University of St Andrews
speciality: English Language & Literature

What I found most striking about starting at St Andrews was not the academic level, but the shift in how learning is structured and delivered. Coming from a school system where teaching felt highly attentive and personal, university can feel comparatively distant. Lectures are often recorded, which is useful, but can also create a more passive relationship to learning. Much of the meaningful interaction with tutors happens in office hours, meaning that building those relationships requires a level of initiative that isn’t always immediately clear to new students.
There is also a noticeable ambiguity around assessment. While feedback is detailed, it can be difficult to identify a consistent standard for what differentiates a good piece of work from an excellent one. Different tutors often prioritise different styles or approaches, which can make improvement feel less like a clear progression and more like adapting to individual expectations.
That said, I value the independence this system encourages. It pushes you to take ownership of your work and develop your own direction, even if that process can feel uncertain at times. I do think there is space for more visible enthusiasm and shared intellectual engagement within teaching, particularly in making academic passion feel more accessible rather than assumed.
One aspect that works exceptionally well is the Scottish degree structure. The sub-honours system and flexibility to study multiple subjects before specialising has been a major advantage for me. It allowed me to combine English and Art History in a way that feels genuinely interdisciplinary, and to discover how my interests connect across fields before committing fully.
Overall, St Andrews suits students who are self-motivated and comfortable navigating a less guided academic environment, but there is still room to strengthen how teaching connects more directly and consistently with student engagement.

I had a meaningful experience at the University of St Andrews.
I was fortunate to learn from world-class educators who brought academic rigor and unique perspectives to the classroom. I also appreciated the breadth-then-depth curriculum structure, with two years of sub-honours followed by two years of honours, which allowed me to explore widely before narrowing my focus.

One of the things I loved most about St Andrews was its setting. The town is saturated in history, which you can feel in the cobblestones, the ruins, the sea. There’s something grounding about studying in a place with such a long intellectual and cultural legacy. I also liked the small size of the university community. At the same time, that intimacy could sometimes feel limiting and suffocating, like you were in a bubble you couldn’t quite step outside of.

Diversity was another challenge. There was a noticeable lack of racial, socioeconomic, and ideological diversity among students and faculty. Many students came from similar, often elite, backgrounds and hadn’t been meaningfully challenged to think beyond those experiences. That lack of representation sometimes narrowed the scope of classroom conversations and made it harder to find a truly global or inclusive perspective.

At the end of the day, would I recommend St Andrews? Yes, especially for students who are looking for a top-tier education in a historic environment. But I’d also encourage prospective students to seek out opportunities (both on and off campus) that expand their worldview and push them beyond the comfort of the familiar.

At sub-honours, the university’s module system feels very flexible, as students can choose modules from subjects that are not part of their degree title. However, at honours, the selection of modules available within your subject(s) changes each year. Some years are better than others. Additionally, the addition of a dissertation in your final year makes it much harder to choose modules you are actually interested in. Even with the option to not do a dissertation (an option available to joint-honours students), the student’s choices will still be restricted, as they need to do a year-long module rather than 2 semester-long modules. It becomes rather restrictive. No matter what module you choose, however, the teacher of that module will be extremely knowledgeable and enthusiastic about their subject and, although you may not find it the most interesting, you still appreciate the passion that they feel for it.

This programme provided a substantial variety of textual material, and we interacted with many theoretical spaces and academics in the taught portion of the MLitt course. One of the significant elements of the programme is its interdisciplinarity, with students also receiving many opportunities to expand their field of study beyond the parameters of the programme, whether it was for presentations, essays, or the dissertation project. This facilitated diverse discussions between classmates and the expansive bodies of work, with many people choosing to study texts from outside of the dates outlined in the programme’s handbook, leading to generative applications of theory. The lecturers and staff were very open to these forms of work. I will note, however, that there was a limited focus on Scottish literature within the taught component of the programme, and this should be taken into account when applying.