[alicatee]

In my opinion these are the top 10 universities in the UK in terms of academics and prestige. The UK 'Ivy league':
1.)Oxford
2.)Cambridge
3.)LSE
4.)Durham
5.)Imperial
6.)Warwick
7.)UCL
8.)St Andrews
9.)Bristol
10.)Edinburgh

[nulli tertius]

(Original post by alicatee)
In my opinion these are the top 10 universities in the UK in terms of academics and prestige. The UK 'Ivy league':
1.)Oxford
2.)Cambridge
3.)LSE
4.)Durham
5.)Imperial
6.)Warwick
7.)UCL
8.)St Andrews
9.)Bristol
10.)Edinburgh

Your opinion is noted. Perhaps you would let us know why your opinion should be accorded respect. Are you an Ofsted inspector, a former vice-chancellor or the head of Universities UK; or perhaps you have made a lifetime's study of the subject?

[Tsunami2011]

(Original post by nulli tertius)
Your opinion is noted. Perhaps you would let us know why your opinion should be accorded respect. Are you an Ofsted inspector, a former vice-chancellor or the head of Universities UK; or perhaps you have made a lifetime's study of the subject?

You must get awfully bored of the adolescent teens on here who have claims to the accurate list of the UK's top 10 universities.

(Original post by alicatee)
In my opinion these are the top 10 universities in the UK in terms of academics and prestige. The UK 'Ivy league':
1.)Oxford
2.)Cambridge
3.)LSE
4.)Durham
5.)Imperial
6.)Warwick
7.)UCL
8.)St Andrews
9.)Bristol
10.)Edinburgh

Durham seems slightly inflated to me.. and suprise suprise you're a Durham firmer. To be honest, after Oxford, Cambridge, and possibly LSE and Imperial, I don't think this would really make sense. Consider that in the US, a Princeton degree is generally more prestigious than a Columbia degree to the massess. Princeton would probably be percieved as slightly below Yale and Harvard, and slightly above Columbia. However even if your table is accurate I don't think a Durham degree (4) is generally any more prestigious then a Edinburgh degree, despite a difference in 6 places.

[QuantumOverlord]

(Original post by Tsunami2011)
You must get awfully bored of the adolescent teens on here who have claims to the accurate list of the UK's top 10 universities.



Durham seems slightly inflated to me.. and suprise suprise you're a Durham firmer. To be honest, after Oxford, Cambridge, and possibly LSE and Imperial, I don't think this would really make sense. Consider that in the US, a Princeton degree is generally more prestigious than a Columbia degree to the massess. Princeton would probably be percieved as slightly below Yale and Harvard, and slightly above Columbia. However even if your table is accurate I don't think a Durham degree (4) is generally any more prestigious then a Edinburgh degree, despite a difference in 6 places.

Im not going to argue either way here, I will point out that prestige is largelly irrelevant if you are looking at the top 10, research quality, teaching quality e.t.c these tangible quantities matter far more. I think people should treat universities less like a game of football with winners, loosers and rankings and more like academic power houses.

Of course I would never argue all universities are equal, oxbridge is obviously the best in the country. However this is not due to their prestige (though undoubtadely they have that), but due to their fantastic teaching and resarch quality and thus their ability to attract applicants of a higher standard.

Now I understand durham does alot better than edinburough in the terrestial legue tables, and worse on the international ones. It is intelectually lazy and very biased to dismiss one or the other out of hand, as so many people do. All university league tables will have some validity, and should be discussed in terms of their methology NOT in terms of a vague phantom comparison to perceived prestige which I fear is the trap we all fall into far too often.

[Frenchous]

(Original post by Tsunami2011)

Durham seems slightly inflated to me.. and suprise suprise you're a Durham firmer. To be honest, after Oxford, Cambridge, and possibly LSE and Imperial, I don't think this would really make sense. Consider that in the US, a Princeton degree is generally more prestigious than a Columbia degree to the massess. Princeton would probably be percieved as slightly below Yale and Harvard, and slightly above Columbia. However even if your table is accurate I don't think a Durham degree (4) is generally any more prestigious then a Edinburgh degree, despite a difference in 6 places.

TSR and university insecurities again

[Tsunami2011]

LSE overtakes Oxford in latest university league table http://www.thecompleteuniversityguid...ables/rankings

The end is nigh

[Tsunami2011]

http://www.thecompleteuniversityguid...bles/rankings?

Top 10 are

1) Cambridge
2) LSE
3) Oxford
4) Imperial
5) Durham
6)Warwick
6) St Andrews
8) UCL
9) Lancaster
10) Bath.

Anybody else suprised by the large difference betwen the graduate prospects of LSE and Oxford?

UCL also seems strangely lower then usual..

[Ms.LastMinute.com]

surely all the russels group shud be in the top 10

[*Hakz*]

(Original post by y.yousef)
surely all the russels group shud be in the top 10

Do you even have any clue about what russell group is?

Anyway I think this new 2013 one is the worse I've seen so far from the complete university guide.

I mean who would go that far to rate Oxford economics higher than Cambridge's when Oxford don't even offer straight economics.
And I don't understand how LSE is ranked above Oxford overall?

Even the top 10 maths table is laughable. Oxford above Cambridge? St Andrews and Durham above Imperial?

[River85]

(Original post by y.yousef)
surely all the russels group shud be in the top 10

That would be quite difficult as there are over 10 members of the RG.

Or do you mean the full top ten should be 10 of the Russell Group? If so, you don't seem to know what the Russell Group is and how league tables work.

All ten are in the Russell or 1994 Group, but even if this weren't the cast, it doesn't make the Table false.

[Ms.LastMinute.com]

(Original post by River85)
That would be quite difficult as there are over 10 members of the RG.

Or do you mean the full top ten should be 10 of the Russell Group? If so, you don't seem to know what the Russell Group is and how league tables work.

All ten are in the Russell or 1994 Group, but even if this weren't the cast, it doesn't make the Table false.

Okay then, can you explain what Russel Group 'actually' is then?

[Tsunami2011]

(Original post by *Hakz*)
Do you even have any clue about what russell group is?

Anyway I think this new 2013 one is the worse I've seen so far from the complete university guide.

I mean who would go that far to rate Oxford economics higher than Cambridge's when Oxford don't even offer straight economics.
And I don't understand how LSE is ranked above Oxford overall?

Even the top 10 maths table is laughable. Oxford above Cambridge? St Andrews and Durham above Imperial?

lol yeah I lol'ed at St Andrews being above Imperial and Warwick for Maths

[Aaron_xyz]

When do the Times/Sunday Times tables get updated?

[BigVitaminD]

(Original post by Tsunami2011)
lol yeah I lol'ed at St Andrews being above Imperial and Warwick for Maths

The table is made using actual measurements and not merely preconceived notions.

All of your comments have been based on your preconceived notions about x being over x. You have not provided any critique of the methodology used in the construction of the table.

[HighestKungFu]

Lol every year these rankings get more and more peculiar. They are completely inconsistent across the board, and to be honest The Times/Sunday Times + world rankings are about all I think are reliable (given that rankings don't seem to change as dramatically every year). The Guardian is the most bizarre and The Complete University Guide is a close second - how can universities move 6-8 places every year? And how is LSE better than Oxford? As strong as it is I doubt anyone could disagree that Oxford and Cambridge still hold the crowns for best universities in the UK.

I also find it odd that despite all the new investment, excellent world rankings, and new membership of the Russell Group that Queen Mary has dropped 6 places in a year that has been marked by success. It has also just built the new ArtsTwo building and yet the History ranking also fell several places. I just find it a bit strange personally.

[Tsunami2011]

(Original post by HighestKungFu)
And how is LSE better than Oxford? As strong as it is I doubt anyone could disagree that Oxford and Cambridge still hold the crowns for best universities in the UK.

The insane thing, that all over Twitter, people think that the tide has turned, and LSE is now superior to Oxford, all because of one measly table.

[roh]

(Original post by y.yousef)
Okay then, can you explain what Russel Group 'actually' is then?

Do you not have Google?!

http://www.russellgroup.ac.uk/about-russell-group/

http://www.russellgroup.ac.uk/our-universities/

[River85]

(Original post by y.yousef)
Okay then, can you explain what Russel Group 'actually' is then?

Yes and have done many times.

It's a lobbying group comprised of larger research intensive universities. It currently has 20 members (the membership will be expanded with Durham, York, Queen Mary and Exeter, all members of the 1994 Group, joining soon). Ninteen of the current twenty members are in the top 20 of the country in terms of research income.

League tables are not meant to represent the membership of the Russell Group, which is not a selection of "the best 20 or so universities". League tables attempt to rank universities according to the criteria the compilers feel are important.

As league tables include things like graduate prospects, student satisfaction and entry standards, the membership of the Russell Group will not be identical (or near identical) to the top 20 in a league table, unless that league table looked at research power and income only. You will always have a large number of universities outside the Russell Group in that top 20, namely some universities from the 1994 Group - a lobbying group for smaller research intensive universities formally established in the same year that the Russell Group was formally/officially established.

[QuantumOverlord]

(Original post by Tsunami2011)
LSE overtakes Oxford in latest university league table http://www.thecompleteuniversityguid...ables/rankings

The end is nigh

Im going to make an important point here before I do though ill give a disclaimer.

Disclaimer: I am in no way making any conclusions of universities based on this data, I have my own personal opinions which I will not disclose (they are irrelevant). The point I make is based purely on this league table, and does NOT reflect my opinions on the university.


If you look at the actual ppts of the rankings, you will see that the top 5 have all either risen, or stayed so high they have met a celing effect. For example Durham was 5th place in the 2012 tables, and 5th in the 2013 however it has risen from 890 to 912 ppts, a significant rise. The same is true of LSE and IC; Oxbridge doesnt have much hope of rising on this relative system due to the ceiling effect. My point is, there is evidence of an increase in quality (as measured by this league table) for all of the top 5 universities. This should be taken into account. Also when I say 'top 5' please See my disclaimer.

[fnm]

Anyone else think the top 20 unis in the CUG are bang on? (Maybe except for a few interchangeable order positions)