(Original post by River85)
Of course it has. I'm not the one lacking basic skills in comprehension and how to form an argument.
I have already covered this.
The theory is that a research intensive department provides superior teaching as the academics are at the forefront of research.
Sometimes this doesn't always work out in practice and it will have a negligible effect. Even a negative effect as staff are more concerned with research than teaching undergradutes. As with anything in life things vary.
A number of the staff at Bangor, whose research was submitted to the RAE, do teach undergraduate students.
The bottom line is research is one aspect of a good department. You have been very dismissive of Bangor's department and initially failed to recognise its research strength (stating that it can't have such a good research score as it's so low in the tables). Finally, the teaching at Bangor is of a high quality and we can look at external assessments for this.
You are aware that student satisfaction is flawed, yet you still trust league tables! Don't you realise that league tables are heavily influenced by student satisfaction? It is given quite a significant weighting.
When student satisfaction was introduced (2005) it significantly altered the position of some universities.
I don't know how you can place so much faith in league tables but at the same time be so critical of student satisfaction.
Now, I wasn't using student satisfaction to argue that Bangor is better. I was showing that across the criteria league tables use Bangor does often outperform those at the top. It's you who places so much faith in league tables and that you're using league tables to argue Bangor is crap.
Yes? But what about the other universities? Manchester, for example?
It's a general point and quite a fair one.
Even if you use the Independent's table but gave one or two criteria a higher weighting then Bangor can easily climb twenty places.
Why is the weighting they use correct? Don't you see league tables are just a game in how to manipulate statistics?
Erm....no I didn't. Yet again your comprehension fails.
I said that Bangor can rival some "top ten" universities in terms of graduate employment. This is true.
Lancaster and St Andrews (two top ten/top twenty) universities have similar graduate prospects to Bangor. There will be others.
Using graduate employment is also flawed. Why? Because the definition of "graduate employment" is quite outdated. What's more, some people don't want to go straight into employment and travel. Finally, why does it make a department inferior? It doesn't. Teaching quality,
Research has significance. This has been explained by me (not sure if you saw the post as it was removed) and others.
No I haven't. I have also pointed to teaching quality scores and assessments. These can be found if you're actually informed enough and know where to find them.
Are you know going to say teaching quality doesn't matter?
Isn't it amazing that you're arguing it's crap yet have nothing to back this up with except league tables? League tables which are routinely criticised?
You even criticse student satisfaction yourself, yet ignore the role it plays in league tables! So by criticising student satisfaction you're actually exposing one of the flaws in these league tables.
So can I ask, if student satisfaction and research are both useless, then why are league tables so important? These are both used in league tables and are given significant weighting?
Do you really not see this?
And that in these league tables Bangor does compete with highly ranked universities in all but one criteria. Sometimes doing significantly better?
I'm not interested in any argument. Arguing with people on the Internetz (and trolling) is a very sad way to spend your time.
I am only interested in offering advice and correcting people who show clear ignorance.
If I didn't know any better I'd think you were doing this deliberately in order to get negative rep (and possibly even some insults through the rep system). It does give some people some jollies. But I don't neg.