The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Warwick VS Birkbeck VS Royal Holloway

Scroll to see replies

Warwick for so many reasons, but I'll only give you one; finance.
Original post by conavioak
the fact is, I am actually thinking of being a philosophy professor... so I guess the rep of the uni does matter... I know Warwick is certainly much better than the two but how do Warwick struggled to beat them both in academic referencing and rep?


Could you link the source saying this?

Every single table/guide I've looked at on this topic is clear in showing Warwick > BB/RH

Does 'academic referencing' mean how often the institution's work is cited by another?
Reply 22
Avatar for conavioak
conavioak
OP
Original post by Marshall Taylor
Warwick for so many reasons, but I'll only give you one; finance.


no that is two.

[doge face]
Original post by conavioak
the fact is, I am actually thinking of being a philosophy professor... so I guess the rep of the uni does matter... I know Warwick is certainly much better than the two but how do Warwick struggled to beat them both in academic referencing and rep?


If you're looking at being an academic, I wouldn't worry too much. The big whoop is going to be your doctoral thesis and quality of your postdoc research. As long as you didn't go to somewhere really really bad for your undergrad, it doesn't matter that much. You can change up for your Masters and then PhD.

Having said that, it doesn't make sense to go somewhere not as good if you have better offers. There might be compelling reasons to go to the others - but they wouldn't be on the basis of academia. Like RoHo for the gay scene, or Birkbeck because you work full time. Otherwise, Warwick is a bit better than the others.

But ultimately, if you go anywhere and do well, nothing stopping you going somewhere really prestigious for Postgrad. And when it gets to doctoral, you'd probably be looking for a supervisor who is an expert in whatever it is you're into - and if (s)he happens to be at Exeter, Kings, Essex wherever - that's where you'd go
Reply 24
Avatar for conavioak
conavioak
OP
Original post by TelAviv
Could you link the source saying this?

Every single table/guide I've looked at on this topic is clear in showing Warwick > BB/RH

Does 'academic referencing' mean how often the institution's work is cited by another?


http://www.topuniversities.com/universities/birkbeck-university-london 82.5-74.8 (philosophy)

http://www.topuniversities.com/universities/university-warwick 77.7-77.4 (philosophy)

www.topuniversities.com/universities/royal-holloway-university-london 88.6-82.2 (history & philosophy)
Birkbeck has one of the best philosophy departments in the country..

Warwick is all round a much better uni than both those two, but it's important to look at departmental rankings. If you look at the Leiter rankings for example, Warwick has only beaten Birkbeck once, whereas Birkbeck has always been grouped with the likes of Kings/UCL before that -- well above Warwick
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by jam277.5
Birkbeck has one of the best philosophy departments in the country..

Warwick is all round a much better uni than both those two, but it's important to look at departmental rankings. If you look at the Leiter rankings for example, Warwick has only beaten Birkbeck once, whereas Birkbeck has always been grouped with the likes of Kings/UCL before that -- well above Warwick


It is still Birkbeck at the end of the day. Warwick has an overall strong reputation, the name itself gets you way further than saying "I did Phil at Birkbeck".
Original post by AmyAlbertsLamb
It is still Birkbeck at the end of the day. Warwick has an overall strong reputation, the name itself gets you way further than saying "I did Phil at Birkbeck".


But surely those that do philosophy for a living would surely recognise the prestige of Birkbeck? Very relevant in OP's case as he wants to go further into academia - in which case the academic ranking of each institution's department would help with references and whatnot.

If he wishes to go into something competitive like IB then well, he'd do better to look at a more quant based degree, in which case obviously Warwick trumps the other two. Then eventually, your experience will trump any institution you go to. But as for now, I think you're overestimating the value that Warwick would be able to carry him in life compared to Birkbeck.
Original post by conavioak
I am holding an offer from Warwick but is thinking of studying in London. Which of the three would you recommend me to read philosophy in?



If it comes down to Warwick v Birkbeck, have you considered the impact of the latter's unique way of teaching in the evening rather than the day?
Original post by jam277.5
Birkbeck has one of the best philosophy departments in the country..


That's because half the student body was alive at the same time as Descartes and Hobbes.
Original post by Trinculo
That's because half the student body was alive at the same time as Descartes and Hobbes.


repped
Reply 31
Avatar for t s
t s
12
Hope you've had a look at the CUG league tables before posting this thread.
Original post by t s
Hope you've had a look at the CUG league tables before posting this thread.


Like I said tho, there might be compelling reasons to pick RoHo or Birkbeck over Warwick, league tables notwithstanding
Reply 33
Avatar for t s
t s
12
Original post by Trinculo
Like I said tho, there might be compelling reasons to pick RoHo or Birkbeck over Warwick, league tables notwithstanding


I know, location is one of them. And I'm not sure if he's doing an undergrad course or postgrad - but surely it's worth studying in Warwick if he's taking an undergrad degree.
Original post by Trinculo
That's because half the student body was alive at the same time as Descartes and Hobbes.


