The american system seems to be tailored to individuals who haven't decided what they want to do after university and thus offers them a year to study a wide range before they specialise.

Personally I would have found this frustrating because I had picked a field I wished to study and studying any other subjects would have been purely to explore other interests. Not really something I want to be paying for.

As it is I am doing a degree in computer science at the University of Hull and other interests I have outside this such as music and media are pursued on my own time. Time I am not paying for.

Daniel Griffiths, Hull, UK

I attended a year of Uni in Britain and it was an experience- if only in British curriculum perspectives. My home (US) university not only allowed, but REQUIRED interdisciplinary coursework. Botanists HAD to take intro Zoology, and visa versa. The sheer diversity and multiple perspectives only allows a better understanding of the world. As a biologist, I took a year of metalsmithing- as I enjoy art as well.
I attended a UK uni for one of its language programs. I took courses in geography, forestry, history as well. They were all quite confused as to what I was doing there.
Forester: "Wait, you're a botanist. What are you doing in a forestry class?"
As for myself, I found british students woefully ignorant of subjects only slightly removed from their area of study. They seemed to be stagnating in their subject. But they've "been doing it that way for over 400 years..." Yes, but doesn't work any more.

Good on you!

Daibh, Blacksburg, VA, USA

Flip a coin! But seriously, theres something strange in this story and I'm trying to put my mind to it.

My uni doesn't offer the science and art combo in the joint honours program I am currently in. But then it was a slight surprise to me to be able to study English Language and Linguistics plus English Literature considering my end goal of getting an education that would help me in my personal goal of writing.

Nowhere in this story do I see a career goal. You aren't 14 years old again picking your GCSE's, you are over 18 and you better have some idea where you want to be working. If you don't yet then take a year out, go working in the various areas through a temping agency or otherwise. Then decide which environment you like and pick accordingly.

But don't complain you cannot take bite sized modules at 50% each of science and arts and have a qualification that means enough to an employer to take you over the next person who knows which career they want to end up in.

MrD, York, England

If any prospective young scientists are reading this, ignore advice from Nottingham. An academic research career can be one of the most rewarding on the planet. True, the money is not great, but it's not too bad either. A salary of around 15K a year tax-free to take a PhD at some of the better universities is extremely competitive, even in London. That's just to study! But, the feeling of working at the real forefront of human progress is unbeatable. There are downsides, as with any job, but these can be quickly dispelled, by the exhilaration of a completely new discovery. Something that may increase our knowledge slightly, or could potentially change the world. So, if you have a passion for science, go for it. From personal experience, it has been brilliant. Recently moved from London to New York, working with some great people and having lots of fun, and intend on having loads more in the future. Nobel prize would be nice too.

A satisfied scientist, New York by way of Brighton,UK,

25 years ago I finished secondary school in the UK with average O level results, poor A level results (due to a difficult home life) and no confidence. Being half American, I was able to apply to an institution in the US, and it gave me the second chance I desperately needed. They didn't rush me to choose a major, and I thrived as I gained in confidence, and eventually graduated with highest honours. It was the best experience ever, and would not have happened had I tried to continue my education in the UK.

US/UK Dual Citizen, Cambridge, England, Sacramento, CA

Another factor to consider is the weather. If you want to spend a few years basking in warmth and sunshine while still receiving an excellent education, forget Canada or the northeastern states. There are some excellent universities in the warmer areas of the U.S. - Davidson and Wake Forest (North Carolina), Pomona and Stanford (California), as well as larger state run universities such as the Universities of Florida and Georgia. My son attends the University of San Francisco and was offered an academic grant equivalent to two-thirds of the tuition making the total cost to send him there about £11,000 per year, including room and board.

Pat Brew, Harrogate, North Yorkshire

Thee cheers for Charlotte - I wish more UK students had her obvious love of learning rather than wish to tick the right boxes for a job. She is also rare in that she is obviously prepared to work rather than regarding uni as one long party.

Stick with the Ivy League schools, Charlotte. You can get a good education elsewhere, but not the superior tuition, nor the prestige which, whether one agrees with it or not, will accrue in later life.

She has restored my faith in British youth. Some of them anyway.

Dual Citizen, , Sheffield UK/ClevelandUSA,

I would say look what you want to be doing in x years time and go for that. Also give science as a career choice a miss. The pay is lousy, and prospects are poor even at the PhD level. After all your going to have student loans to pay back. Check out reed.co.uk/scientific for the aforesaid lousy salaries

A Scientist, nottingham,

Most universities here, even the most archaic ones, will allow you to change course if you find your primary choice no longer appealing after the first year at least.
I can't reasonably see how delaying the whole choice thing by a year can offer much further enlightenment. While courses are practically always made up of elements of the individual's choice. There is plenty of flexibility along with the opportunity to take general courses that do not require immediate specialisation.
This article is a bit of waste of time. Every education system might have its merits and downfalls. The debate sparked here is rather pointless and circular.

