1、学术vs实用
大学倾向于学术方面，而学院注重实用教育。在大学里写论文、作报告、迎接各种难度较高的考试是家常便饭。大学毕业后，你可以获得本科学位，之后多数人会选择读研，继续深造。
学院也会给你颁发证书和文凭，但课堂之外，比较注重积累工作经验，多数人会选择实习，基本上很少有人会去讨论学术问题，大家谈论的话题都是围绕着各自的工作内容，公司发展等方面。
2、学制长vs学制短
大学的学制主要有四种形式：本科学士学位3年;荣誉学士学位4年;硕士学位1-2年;博士学位4-6年。学院的学制主要有三种形式：证书学制1年;文凭学制2-3年;学士学位3-4年。
3、申请要求高vs申请要求低
大学的申请要求较高，成绩一般要求80%以上，名校对成绩的要求的则是85%以上，有时候对雅思托福的成绩也有要求。学院的录取标准就低多了，成绩只需达到75%，对于语言成绩的要求也很低，有时候录取学生的成绩还会低于平均标准。
4、学院的就业率更高
相较于大学，学院的就业率更高一些。因为学院的宗旨是迎合工作市场需求，培养社会紧缺人才。在校期间，学院通常会安排带薪实习项目，使学生在就读期间就可以进入相应岗位进行实习。在此期间，学生不仅可以获得实际工作经验，还有一定的收入来源。很多学院也会与企业进行合作，专门为大型企业设置一些专业，这些专业的学生毕业后可以直接进入该企业工作。
不过，政府部门，或者是大型的协会组织部门都要求应聘者为大学学历，而在申请要求拥有专业的培训经历的工作时，学院的学生比大学的学生更占有优势。因此，究竟选择哪一个，还是要看学生个人的成绩，以及未来想要从事的工作类型。
每个学校的不同专业都会有自己的特别要求，如果需要了解各大学更为详细的申请要求，可以通过留学志愿参考系统按照自己的院校背景和成绩情况查询一下过往的申请的成功案例，
留学志愿参考系统如下：
https://www.liuxue315.cn/dingwei/?ozs=300-311
在留学志愿参考系统中我们会看到自己院系的师哥师姐们都去了哪些学校，具体申请了哪些专业，他们都考了多少的语言成绩，用了哪个留学中介等信息。
查询如下图：
The Guardian’s Higher Education Network has spent the past fortnight comparing universities in the UK and Australia. The series highlights the many similarities between the two countries’ higher education systems, while also exploring some of the contrasts and controversies, and areas of collaboration and competition. Take a look at the series summary below to find out how UK universities and Australian universities match up in some of the most pressing issues for today’s higher education providers.
《卫报》的高等教育网络已经花了两周时间来比较英国和澳大利亚的大学，凸显了这两个国家的高等教育系统的相似之处，同时还探索了一些对比和争议，此外还有不同领域的协作和竞争。以下是为大家独家整理并且翻译的英国大学和澳大利亚大学的比较，一起来看看这两个国家的大学如何成为今天最顶尖高等教育的提供者，希望对大家有帮助。
Which country’s universities are more innovative?
Pointing out that the UK and Australian higher education systems owe many of their similarities to their governments’ tendency to mimic each other’s policies, the series started with an interactive timeline showing major developmental milestones – and which nation got there first. This is admittedly highly subjective, largely depending on your perspective; those who disagree with policies such as increasing the tuition fee cap are unlikely to view the first country to do so as the most progressive or innovative. However, it is a fun way to get a quick overview of major changes at UK and Australian universities over the past three decades, and track parallel developments in the two countries.
Continuing the interactive theme, the network challenged readers to guess the missing word in a series of quotes from the countries’ respective higher education ministers, commenting on their own and each other’s policies.
哪个国家的大学更具创新性?
英国和澳大利亚高等教育系统有很多的相似之处，他们的政府倾向于模仿对方的政策，两个国家的大学也是交互发展，这个日程表也显示了这两个国家大学主要发展的重要里程碑——并且哪个国家先做到了。这诚然是主观性太强，很大程度上取决于你看问题的视角;不同意一些例如增加学费收费上限这样的政策的国家，不太可能认为第一个这样做的国家是最前卫或者最创新的。但是，获得在过去的三十年里，在英国和澳大利亚的大学获得重大变化的快速概览是一个有趣的方式，还有这两个国家跟踪并行的发展。
Which country’s universities are more collaborative?
Focusing on the ever-growing emphasis placed on international collaboration, the series featured a blog post from Simon Marginson, a professor at the UK’sInstitute of Education and professorial associate at Australia’s University of Melbourne, who argued that the major difference between the two countries is the strength of Australia’s relationship with fast-growing Asian nations such as China, Taiwan and Singapore. In contrast, Marginson argued, “Among all the English-speaking nations, the UK has the lowest rates of research collaboration in dynamic Asia.”
