Try learning some humility, not to mention the English language, if you want to succeed as a Barrister.
Posted by: Graham McManus | 6 Mar 2009 18:40:31
David,
"Hmmm. Martha claims to have been a student and to have taught at "Ivy Leagues uni's on both continents". This is worrying, as she seems not to known that the term "Ivy League" is only used of US institutions, and she does not know how to use an apostrophe."
While you are correct that the Ivy League refers to only American institutions, you incorrectly assert that Martha misused an apostrophe: she was merely contracting the word "universities", so the use of a comma is perfectly justifiable.
One could also reasonably claim that you do not know how to use the copy and paste functions, as evinced by your failing to identically copy a rather short section of Martha's post. But we wouldn't want to be petty now, would we?
Posted by: K | 7 Mar 2009 03:22:22
This is to Cathy and Graham: I am Tamanna's twin sister. I am equally as intellectual but only use 'big' words to those who appreciate the splendour of vocabulary. So I'll give it to you straight- English is our second language, and I do not laud the way you and many others have slated a 14 year old. And humility? I rather think many of the comments ooze arrogance.
Posted by: TISHA | 7 Mar 2009 10:27:54
Tisha: As I said earlier, if English is T's second language I'm happy to apologise.
But she (and you) might like to know that, generally speaking, 'big' words are best used sparingly, when exact and elegant alternatives do not exist. The promiscuous use of grandiose language, like that of jargon, betrays a desire to show off ;)
Posted by: Cathy | 7 Mar 2009 17:04:56
If that's an apology, it's accepted... And please forgive me for trying to expand my writing skills when all I am trying to do is practice for my early entry GCSE exams. Now that would be such a crime, especially when typical teenagers of today now be getting drunk with their friends and participate in rounds of happy-slapping.
Posted by: TISHA | 7 Mar 2009 18:06:55
Sorry, my comment below seems to contain a grammatical error. But that only proves that my sister and I are human... I do not 'eat dictionaries' (quoted from classmates) or read old literature which a 14 year old wouldn't find interesting... On the contrary, I have unexplainable obsessions with couture ad campaigns and Brangelina. I hope to see many of you people (Cathy, Graham and Peter) on other articles around Times Online.
Posted by: TISHA | 7 Mar 2009 18:27:35
Although you, Graham, and many others may not realise it, I am actually gaining a feeling of satisfaction rather than humility. This is the case because you and several others are spending your valuable time profoundly analysing my comments- valuable time on a 14-year old who you all seem to hate! Graham, everyone is allowed to have their own opinions, whether based on fact or not. Besides, it is not as if I am going to put forward my comments in court, is it? In the future, maybe, but I would have you know that I wrote my first comment in the time space of five minutes and did not expect such a response. The purpose of my comments are to gain practice in writing skills for upcoming exams. Conversely to the attitude you seem to get from me, I would like to thank you in giving me the opportunity to argue and stand by my point, dare I say, proficiently. Can I rest my case now?
Posted by: Tamanna | 7 Mar 2009 18:56:40
Tamanna is clearly a prat of the highest order.
I dislike priggish teenagers with ideas of intellectual superiority.
However, as she seems to think, it is not hatred which causes me to comment; it is merely the desire to laugh long and hard at how pitifully she expresses herself.
Proficient, I think not.
Her grammar is appalling. Not quite so precociously intelligent as she would have us believe.
Her insistence on American spelling, for example 'apologize', shows someone who is not sufficiently careful about remembering what side of the Atlantic she is on, which is a pity.
Pride in intellect is one which is very easily deflated, and is always superseded by an attitude of pleasant willingness to learn. Tamanna has demonstrated (in her comments so far) that she neither feels that she has much more to learn, or that, perhaps, her opinions are not partciularly worth voicing.
Of course everyone has the opportunity to speak their mind; we do not live in a restrictive dictatorship. However, that is not the defining factor in whether to voice an opinion or not. The real test is deciding if one's opinion is sufficiently valuable to public knowledge to let it be known. If not, it is better by far to keep it gracefully to oneself, and retain dignity.
Kudos to Emma Watson, who has never disgraced herself in the British media, and has been an ideal ambassador of British youth from the beginning of her fame. I hope she succeeds in university as well as she has already done as an actress.
Posted by: Kathryn | 7 Mar 2009 20:13:27
Apologies for spelling errors in my previous comment; I did not take sufficent care in spell-checking it manually.
