The Student Room Group

Should we get rid of weaker universities?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by zainyyyyy
ok, lets to save money lets burn down every single bad university. It doesnt matter what bad means but because this user says we should i think we should......

also entry to london met is like CCC. To get this at A level is hard and just because you dont agree it doesnt mean ****..

Also what does top 50 mean? cant a university just pay its way also as student satisfaction is how they judge why dont they just rig the surveys

you sir are retarded


entry may be stated as CCC but you can get on just about every course with 3 Es in reality.
Original post by Drewski
You completely ignored my question.


I didn't ignore it sweetie, as a solution I said those said departments could be merged into the universities that are closest to them. Like how sometimes there are top universities in the same city as the bad ones (e.g. Birmingham city/Nottingham Trent in comparison to Nottingham/Birmingham)
Original post by BabyLadDarren
entry may be stated as CCC but you can get on just about every course with 3 Es in reality.



does that hinder its ability to raise good students?
Original post by DraculaMihawk
I didn't ignore it sweetie, as a solution I said those said departments could be merged into the universities that are closest to them. Like how sometimes there are top universities in the same city as the bad ones (e.g. Birmingham city/Nottingham Trent in comparison to Nottingham/Birmingham)


So the big universities, with the big outlays, massive infrastructure to support, large class sizes and their own array of expensive courses now have to subsidise the new 'smaller' institutions-formerly-known-universities?

How popular do you think that's going to be?


Here's a hint: not at all.
Reply 24
Create alternatives or accept the fact that some people stay in education for the enjoyment of education.
Reply 25
the idea is nonsense for reasons already mentioned. i agree with OP's principle though, just not his ridiculous solution
The US has 600+ public universities. Reducing our number of universities will probably cause some sort of damane. By all means get rid of the really bad unis but we do need more than 50 universities in the UK imo
Or remove/reduce (substantially) their tuition fees?
Like the guy in the video says, if people attended that uni for free, it wouldn't be as bad.
Original post by Drewski
So the big universities, with the big outlays, massive infrastructure to support, large class sizes and their own array of expensive courses now have to subsidise the new 'smaller' institutions-formerly-known-universities?

How popular do you think that's going to be?


Here's a hint: not at all.


Just because those departments are merging doesn't mean they have to be subsidised by the university itself. As a separate college they raise their own funding or they simply vanish. There's already enough institutions to go around anyway.

Original post by Sorani
Create alternatives or accept the fact that some people stay in education for the enjoyment of education.


I agree technical colleges and apprenticeships should be of better quality and should be emphasised more by schools.

Original post by takasar
the idea is nonsense for reasons already mentioned. i agree with OP's principle though, just not his ridiculous solution


Not ridiculous. What's your solution then? Continue having naive students take out £27,000 debt in a degree in magazine journalism from a university ranked no. 89 and then be unemployed?

Original post by Trapz99
The US has 600+ public universities. Reducing our number of universities will probably cause some sort of damane. By all means get rid of the really bad unis but we do need more than 50 universities in the UK imo
We are a small country in comparison. It won't cause any damage considering we already have a plethora of top universities in the global top 100. We need to focus on getting our other universities in the top 100 that are already esteemed in our country.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by 999tigger
Too many . Not a god given right and just the best students from the best schools could go. It would make a degree rarer and worth having. It would also make sure the top 5 were adequately funded. Top 50 way too common. MIght even be better if we went back to just Oxbridge. Imperical could be a technical college and LSE just be able to teach economics to the Chinese.

Everyone who wasnt able to get in should know their place and be made to do apprentichships or work in a shop.


You have absolutely no clue about what you're talking about. Enjoy dreaming about your elitist fantasy world.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by zzFishstick
You have absolutely no clue about what you're talking about. Enjoy dreaming about your elitist fantasy world.


Or maybe I dont agree with the OP at all and that was the point I was making. Just a thought.
I say completely privatise the higher education sector and let universities set their own tuition fees. That way the universities that aren't up to scratch can fail and be shut down on their own accord.
Original post by 999tigger
Or maybe I dont agree with the OP at all and that was the point I was making. Just a thought.


Oh. It was your second post reiterating the same thing, so I assumed you were serious.
Original post by #ChaosKass
I say completely privatise the higher education sector and let universities set their own tuition fees. That way the universities that aren't up to scratch can fail and be shut down on their own accord.


I wouldn't mind privatising higher education as an alternative solution. A bit radical but I like it. We should keep our universities as elite institutions, privatise them and attract international students which helps to settle the equilibrium, which then gives us the endowments to allow those bright students from poorer backgrounds to go to university.
Reply 34
What about the people who go to university purely for the pursuit of knowledge? "Certain standard of academic excellence" is tosh.
First of all, to make any sense out of this argument you must provide evidence that those universities take in more than they give back.
Secondly, you must prove that even if the margin is negative, the cost being paid by the government isn't translated into better job prospects and/or better personal and political development of individuals
Until you provide that, your argument isn't worth considering.
Original post by Asurat
What about the people who go to university purely for the pursuit of knowledge? "Certain standard of academic excellence" is tosh.


That's a very noble thing to say but the reality is the burden is on the taxpayers. There's no guarantee that someone who got CDD at A-level will go to a top university and gain employment from their communications studies just because they wanted to learn more.

Certain standards of academic excellence is entry requirements. Depending on the course I believe anyone who gets below BBC-BCC shouldn't be allowed entrance at a university.
Reply 37
Bring the polytechnics back.
Reply 38
Original post by DraculaMihawk
That's a very noble thing to say but the reality is the burden is on the taxpayers. There's no guarantee that someone who got CDD at A-level will go to a top university and gain employment from their communications studies just because they wanted to learn more.

Certain standards of academic excellence is entry requirements. Depending on the course I believe anyone who gets below BBC-BCC shouldn't be allowed entrance at a university.

That sort of makes sense. I reckon rather than shutting people out entirely there should be a premium then. Universities were historically places to learn, not to pick up vocational skills.
Original post by oShahpo
First of all, to make any sense out of this argument you must provide evidence that those universities take in more than they give back.
Secondly, you must prove that even if the margin is negative, the cost being paid by the government isn't translated into better job prospects and/or better personal and political development of individuals
Until you provide that, your argument isn't worth considering.


Just look at the video I posted. It's happening everywhere, universities run like businesses now and prey on naive students. The margin is negative and many students have regretted going to university. You see them everywhere at McDonalds, KFC, Burger King, you name it, students with BA degrees from poor universities who regret their decision. Many of the students who come from those crap universities, who managed to get a job, could've gotten those jobs without getting in £27,000+ debt that many of them will never pay back. You wouldn't happened to go to London Met now would you?

There needs to be better alternatives, like I've already said in this thread, for those less academically capable students.
(edited 7 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest