Could a unified University of London challenge Oxbridge?

Tsunami2011

i've been thinking about this for a while, and thought I'd ask on here. Does anyone think that if (LSE, UCL, Imperial) merged to form one institution they could challenge Oxbridge. in terms of research quality/quality of undergrad teaching and global reputation since each school alone are seen as making up the top 5 UK universities and this way they could focus solely on the aspect where they excel. So Imperial (Sciences and Maths) LSE(social sciences) and UCL could offer the humanties (English, History,etc..

It obviously wouldn't be able to compete in terms of prestige and history, but does anyone think that It could challenge on other grounds and be an actual peer to Oxford and Cambridge, unlike now where they are in their own universe.

Scroll to see replies

Easily.

I read the title and immediately thought academically yes, prestige history and popular admiration no, so we agree

Reply 3

+ polarity -

I don't understand. Wouldn't the research and teaching quality be averaged across the schools?

Reply 4

Zuzuzu

Whilst indeed the constituent colleges of the University of London challenge (and arguably exceed) Oxbridge in their respective specialist areas that you mention, I have the feeling that a combined UoL would be significantly less than the sum of it's parts. I doubt Oxford and Cambridge will ever be knocked off the top spot.

Imperial left the UoL a few years ago now, as well.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 5

Tsunami2011

Original post by + polarity -

I don't understand. Wouldn't the research and teaching quality be averaged across the schools?

I don't even really know what I'm talking about.. But I'm thinking that Imperial could just offer the sciences, then UCL would cease to offer any sciences, which would then allow them to focus on their Arts subjects and place all their revenue into strengthening it. While LSE offered the social sciences and carried on as they were really.

I could be completely wrong thoughh.

Reply 6

Newcastle456

LSE has the best Economics department (when talking about overall studies including masters and post grad) and already competes and surpasses them on prestige.

The whole point is to be specialised.

Reply 7

nexttime

Prestige doesn't just equate to number of students.

Reply 8

daviesblue

Original post by Deep456

LSE has the best postgraduate courses in the UK for Economics, it is a fact.

What would an historian know anyway? Or do you have extensive knowledge in Economics? :rolleyes:

Stick to what you are good at instead of posting useless gifs and making an useless contribution to a thread.

The thread never specified Economics...

Reply 9

daviesblue

Original post by Deep456

My post did....

Yeah so why talk about one dept, surely it defeats the purpose of the thread. Talking about unifying them, i bet if others combined then they could have one dept better than the equivalent Oxbridge. One dept is not difficult.

Ahh okay nevermind, didnt see why you were on that point.

Reply 10

Newcastle456

Original post by daviesblue

Read my above post.

The whole point of LSE is to be specialised to be the best within Economics. Why would they merge with other universities to become a multi-faculty university?

I am saying for logistical reasons, it just would not happen.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 11

Tsunami2011

Original post by Deep456

I see what you're saying. But would it be completely unrealistic to think that if they were to merge, the University of London would be seen as a world leader in Economics, in a similar way to Cambridge. LSE could still flourish as part of a multi-faculty university. LSE would still be the primary base for Economics and its research. It seems that if it were to fail, it would be for superficial reasons, such as the Economics part of the LSE's name having an huge impact in the familarity overseas in regards to the Econ dept.

Reply 12

Clip

In some specialities from LSE and SOAS, music etc -no problem at all. A lot of stuff from Imperial, and the combined London Medical schools would go waaaaay past the varsity.

The weakness would be basically everything else. UCL and Royal Holloway would be repeating some stuff at LSE , and all other subjects would range from competent to very good - but that's hardly a ringing endorsement.

Reply 13

blacklistmember

do you plan to merge the 3? :colonhash:

Reply 14

Like_A_G6

It would be more appealing. UCL currently do a degree called Engineering and Business finance where the engineering is taught at UCL and the business finance is taught at LSE. If the three unis were to merge then you'd probably obtain a degree where the engineering side is taught at Imperial and business finance is taught at LSE. Personally, I feel this degree would be more competitive to get into than any degree oxbridge has to offer as surely such a degree is just getting you ready to be signed up by some of the biggest names in the investment banking with ridiculous starting salaries. This is the aim for many or mos LSE students and a significant percentage of Imperial students.

As a whole though I reckon if it were to happen it would be up there with Oxbridge, not any better, not any worse and would mean Kings College could be kicked out of the universities known as the golden triangle.

Reply 15

SHELDON123

In my opinion, they would not be able to compete at an undergraduate level, but they definitely would compete at postgraduate and research level. I know this will get a lot of negs, but I believe the London universities are slightly over-rated for undergraduates. Everyone I know that got an offer from Oxbridge accepted it ahead of the London universities without even a second thought. In my opinion, until they can compete against Oxbridge for these students, the will not be able to challenge Oxbridge. I also know lots of people that were accepted for the London universities who could not even consider Oxbridge. Conversely, I believe they would and already do challenge Oxbridge at the research level. All of the London universities have top quality research facilities and they are roughly equal to Oxbridge in their respective disciplines.

Reply 16

Harry S Truman

Original post by Deep456

LSE has the best postgraduate courses in the UK for Economics, it is a fact.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2008/dec/18/rae-2008-economics-and-econometrics

Research quality is not the same as institutional prestige, you muppet.

Original post by Deep456

What would an historian know anyway? Or do you have extensive knowledge in Economics? :rolleyes:

Sorry, didn't realise you had to be John Maynard Keynes in order to perceive the different levels of value that mainstream society assigns different universities. My bad.

For what it's worth, historians know a lot of stuff.

Original post by Deep456

Stick to what you are good at instead of posting useless gifs and making an useless contribution to a thread.

Reply 17

Newcastle456

Original post by Harry S Truman

Research quality is not the same as institutional prestige, you muppet.

Sorry, didn't realise you had to be John Maynard Keynes in order to perceive the different levels of value that mainstream society assigns different universities. My bad.

For what it's worth, historians know a lot of stuff.

Ok, I mildly rate you for using that gif. :wink:

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 18

Sovr'gnChancellor£

Original post by Harry S Truman

I call bias!

"Historian at Emmanuel College, Cambridge"

Methinks that if you were at LSE or some other uni, you would jump to agree with the above poster! Ah, the human race - what a fine species!