Oh my gosh... XD
When I type in "Warwick VS", I tend to see only great competitors. Birkbeck and Royal Holloway are nowhere near Warwick's league, Warwick is prestigious. Now, Warwick is 9th for Phil in the UK too. It has a much stronger reputation and is renowned. Birkbeck and Royal Holloway aren't. They are standard universities. It seems as though the OP will be more likely to go further in Philosophy related academia if he/she held a Birkbeck degree- this is by far the most deluded thing to think of. An overall reputation means far more than just individual degrees- an overall reputation gets your foot into doors. Nobody will ever say Birkbeck is good for Philosophy unless you deeply know about Birkbeck history.

I actually believe this post to be a joke? Warwick philosophy will get you further than Birkbeck as it is an overall leading university competitor. It has a leading brand. Birkbeck and Royal Holloway do not.

As usual, I normally see Warwick VS : LSE, Imperial, UCL, KCL, Durham, Edinburgh, Bristol. To which the arguments are strong, but to Birkbeck vs RoHo?

If the OP isn't too fussed about reputation, then I suggest you visit each university and talk to each department, heavily research each course and what is the best for you.

Good luck OP!
(edited 7 years ago)
The thread is riddled with Warwick biases :rofl2: ^

The above user doesn't have much of an idea on what he's talking about. Sounds like the standard 'omg russell group unis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *****y non russel group unis!!' that you see daily. An overall university reputation does not mean more when it comes to academia overall, that's very silly. People in academia are going to be well aware of the reputation that individual departments have to show, if that's what he means by 'Birkbeck history'

Read this thread; https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhilosophyFAQ/comments/4hy3g8/what_do_i_need_to_know_about_graduate_school_in/

I've never heard of RoHo when it comes to philosophy, nor does it appear in the philosophy compass / Leiter rankings so I cannot speak on that front
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by jam277.5
The thread is riddled with Warwick biases :rofl2: ^

The above user doesn't have much of an idea on what he's talking about. Sounds like the standard 'omg russell group unis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *****y non russel group unis!!' that you see daily. An overall university reputation does not mean more when it comes to academia overall, that's very silly. People in academia are going to be well aware of the reputation that individual departments have to show, if that's what he means by 'Birkbeck history'

Read this thread; https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhilosophyFAQ/comments/4hy3g8/what_do_i_need_to_know_about_graduate_school_in/

I've never heard of RoHo when it comes to philosophy, nor does it appear in the philosophy compass / Leiter rankings so I cannot speak on that front


I doubt anyone is saying that Russell Groups are better than non Russells. It's more like Warwick only competes with the top 10- nobody else. It's those 10 mentioned that have the strongest UK reputation. Those top 10 outcompete any other uni in the UK easily due to their reputation, followed closely by St Andrews and Bath.
Original post by AmyAlbertsLamb
I doubt anyone is saying that Russell Groups are better than non Russells. It's more like Warwick only competes with the top 10- nobody else. It's those 10 mentioned that have the strongest UK reputation. Those top 10 outcompete any other uni in the UK easily due to their reputation, followed closely by St Andrews and Bath.


This is missing the point again. The above user is talking about his ass when mentioning all those russell group unis being better than Birkbeck/RoHo.

When it comes to academia, departmental rankings matter for more than the overall reputation of a university. The Leiter rankings that I mentioned is not a "league ranking". It's how actual professional philosophers have ranked departments - i.e. actual full-time professional academic philosophers. It's a ranking of the quality of faculty at every institution. Birkbeck has continuously been grouped in the top six (aside from this year) and it regularly does compete with Warwick. It also depends on the courses themselves -- Warwick for example doesn't have certain philosophy specialities that Birkbeck would have and vice versa, so the point i'm making is that it's not as easy as simply saying 'Warwick is a far better uni than Birkbeck therefore go to that' without taking other very important facets into consideration

Also, Birkbeck has an intercollegiate philosophy program with both KCL/UCL, and if it wasn't considered to be worthy, than KCL/UCL wouldn't have included Birkbeck in it's program
(edited 7 years ago)
Jam277.5 is quite right that Birkbeck's philosophy department is every bit as good, if not better, than Warwick's.

If the OP is interested in pursuing philosophy professionally (as opposed to obtaining a degree from a 'prestigious' university in order to impress a range of potential employers, as is the concern of most students on here) then this is not to be dismissed.

I agree with other posters that, in the round, Warwick is the better university, but given the OP's specific intentions that is not the most relevant point.

Royal Holloway is way out of the picture on either criterion.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you