Posted by: Kathryn | 7 Mar 2009 20:16:20
"because you and several others are spending your valuable time profoundly analysing my comments- valuable time on a 14-year old who you all seem to hate!"
Lol Tamanna -so true! I have been following this debate , but prefer to stay more reserved!
However I believe that if any individual out there is presented with the opportunity to study/read at one of the worlds top ranked university's then 'hell yeah' go for it!
University in general is an experience within itself, but to graduate from the likes of Oxbridge, Yale or Harvard would be even greater just because of their names!
Posted by: Natasha | 7 Mar 2009 20:46:12
Kathryn: I hope that by saying 'apologies for spelling errors in my previous comment', you weren't having a pop at me. If I have got that wrong, then apologies. I am not supercilious, or one of those conceited little girls that get on my nerves, but I will say this. You appear to have done, shall we say, a lot of research for your comment just to outshine a 14 year old. Umm, have you got nothing better to do? Or does the older generation take pride in bringing down the younger and more ambitious people of today?
Everyone else: Stop trying to bring down a budding barrister. Your comments, which comprise of bitter insults, may just be because your salaries don't have as many figures as a barrister's. The credit crunch must really be biting. Or you don't know the nightclub in which your child is currently getting 'hammered', and wish that they would behave a little more cultivated.
Posted by: TISHA | 7 Mar 2009 21:29:50
I think this war between the adults and the children must stop. The 14 year old twins have defended themselves pretty well- I'm impressed! Adults should not be so malicious towards youngsters in any manner. Let's get back to who we're supposed to be commenting on- Emma Watson.
Posted by: Jane | 7 Mar 2009 22:15:43
I agree with Jane wholeheartedly. We have been allowed to post comments based on the article. We should not be exploiting teenagers who want to broaden their vocabulary. Incidentally, I thought some of their words were used rather well. Keep it up!
Posted by: MATT | 8 Mar 2009 09:28:40
Well, Jane, this did all start with one of these teenagers being pretty malicious about the divine Ms W!
Speaking for myself, I was rather amused to see EW's intelligence being called into question by someone who claims to be awfully intelligent but struggles to use English correctly. Perhaps if T had kicked off by saying something along the lines of 'I'm 14 and English is not my first language but I hope to become a barrister' most people on here would have given her three generous cheers! People aren't generally mean-minded, but I'm afraid there's something deeply irritating about being lectured by teenagers in possession of quite such breathtaking and as-yet-unwon confidence!
I am the mother of three teenagers ;)
Posted by: Cathy | 8 Mar 2009 12:23:38
Cathy, if you are the mother of three teenagers, you should know that they are naive and do not know everything- and should not be so cruelly criticised when they make a mistake. I wish my children were more 'cultivated' when they were teenagers- my eldest now works as a shop assistant. It would have been better if you kindly pointed out where the mistakes were.
Posted by: Jane | 8 Mar 2009 12:28:02
Hmmmm ... I think you're being very generous, Jane! After all, no one asked T to weigh in with her rather spiteful remarks in the first place. If she's claiming to be intellectually on a par with people three times her age, she can hardly expect to play the 'I'm only 14, me' card and get away with it! And I rather think my own comments are being conflated with those of others on this thread, which is horribly unfair to a 48-year-old - wahhhh!
Posted by: Cathy | 8 Mar 2009 16:55:36
Oh such spite...
Do shut up everyone.
And good luck with the career T! Don't necessarily agree with what you said but there was no way you deserved all this. In the playground this would be bullying.
Posted by: Hannah | 8 Mar 2009 20:13:21
In the playground, this may indeed have been bullying, but I doubt any of the teachers would have had much sympathy...
Besides, we're doing Tamanna a favour; when she becomes a high-flying barrister, she'll 'undoubtably' need to learn to watch everything she says and have a hide thicker than that of a rhinoceros.
Okay, I'll stop now.
Posted by: Louis | 9 Mar 2009 00:02:03
You haven't even met Tamanna, so you can't really judge her based on her writing! I'm sure she's a nice girl. I used to be a primary school teacher (retired now) and would certainly take action if I knew the older kids were taunting the nursery infants... What were you lot all like at 14?
Posted by: SCARLETT | 9 Mar 2009 11:06:55
Cathy: 'After all, no one asked T to weigh in with her rather spiteful remarks in the first place.' No one asked you people to weigh in your rather spiteful remarks either.
And T, keep doing what you're doing! One day you'll look back at this with your shrink and laugh loads.
Posted by: jane | 9 Mar 2009 11:10:50
Why do I sense the young Tamanna has recruited her friends to have a go on her behalf?
Posted by: M. Geland | 9 Mar 2009 13:57:00
M. Geland: Are you referring to me as a 14 year old, even when I have told you about my children? Dear oh dear, what has the world come to? You'll be glad to know that I am 'real', and you can find me (and my married offspring) in High Wycombe. And that was very clever, leaving your name as 'M. Geland'. You see, I don't usually go easy on females. I'm just assuming you are of the male gender.
All Tamanna's other criticisers, have you got nothing better to do? This article is quite old now!
Posted by: jane | 9 Mar 2009 14:33:45
My goodness, is this debate still going on? I do not concur with Tamanna, but the adults are analysing too deeply. Get a life, y'all! I say that someone should bury the hatchet, fast. And by looking at the long age range, it should be the adults who apologise for their cutting remarks.
Posted by: nicola | 9 Mar 2009 14:36:37
Ok, you people are all sad. There is better things to do than follow an article that is well past its best before date... Lol. And I refuse to comment on the Adults V Teens war that appears to be raging, because I can't understand the lingo used. But T... What dictionary do you use?
Posted by: Jackie | 10 Mar 2009 11:09:31
hermione's last name is spelt 'granger', not 'grainger'
Posted by: nicola bent | 11 Mar 2009 17:58:25
hahaha from an on-the-fence viewpoint this really is hilarious
Posted by: Brad | 11 Mar 2009 21:38:44
Lol Brad, I haven't been on this for a while now and it gets funnier with every read... The fact that T and I are retaliating against adults is rather amusing. Is your real name Brad, or did you just read my previous comment below? Just wondering...
Posted by: tisha | 12 Mar 2009 12:58:21
I think youre all idiots, haven't you got anything better to do?
Posted by: Vicky | 12 Mar 2009 16:54:33
Vicky, don't be such a hypocrite. You cannot criticise people for posting comments when you do one yourself. Omg, people really do not think before they make a comment do they? There's a saying- think before you speak. Peeps, think before you write!
Idiots.
Posted by: Amanda | 12 Mar 2009 17:20:43
Pursuant to discussion about the universities - Yale and Cambridge are ranked second equal in the world by The Times, along with Oxford. Yale loses points for "international Students" where Cambridge loses for citations:staff score (though the quality of research in which the citations are found is not addressed).
What I really wanted to do, though, was to ask what was meant by the comment about americanized spelling - the OED (which, just to be clear, is English) lists "apologize" as the first-choice spelling. Apologise is present only in light type and in parentheses. Incidentally, the word "connexion" is a British (not an American) variant/alternative spelling, and is in fact an older spelling.
Posted by: CatzRob | 13 Mar 2009 14:44:56
Kathryn, hahahahaha! You ain't so intelligent either. Blasting a 14 year old for in fact being as precocious as she makes out! Thanks Catzrob! In this battle I think the young 'uns have won a round, what do you all think?
Posted by: Gwen | 13 Mar 2009 17:38:57
Sticking to the subject: There is a common university and college application that many schools use:
https://www.commonapp.org
American universities are incredibly competitive. Being a Brit might help quite a bit, we're really into diversity.
A school like Yale will require an SAT score in the range of 1500, (out of 1600), a near perfect grade point average, and something that sets one apart from the masses.
The annoying thing is that while Ms. Watson might be very bright, she will most likely, get admitted over other students because of her fame.
It's hardly a level playing field.
Posted by: james jones md,phd | 18 Mar 2009 00:00:42
What's really sad is that the "news story" this article was based on is in fact nonsense made up by an impersonator on a twitter account, and yet The Times still links to this story about two weeks after the actress in question pointed this out.
Posted by: Percy Weasley | 18 Mar 2009 00:09:28
I know, James, it's not fair is it? The fact that Emma is famous (and supposedly clever) immediately gives her an advantage. Universities may try to deny it but they obviously will want to cater for the filthy rich and famous, won't they? And Percy Weasley... That's a good one!
Posted by: Catherine | 18 Mar 2009 10:55:52
I'm an American who attended Yale and another Ivy university on extremely generous financial aid. These schools do have the most aid available, because they are the best-endowed. International students should certainly investigate the possibilities.
