I didn’t take a medical degree, but again the (non-arts) bachelor’s degree is much more specialised elsewhere than in the US. It’s not the equivalent of taking an American “major”. In three years of an Australian greater-than-required course load I was only able to take two half-subjects that weren’t directly related to my degree. It was my university’s idea of giving students “rounding”.
In the five years of uni study, medical students would pick up two degrees (baccalaureates in medicine and chirurgery - two three-year courses that share a year of common requirements), but do very little if anything that’s not related to getting those degrees.
They’d then go on to do several years of practical training in hospitals before becoming qualified for practice, and more after that if they wanted to specialise.
We took a lot of US exchange students at my uni - the only thing they found weirder than the fact that there weren’t any general courses was the marking.
Medical; 5 years; you do two Bachelors; a Bachelors in Surgery AND a Bachelors in Medicine (MBBS). Plus House Job and specialisation.
Law: LLB -3 to 4 years. Then a years work doing either an LPC to become a Solisitor; meaning a desk jockey or a year doing the Bar to become a Barrister; meaning a real lawyer who goes and argues in court. After that its a year doing a training contract in a firm for Solisitors or a year working under a Pupil Master (a senior barrister with 5 years in the profession) you can become a professional person.
Law is slightly different in Scotland
In the UK and former colonies of the UK the O’Levels (or whatever they are called now) know are of the general standard of the US High School Degree. However these are 16 year olds. An A-Levels (18 year olds) are what are the equivalent of the first two years of college in the US; the students take subjects with their future careers in mind. There is A-Level law for instance.
Note that “other commonwealth countries like it” doesn’t correspond to “all Commonwealth countries”.
In Australia the Bachelor of Laws is generally only available after the attainment of another Bachelor’s degree. Most students enrol in a five year course where they first do the other degree (with a few legal subjects over and above their normal course load in third year).
The most popular course is a B.A./LL.B., followed by a B.Com./LL.B. (or the equivalent B.Econ./LL.B.) and way, way behind a B.Sc./LL.B.
After that, there’s extra years practical learning before you’re qualified for practice, either as a solicitor or barrister.
The high school stuff is wildly different, years eleven and twelve being essentially a long series of exams to determine your Tertiary Entrance Rank (or equivalent in other states), calculated across the state. Government-subsidised university places are awarded in order by TER scores until that course at that university fills up. Some courses need you to get a score in the top .05% in the state in order to qualify. The whole US system of getting a school-assigned GPA, looking like a “well-rounded” student and having interviews, essays, etc. strikes us as weird and more than a little silly.
There’s several messages in here, and they’re not all clear or accurate. GCSEs replaced O Levels over twenty years ago, so forgive me if I assume you’re not all that familiar with modern-day 16-18 education nor with the progression into university.
I’m sure many people here would question the suggestion that A Levels are equivalent to two years of college in America, other than for a rather superficial view of it purely as a means to an end. Many, perhaps most, children certainly do not have a clear intention in mind when they choose what to study post-16. It’s true that some will, at that stage, already have clear intentions of studying medicine, or law, or whatever. Far more choose subjects they are interested in, and that they are good at. It stands to reason that the latter group will also use similar criteria if applying to university.
I did mine 8 years ago, it was called GCE at the time, we still called it O’Levels colloquially (specifically it was the Cambridge GCE, UCLES). My own experience with US students is that the standard that an average high school student has is equivalent to what you see with an average O Leveler. An A-Leveler usually is of the standard of a college freshman or sophomore.
I agree that 18 is too young to choose what you want with life. The yanks have it dead right.
Edit:This is what my examination board was.
It appears to me that an O level (i.e., a GCSE), which is taken at the age when an American student is finishing his sophomore year in high school, is the equivalent of what an American high school student who plans to go to college (and goes to a good high school) knows at the end of his junior year in high school, although it might be in less subject matters. That is, an American student planning to go to college who goes to a good high school will probably take math up to first-year calculus, a year each of biology, chemistry, and physics, four years of English, two to four years of a language, a year each of American history and American government, and often other things. A British student might not take as much stuff.
It appears to me that an A level, which is taken at the age when an American student is finishing his senior year in college, is equivalent to what a student at a good college in the U.S. knows in his major and minor subjects at the end of his freshman year. Thus British students are only a year ahead of American students in knowledge, not two years, in the subject of concentration. The British students are probably slightly less rounded in what they studied.
I don’t think most schools in the US operate based on a “two years of liberal arts plus two years of your major” system. Even schools that pride themselves on having “rounded educations” and other BS tend to mix in degree specific classes right off the bat.
And then there are people like me, who went to a “technical school” (RPI.) I had five classes that weren’t related to my major in my four years, and I only needed three of those (I’m counting physics and chemistry as counting towards my major (engineering.)) Our “interdisciplinary requirement” was three classes, one each from the “arts” and “social sciences,” and then one more course from either group that was “advanced” (either 4000 level or required a class you already took as a pre-req.) I took all three “acting/theatre” classes they offered, gen psych, and a science fiction literature class. I didn’t need the second theatre or the lit. class, but I took them for fun.
Oh, and if we scored less than 600 on our verbal SAT, we had to take a writing class (I had a 640, so I was exempt from that rule.)