The wide range of research collaborations involving UK universities and Australian universities was showcased in a photo gallery, with comments from participating academics highlighting some of the benefits and challenges of these kinds of cross-planet projects. Time zone differences definitely came top of the ‘challenges’ pile, though this was viewed in more positive terms surprisingly often. As the University of Melbourne’s Vanessa Teague put it, “we get twice as much work done in a week: one side works while the other side sleeps”.
This piece was complemented by blog contributions from two academics who have each experienced working within both UK and Australian universities. Interestingly, both viewed their home country as less successfully collaborative at a national level compared to their new host. Chris Elders, who moved from working in UK universities to join Australia’s Curtin University last year, said, “I am struck by the much greater sense of collaboration between institutions, compared with the more fiercely competitive atmosphere in the UK.” Yet Emily Hudson, who made the move in the opposite direction to join Oxford University in 2012, said she’d experienced a greater sense of collaboration in the UK: “I have found that the UK’s size and proximity to other countries makes it far easier to maintain connections with the broader academic community.”
哪个国家的大学更具协作性?
将重点放在不断增长的国际合作上，这一系列推荐一篇Simon Marginson的博客文章，他是英国教育研究所的教授，以及澳大利亚墨尔本大学的副教授，他认为两国之间的主要区别是澳大利亚与快速增长的亚洲国家如中国、台湾、新加坡的关系强度。Marginson辩称，相比之下，“在所有讲英语的国家中，英国跟亚洲是有着最低科研合作的国家”。
涉及英国大学和澳大利亚大学的范围广泛的的研究合作显示在照片库，突出这类跨星球项目的一些好处和挑战。时区差异肯定位居“挑战”的榜首，尽管这从往往从更积极的角度来看会有惊喜。正如墨尔本大学的凡妮莎蒂格说，"我们在一周内完成两倍多的的工作: 一方工作而另一在睡觉"。
这篇博客由两位在英国和澳大利亚的大学内都有工作经验的学者完成。有趣的是，两者都认为在国家协作方面，更另一方相比自己国家是较少成功的一方。Chris Elders，之前在英国大学工作，在去年加入澳大利亚的科廷大学，他说，"我深受大学之间的协作感动，相比英国的更激烈的竞争气氛，澳大利亚之间的协作意识更强烈"。但是，Emily Hudson，她做了相反方向的移动，在 2012 年加入牛津大学，她说她在英国经感受到了更强烈的协作:"我发现英国的大小，以及和其他国家的接近，使得它更容易与更广泛的学术社区保持连接。"
Which country has the better higher education funding system?
With higher education funding close to the surface of any debate in the sector, several contributions to the series explored funding choices already made by the two countries, as well as those looming in the near future. Deakin University’s Jane den Hollander argued that proposed cuts to higher education funding in Australia could lead to fewer choices for students unable to afford hiked-up tuition fees; potential job losses and cuts to academic salaries; and increased debt for the poorest students and graduates – meaning more student loans remaining unpaid.
Australian National University’s Ian Young explored the issue of deregulating fees, highlighting this as an example of the two countries’ tendency not to learn from each other’s mistakes. The UK government, he argued, should have known that almost all UK universities would charge the full £9,000 maximum rate when this was cap introduced, by looking at the Australian precedent. Concluding that the only way to ensure there is real price competition is to deregulate entirely, he suggested that this is the most practical – if not always popular – pathway for both countries.
But Gill Wyness and Richard Murphy, each holding positions at two UK universities, were keen to warn against following the Australian example too readily. While recognizing the appeal and apparent strengths of Australia’s higher education funding system, they argued that the Australian model demands higher taxpayer contributions, risks deterring lower-income students from studying certain subjects for which fees are higher, and has also raised concerns about a lack of quality control in entry requirements or completion standards.
哪个国家有更好的高等教育拨款制度?
凭借高等教育资金接近这个部分的任何辩论，探索由两个国家已经贡献的几个资金选择，以及那些即将在不久的将来提供的。迪肯大学Jane den Hollander 德认为在澳大利亚削减高等教育经费，为负担不起的学生上调了学费; 可能导致更少潜在工作的选择和削减学术的薪金;以及贫穷学生和毕业生不断增长的债务 — — 这意味着更多的学生贷款的剩余未付。
澳洲国立大学的Ian Young 探索开放收费问题，突出两个国家的倾向，就是不从别人的错误中学习。他认为，英国政府应该知道几乎所有的英国大学最多会收取全额9,000 英镑，通过看澳大利亚的先例。确保真实价格竞争的唯一方法就是完全解除，他建议，这是最实用的 — — 如果不总是那么受欢迎 — — 是这两个国家共同的通路。
但Gill Wyness 和Richard Murphy，分别在两所英国大学就读，急于警告不要太容易随澳大利亚的例子。虽然认识到澳大利亚的高等教育财政拨款制度的明显优势，他们认为澳大利亚模型要求更高的纳税人贡献风险，低收入学生学习的费用较高，也引起了关注缺乏入学要求或完成标准的质量控制。