As for the exams, I wonder whether some U.S. schools might not be willing to accept A-level results in lieu of the SAT subject tests. It's worth asking. This would certainly reduce the pressure on U.K. applicants. Timing might be an issue, since U.S. schools usually expect to see test scores submitted with applications in the fall of the year before one hopes to attend, (That is, about one year in advance of enrollment.) If you're planning a gap year, however, this wouldn't be problem.
From what I know of Miss Watson, she is an excellent and highly-motivated student and might well have been admitted to Yale and Cambridge even if she were not a famed actress.
Posted by: Lili | 18 Mar 2009 15:39:52
In fact Cambridge University has always supported undergraduates who want to change courses in midstream.
Posted by: Frank Upton | 18 Mar 2009 16:03:50
Tamanna sorry but I really have to tell you something, being in the National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth means nothing. I repeat. NOTHING. There are people I know that are getting 'u' grades in their GCSE's that are in it. Also you are trying to sound smart using long words, you don't you sound pretentious. You have used this marvellous invention called a thesaurus. Thirdly, getting your little school friends or posting under a second or third name to defend yourself (and we all know you have done this because if you view this page from a certain format you can see the IP addresses) shows how much maturity you are yet to gain. Next point, if you look at her (Emma Watson) grades (which are available if you Google it) she got 14 'A’s' and 'A*’s' in her GCSE’s and has been predicted straight a* grade’s for her A Levels. Next stop being so jealous of what you don’t have, and learn to live with what you do have. Also I should point out I’m 15 and I’m in the middle of my GCSE’s so don’t massage your ego by telling yourself there is a grown up having a debate with you. You need to learn that that attitude will get you nowhere in life, grow a backbone, go out into the real world and make something of your life. You may be smart but you are not wise and wisdom is what really matters in life.
Posted by: Shelly McTownsend | 18 Mar 2009 17:12:21
Thank you Shelly! I have been following this for some time and I am so glad to see I am not the only younger person thinking Tamanna sounds like a pretentious show-off! Very well said, and I must say very eloquently argued!
Posted by: Nicola | 18 Mar 2009 19:12:12
Shelly whats-your-name, I have shown this blog to several of my friends (mainly because I find it amusing) but I didn't ask that they should comment on it. And if they did, it's probably because we use the same computer in our dormitory. I don't know, I'll have a word with them, but I don't think they are familiar with a computer. Did you read my previous comment that English is our second language, hmm? But they are not sad enough to make up stories, which you sooooooo evidently are (oh yeah, because you really are 15) . And if you are 15 then I think you are extremely sad. You have just burst into our 'debate', shall we say, with your opinion. Not that it matters, because it's finished on an even footing. No one here is interested in what you think because they have come to this article to read it, not to see what the seemingly boisterous and out-spoken Shelby whats-her-name has to say. This is, to use my sister's phrase, purely my 'legal opinion'. Oh my days, can't you people get a life? And Shelby, you were completely and utterly wrong about NAGTY, okay? You can only make nasty remarks about it if you are in MENSA. Judging by the way you structure your argument, you clearly are not.
Posted by: Tisha | 18 Mar 2009 19:21:33
Tisha: 'You have just burst into our 'debate', shall we say, with your opinion'
'This is, to use my sister's phrase, purely my "legal opinion".'
So, let me get this straight. You and your sister are allowed an opinion but no one else is?
I'm afraid that this is a public forum and, short of actual abuse, anyone is allowed to express any opinion, however abhorrent it may be to others. You'll have to get used to people disagreeing with you if you seek to favour them with your opinion at every turn.
Anyone else reading this: I'm sorry to help drag this discussion back to an unprofitable course, but I couldn't let a contradiction like that pass without comment. Mea culpa.
Posted by: Cathy | 18 Mar 2009 20:06:39
Lol, okay Cathy, you were right... I guess in the heat of things I couldn't help but be slightly unfair. But OMG. You are still checking up on this article?
Posted by: Tisha | 18 Mar 2009 20:29:53
As apparently....erm Tisha you also are.....
Posted by: Nicola | 18 Mar 2009 23:16:01
"...intrigued by the possibilities of a liberal arts degree."... about as good as a McDonald Uni NVQ... and we wonder why US & UK has "toxic debt"..
