This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

The bumper thread of University League Tables discussion - includes an info post

Reply 2380

tj hughes

Wow, that's ridiculous

I mean Cambridge shouldn't even be in the top 50

Reply 2381

CJAW

9

When do they publish the rankings by subject?

Reply 2382

username133326

16

Well at least Bangor isn't 79th again...

Reply 2383

Yumnaarrhhh

14

Kings is 31st, really? *sarcasm*

-Gosh, I know its a load of b.s :rolleyes:

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 2384

Benniboi1

9

I know that they're not particularly important and aren't reliable, but come on Warwick, up to 5th! :biggrin:

Reply 2385

rodcarter

6

Herriot-Watt ahead of Nottingham, Kings, Leeds and Manchester. No - just no.

Reply 2386

username380364

16

People actually take the guardian league table seriously?

Reply 2387

Jackso

17

Those guys really are not fans of Queen's Belfast.

Reply 2388

McMurdo

11

Original post by greekguy

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2012/may/21/university-league-table-2013

:smile:

Sounds pretty strange to me... UCL and Imperial should be above Warwick/St Andrews.

Reply 2389

fnm

13

Cardiff, Manchester, Sheffield at 39, 40 and 41. Dear me.

How is Exeter a better uni than Imperial? In the Guardian Table from 2005 Exeter was ranked 46th lol.

Reply 2390

I'mBadAtMaths

14

This league table is ridiculous. They place so much emphasis on the NSS (3 of the 9 main assessment criteria shown use the NSS). They don't even have a research assessment as one of their main criteria

Reply 2391

JagSan

11

I see this thread as people bashing the whole table because one university(the one they probably went to) isn't as high as they think it should be, which is biased. I don't really see the point of these league tables, they just convince people that choosing a uni isn't about the course, but about the ranking, which I find silly. I guess that's conformity and social pressure for you.

Reply 2392

little_wizard123

19

How are Buckingham 16th? All they've done well on is the NSS (not much better than the rest). The value added is terrible and the entry standards aren't exactly fantastic.

Reply 2393

tinytadpoletim

1

Apparently someone who went to Oxford would have worse career prospects than Newcastle and Buckingham, and the same career prospects as Robert Gordon University (which I've just had to look up as I hadn't heard of it before)... So basically, the PM and half the cabinet would be in a better job right now had they gone to Robert Gordon University???!!! Someone's having a laugh

Reply 2394

I'mBadAtMaths

14

Also the default league table is based solely on 'Average teaching score'...

Reply 2395

Adman32

My uni (Nottingham Trent) appears to be getting an increasingly **** ranking every year. :frown:

Reply 2396

BLu_REdEmTiON

...even Brookes went down, and Brunel's ahead of it :frown:

...but Imperial at 13 is unforgivable.

Reply 2397

Forget that

15

I stopped looking at the guardian league tables when is saw Brunel above Oxford for history.
Now that i have looked at this one i can see nothing has really changed
The 'good' university guide much better potential applicants

Reply 2398

F1's Finest

21

The guys at the Guardian are having a right barney...

Reply 2399

nulli tertius

21

Original post by tinytadpoletim

Apparently someone who went to Oxford would have worse career prospects than Newcastle and Buckingham, and the same career prospects as Robert Gordon University (which I've just had to look up as I hadn't heard of it before)... So basically, the PM and half the cabinet would be in a better job right now had they gone to Robert Gordon University???!!! Someone's having a laugh

Actually they probably would. Robert Gordon's speciality is turning people out for the oil industry and plenty of its graduates will be earning far more than the cabinet.

The bumper thread of University League Tables discussion - includes an info post

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you