Stefan K, Cambridge, UK

As an ambitious student who was in a similar situation when applying to universities two years ago, I can certainly sympathise. I always found the major fault in the British (though not necessarily Scottish) approach to education was the attitude towards academic and professional specialisation at such an alarmingly early age. All I can say is, good for her. I wish I had considered applying to an American university, but this wasn't exactly advertised by UCAS and the other higher education services, who are forced to cater for the lowest common denominator.

James, Sunderland,

She should apply to Purdue University. Ivy League schools are ok but you get SUCH a broader view with the state-run universities like Purdue University or the University of Michigan or Ohio State.

Jacquelyn, Los Angeles, California

That's great, Brian. Did they teach you sentence structure and spelling? Because saying you received a "Bachelor of Arts in the Arts and a Bachelor of Science in the sciences" is truly not 'truely' redundant.

C. Bragg, Burlington, Canada

I hope she will consider other institutions as well as "Yale and Harvard." Expensive does not equal quality. There are plenty of equivalents to redbrick universities in the US which will provide an excellent education to high standards. My daughter got one at the State University at Buffalo (NY) and emerged debt-free, something a Yale or Harvard graduate cannot say.

Linda, NYS,

Quite.

The new curriculum needs small bite size chunks so that the modern student raised on open book learning and being taught rather than researching matters themselves can understand it.

So no pure maths or physics or chemistry courses, but say Biology with Creation Theory...

Now what was it my friend heard from a second year Physics undergrad. (that's short for undergraduate for those who haven't yet passed their English semester, the equivalent of an A Level 20 years ago) in the library the other day?

"Gimme a book about Physics".

The Librarian to the astonished student replied would you like it on Pure Physics, Applied Physics, Quantium Physics.

Never mind, we can always steal real scientists and medics from the third world.

Pete Balchin, Solicitor , Bristol, UK

Somewhat less jingoistic? American schools are filled with students from all over the world, while the Americans attending have lived with 20 years of Political Correctness - so true jingoism will be hard to find. However, as with all social groupings you will find all kinds of people, good and bad.

Meanwhile, yes, Canadian schools are lusually ess expensive. However, American schools are better known and jobs in nearly any field pay much better in the US. So, it may be worth the extra cost for school. Also, there are many sources of financial assistance available to all students.

Sean , Portland, OR

here are two sides to this coin, as with most things in life. I applied to the US however chose NOT to go as i felt that the broad curriculum was not the best suited to my personal needs. If you have not decided what it is you wish to do at university then i can see the benefit in the US system. However i have seen the depth to which some US universities teach my specialism, Physics, and frankly it is not up to the standard that would be necessary for a PhD, not witohut an intermediate course being taken at least. At the University of Glasgow we take 3 courses in 1st year, any of which we can take on to degree level. For example, i chose to do Maths when i applied to uni, and changed my mind after 2nd year and picked up Physics as my degree subject. I feel this offers the depth needed while not closing doors on the student and would advocate it as the system of choice for the 1st few years of undergraduate teaching.

Euan, Glasgow,

So, you think that the US is the be all end all.... Hello Folk wake up the tea is burning. How about looking at Canadian universites, the tuitions are more comparable to or even lower than what you folk pay in the UK and the environment is somewhat less jingoistic. But this is just one Canadians point of view.
Try looking into schools such as University of Waterloo for engineering, University of Calgary for engineering, sciences, Medicine ( a lot of cancer research is happeing and breaking grond here) and the arts, McGill university for arts and sciences. For every field of endovor there are some exceedingly good universities in Canada.

David Pocock, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

She is so right as I earned both a BA in the arts and a BS in the sciences by going one extra year and was able to do two complete curriculums that prepared me for graduate studies in both fields. I found the science background invaluable and the arts truely eye opening. Nothing like a full-bore course in Organic Chemistry to broaden your outlook in English Literature. Quantum Mechanics for the Advanced American Novel? Physiology for poetry? It further develops the brain in both analytic and creativity and if you're really the curious type you should study chemistry and creative writing in my book. She has the American spirit of flipping waffles with one hand while tasting fine cheese with the other and if its French, all the better. Add to that a musical talent at the piano and a keen ear for the synthesizer and you have fun people, and they might well stumble onto something really interesting one day. Multimodal thinking should precede all the multitasking anyways.

Brian Stewart, Los Angeles, USA