Posted by: mike | 19 Mar 2009 00:16:24
Er ... yes. Any problem with that? I see you are too, after all.
Yes, I know I'm sad. I'll tell you what I'm doing right now. I've been off work ill for a couple of days and have just dragged myself out of bed and made a nice bowl of porridge and thought I'd have a look through some of the recent posts on this blog and see what's what. A bit of a waste of time, I know, but I'm entitled to a lazy day.
Posted by: Cathy | 19 Mar 2009 10:26:25
I knew you would react like that, but I only have been checking up on the article to see where I need to put my support. Okay, I've been trying to ignore this article since 3rd March, but I keep needing to add comments like this explaining my previous comments. I will not post any more comments on this extremely old article that is, in fact, about Emma Watson. EMMA WATSON, people. Cathy, you also said 'I'm afraid that this is a public forum'. Be that as it may, the comments are supposed to be about the article matter. People use e-mail and Msn to communicate (or argue) about irrelevant issues.
Posted by: Tisha | 19 Mar 2009 11:03:16
You've finally proved to my complete satisfaction that you really are a teenager. No one else could possibly take him/herself so seriously! But shouldn't you be doing something a bit more exciting than arguing with old crusties like me?
Posted by: Cathy | 19 Mar 2009 11:52:27
No, I'm on work experience, it's really boring. Please stop leaving questions as such because I feel compelled to answer them.
Posted by: Tisha | 19 Mar 2009 12:27:10
American universities have been getting more and more competitive through the years. Take UCLA for example. Each year, UCLA has been receiving about 50,000+ freshman applicants trying to take one of the very few spots of the freshman class. Even people with perfect grades and Test Scores have been rejected. You need extra-curricular activies ie, volunteer work, hold office in your class, participate in school clubs or sports to backup with your academic record. Another barrier, esp for UC schools which are public universities, they usually give priority to California residents before anyone else.
Posted by: Ann | 20 Mar 2009 03:46:55
Now, obviously I'm going to look like I have nothing better to do, but this is really quite amusing. Is any of this actually serious? Or can I just assume that everyone likes having a little arguament from time to time?
I have some friends that are in NAGTY, they think it is a waste of time and yes, I'm not included in it but there is no point in me feeling dissapointed, it just takes up too much time which could be spent LAUGHING. Being clever and having money probably brings a certain amount of happiness, but laughing is just one of the best feeling's in the world, so you can stop having a go at each other now and laugh instead :)
I have no idea why I'm being so positive either, my GCSE's are coming up, doesn't sound too appealing does it? Haha.
Anyway, go have fun now....
Posted by: Emma | 22 Mar 2009 14:52:55
This is unbelievably funny, i just clicked on the story and find world war 3! What suprises me though is that the older generation are putting down the younger generation for using 'big' words. Surely you should be encouraging them to do this as it is obviously better than using slang and will most defiantly help them in later life (job interviews and such). Being 16 myself im often advised to try and 'broaden my vocabulary' as it can give you an edge over those who do not. Instead of arguing and calling them petty names congratualte them for trying to better their vocabulary!
Oh and emma - good luck in your gcse's ive got mine coming up too - quite worried to be honest haha
Posted by: Chloe | 22 Mar 2009 22:53:11
Ok then now to answer Tisha, My name is SHELLY MCTOWNSEND, it's not that difficult to get right so grow some manners and class please? Oh God, look at the rest of the message, someone behind a computer is calling me a lier. Whatever shall I do? Look up my Myspace I am 15. I don't know about you but I live in a country where I have a right to free speech. You stated your opinion and now I am telling you mine. Also I am getting A's and A* in all my GCSE's and I am taking 2 A Levels early which I am getting A*'s in and I have been invited to join NAGTY more than ones and have declined, because it means nothing. You go to a potential empolyer and say I was in NAGTY, they won't give a flying monkeys. Also again Free Speech, I am allowed to make fun of who the hell I want. Oh and one final thing, don't flatter yourself by calling this a debate, it's you and your friends making petty comments and alot of other people telling you to shut the hell up.