In talking with my friends at work who go/went to UVM, though, I see that have a lot more liberal arts classes they have to take. They all need a writing class, more art classes, phys ed, and a BS “racial/cultural tolerance” class.
US education is much broader for longer than English education. This has pros and cons, but that is for a different forum. To compare, I am English and in my last two years at high school (equivalent), I studied: Maths, Biology, Chemistry. That’s it.
In my three year BSC in Biochemistry, I studied:
Year 1
Organic Chemistry (mandatory)
Physical Chemistry (mandatory)
Biochemistry (mandatory)
Physiology (optional subsidiary)
Year 2
Biochemistry (mandatory)
Organic Chemistry (mandatory)
Pharmacology (optional subsidiary)
Year 3
Biochemistry (mandatory)
In contrast, my son has done two years of American college so far, still not knowing what his major will be, and has studied English, Psychology, History, Economics, Computer Science, Geography, Chemistry, Calculus, Accounting and probably more.
So back to the OP - as others have said, in England you go to university to study medicine and start taking very relevant classes from day one.
Physics
Chemistry
Maths
Additional Maths
Computer Studies
History/ Civics
Religious Studies
English
Studied these for two years
As for what was covered. In History/civics we read about population increases, social structure, , town planning, agriculture and livestock (name that breed of cattle), communications etc. In religious studies, we did comparative religion, religion todayin societys etc. In Computer Studies, we had an exam on computer applications and we were taught programming and for the finals were told to computerise a system (I made a Cricket club membership system), was made in Visual Basic 6.2 +. We had lit in English, including Shakepeare, Sheridan and we also did poetry and plays. Hemmingway is the only Yank I can recall.
A-Levels
Physics
Chemistry
Maths
English
A-Level Law
Studied for two years again
Again this was studied for two years, the Maths had 4 modules; two pure Maths (very advanced calculus, trig etc), a Mechanics modules (hated it) and a Statistics module (did well). Physics and Chemistry had 4 main papers (theory and MCQ’s) two practical exams and two “options” (We did Physics of fluids, electonics in Physics, Bio-Chemistry and further Enviromental Chemistry for Chem). For English we read classics (Gilgamesh, the Greeks) we did Gibbon and we did eassy writing. For A-Level law it was basic law and legal system; we also did Philosophy of law, Aquainus, the Greeks, John Austin etc.
I was planning to be an Engineer but I decided in my final year of A Levels that it was not for me and stuck to law.
The British system has changed, now. You’re expected to study four/five A/S levels in the first year of sixth form, and take on three/four of those subjects onto A2 level. The extra subject in the first year is supposed to encourage people to study something outside their immediate interests, or so I’ve heard. This doesn’t seem to happen though, and those interested in science simply take on another science, for instance.
“General Studies” is also a requirement for all students (or at least it was when I was taking my A-levels) at both A/S and A/2. This covers foreign languages, English, science, maths, politics etc. and is universally despised.
(Note: I was in the first year to take the new style A-levels, so what I said may be outdated, now).
Ah, I see what’s going on here. GCE, General Certificate of Education, refers to Ordinary (O) and Advanced (A) Level qualifications. Within Britain, the former was replaced with the GCSE. Looking around on t’internet, it appears that the exams boards continued to offer it to overseas institutions, which would make sense given that GCSEs are far more closely intertwined with the national curriculum(s) here as a whole. (Curriculums because there’s differences between England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Scotland’s education, and exams, have always been completely independent.)
Looking through the sample material for the International O Level, it’s pretty much as I would have expected - a greater depth of knowledge is certainly required, and I agree that it’s closer to A Levels than GCSEs, but there’s not the same need for a broader range of skills, bearing in mind that coursework as well as examinations has always been integral to GCSEs.
It’s perhaps also worth noting that the International O Levels offered by CIE, the international branch of the board you used, are offered alongside their International GCSEs, but neither are recognised on the National Qualifications Framework, the official tiered structure of qualifications in British (err, English/Welsh/N Irish ) education. This means that there’s no formal accreditation as a true ‘O Level’, I’m sorry to say…
It’s certainly advisable for any capable student to take a range of subjects which both develop and demonstrate a wider range of abilities and knowledge. My old music department now, in addition to three As including music, require an ‘English language rich’ subject (which would have ruled me out ).
And I forgot to include this:
I think perhaps this depends on the view of higher education. Yes, there’s clear vocational routes such as medicine, and I’ve got 15-year-olds already with definite plans for following these. The majority of higher education courses aren’t, however, about ‘choosing what you want with life’. (Fellow music students of mine now include an actor, an editorial assistant, a restaurant manager, a stage school owner, somebody working in IT, and a lawyer.)
State or private? If the latter, they can offer whatever they want, the International Baccalaureate being the most popular alternative. If state, I’m surprised, although eight years would (I think) take things back to before the NQF was established as part of the attempt to reduce the overkill in the sheer number of different external qualifications available.
Yea, but you still have to take a lot of not-your-concentration classes. They mix in the concentration specific ones quick, and some of those overlap with the “well-rounded” classes.
And you can take your “non-major” classes anytime you want. For some reason some colleges insist on babying you and try to steer you into an easier path (that was my experience), and for them it means taking the “non-major” classes first.
) education. This means that there’s no formal accreditation as a true ‘O Level’, I’m sorry to say…
).