Posted by: Shelly McTownsend | 23 Mar 2009 08:04:22
You may have free speech but you cannot tell someone to shut the hell up. You shut the hell up, alright!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Hayley | 23 Mar 2009 17:14:07
You may have free speech but you cannot tell someone to shut the hell up. You shut the hell up, alright!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Hayley | 23 Mar 2009 17:14:10
Shelly- You cannot tell me to get some class, ok? You can tell by the way you write that you come from a council estate- if not, then that's where you belong (umm, I'm just expressing myself because we all have 'free speech'. So does that mean I can be as nasty as I want?). And by the way, people are only offered to join NAGTY once, so you cannot have declined as many times as you have claimed. If I were you, I would have joined because you sound like you have nothing else to be proud of (oh! Poor you!). I never have said that NAGTY does a lot, but at least it gives me a chance to say that I am in the top 5%. And people do give a 'flying monkeys' about it. Sorry, 'flying monkeys' sounds so common and you sound common. Grow up!
Posted by: Tisha | 23 Mar 2009 17:44:41
Even if I did come from a council estate, (which I don't I live in a large house with my family in Hertfordshire) what difference would that have made? Don't be so classist. Personally if i had to choose beetween meeting you and meeting someone from a council estate I would choose the latter because they would probably be alot more appreciative of the amount of wealth they have than you are. Do you know that 25% of the worlds population are living on 80% of the worlds resorces and that 8% have 75% of the worlds wealth? You probably didn't know that or appreciate that.
I meant act with some class not class like social class i mean things like, manners, humility and grace are all a part of that.
Also no try once a year? They wrote to me in year 7, 8, 9, 10 and again this year why would you know anything about that if you accepted thier offer? I have plenty to be proud of actually,(If the only thing you aree proud of in yourself is that your in NAGTY then you have some serious issues by the way) even so I tend not to take myself as seriously as you clearly take yourself, and I don't have so much self pride that it makes me act as self ritecheous as you.
I am in the top 5% ok and I know that without having to be in NAGTY. I unlike you don't need to brag about it. You are clearly only in it to massage your oversized ego. I hope that some day you realise just how up your own ass you are acting and how much potential you are wasting.
Also Hayley, ever heard of a thing called a double negative darling?
Posted by: Shelly McTownsend | 23 Mar 2009 18:23:57
If you didn't mean social class, Shelly, then you should have just said what you meant. And by 'council estate', what I mean is the way you behave and act- it has nothing to do with the money ok? I do not brag but you sound so conceited- I just feel like you are talking about yourself here... (Hypocrite). By the way, I see you have been doing your research. Wow(!) I think you have earned a gold star for that!
Now let's be serious, Shelly. This petty arguing has got to stop, mainly because it has nothing to do with the article. I'll be the bigger person and offer the apology.
Posted by: Tisha | 23 Mar 2009 18:43:03
Shelly, you seem to think that both T's are show-offs. I personally think that you are worse. The way you write has a disgusting tone- and you cannot be as talented as you claim (gosh, look at the many spelling and grammar errors, haha!).
And Shelly, I've been following this arguing for a long time. Surely you would have checked up on this again after your last comment? But after T left such a resounding comment (congrats!) you didn't have anything better to reply with. I think I'm correct, am I not?
Posted by: Angela | 25 Mar 2009 13:37:29
Leaving increasing tangential and vitriolic arguments aside, I'd suggest that there are systems in place in the UK that are not dissimilar from the US liberal arts degrees. In the US, students 'pick a degree until their second, or even third, year of education'; with Scottish (4 year) degrees, students don't commit themselves to a subject until third year, despite the initial application to a school. And we're cheaper. And SAAS will pay your final year fees if you're from NI, Eng or Wales.
Posted by: Hannah | 27 Mar 2009 08:51:16
ha.... shelly, shelly, shelly... i know 4 a fact that ur lieing about the GCSE'S and ALevels!!! because at Alevel u cant get higher than an A ....duh!! and if u did get that at GCSE then u wud be taking more than 2 Alevels!! I got that and i took 4 alevels!!! oh and of course... good luck getin to uni wif oni 2 alevels!!! hahaha... no1 will want ya!!
Posted by: Emma Greenaway | 28 Mar 2009 23:25:05
"good luck getin to uni wif oni 2 alevels!!! hahaha... no1 will want ya!!"
But she got 4 A'levels? And we are told they're not being dumbed down?
Posted by: Steve | 3 Apr 2009 19:17:38
No, I think Emma Greenaway is talking about Shelly with only 2 A Levels... These comments are very funny, by the way! Shelly, where are you now?
Posted by: Rochelle | 3 Apr 2009 19:44:08