The Student Room Group
Learning at Imperial College London
Imperial College London
London

IMPERIAL -High prestige but low student stisfaction level ???

I have been looking at the CUG table which ranked Imperial highly 3rd 2011 and dropped to fifth this year. What really puzzled me is that a reputable Uni such as Imperial has one of the lowest Student Satisfaction level recorded. (I understand this is a measure of teaching quality from final year student survey).

My questions are :-

1) If teaching quality is so unsatisfactory, why Imperial still able to produce quality graduates

2) Do you find the teaching not up to the required standard ?

3) In what aspects of teaching you think Imperial is having a problem with students ?

Scroll to see replies

Its not always as simple as how happy are you with teaching. It can be, things like

How was the starting standard of this course.
How stimulating where the lectures.
How useful where the recommended texts.

Unsatisfactory teaching doesn't really tell you anything, if you don't know the standard of the assessments. I would look at the drop out rate, if the teaching so poor many people will be dropping out.
Learning at Imperial College London
Imperial College London
London
Reply 2
Original post by canlah2
I have been looking at the CUG table which ranked Imperial highly 3rd 2011 and dropped to fifth this year. What really puzzled me is that a reputable Uni such as Imperial has one of the lowest Student Satisfaction level recorded. (I understand this is a measure of teaching quality from final year student survey).

My questions are :-

1) If teaching quality is so unsatisfactory, why Imperial still able to produce quality graduates

2) Do you find the teaching not up to the required standard ?

3) In what aspects of teaching you think Imperial is having a problem with students ?


The student satisfaction survey is fundamentally flawed. Since most students have only ever attended one university, how can they possibly make an informed judgement as to how good teaching is relative to other universities? There is no objective measurement of what 'good' and 'bad' teaching is.

It's also likely that different types of students will have different expectation levels. Imperial tends to have more well-motivated, dare I say it 'geeky' students who are likely to have higher demands over the content of the courses. If you feel that you worked really hard to get onto a very competitive course then presumably you will have higher expectations once you get there.

Having said all that, there is quite a strong correlation between entry tariff and student satisfaction, and Imperial is the biggest outlier. But we're talking quite small variations, less than 10 percentage points difference from the best scoring universities.
Original post by canlah2
I have been looking at the CUG table which ranked Imperial highly 3rd 2011 and dropped to fifth this year. What really puzzled me is that a reputable Uni such as Imperial has one of the lowest Student Satisfaction level recorded. (I understand this is a measure of teaching quality from final year student survey).

My questions are :-

1) If teaching quality is so unsatisfactory, why Imperial still able to produce quality graduates

2) Do you find the teaching not up to the required standard ?

3) In what aspects of teaching you think Imperial is having a problem with students ?



nobody bothers to fill it
I hated every second of it (Imperial), complete waste of time. I guess it's a hoop to employment for those that way inclined. Interestingly, they never asked me fill their survey form, mmm. :rolleyes:
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 5
Original post by Physics Enemy
I hated every second of it (Imperial), complete waste of time. I guess it's a hoop to employment for those that way inclined. Interestingly, they never asked me fill their survey form, mmm. :rolleyes:


And they never asked me... I think we might be onto something :eek::eek:
Original post by Moa
And they never asked me... I think we might be onto something :eek::eek:

And their stats regarding employment within 6 months of graduating etc are clearly BS and rigged. Most people I know are unemployed bums or dossing around with silly Masters. It's all propaganda, education is a scam in reality. It's designed for higher powers to make money, simple.
Original post by Physics Enemy
And their stats regarding employment within 6 months of graduating etc are clearly BS and rigged. Most people I know are unemployed bums or dossing around with silly Masters. It's all propaganda, education is a scam in reality. It's designed for higher powers to make money, simple.


I don't know if the leagues are rigged or not, but in the case of education being a propaganda and a scam.

I don't think it is.

Firstly, we are given freedom to choose whether to go or not to go to university. If you don't think it is useful, nobody is forcing you to go.

Secondly, depending on the course taken, a degree can be a huge investment in terms of being capable of getting a good job - sure, there will be people that will get unemployed initially, but mostly it's with the "light" courses and they should already have had an idea where would that lead them. If that's not the case, it's about the perseverance to keep looking for a job and to further improve their job employability and prospects.

Lastly, going to university is an amazing opportunity to develop yourself, not just academically, and learn more about a subject you're genuinely interested in.

Also, some people say education is scam since what is taught are mostly unnecessary. I think they're missing an important thing here - studying a subject is, in my opinion, not just about memorizing facts and being able to write the correct answers in the exam: I believe that the real purpose of education is to develop your ability to learn, which is probably one of the most important skills that one should improve and one of the most sought after skills by employers. This is why some people who study sciences get a job in complete unrelated non-science jobs.

Well, it can't be helped some people love to think about conspiracies and have a victim mentality....
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Physics Enemy
You're fed with propaganda and lies from a young age and then make a decision (at too young an age) based on that. People are stigmatised if they don't go (said propaganda) and hence go to avoid that. Hardly free choice.


Really? Where I live, people here don't judge people on their choices on academic life. Plus, why do you even care if others judge you - it's your life, do what you want. You care too much on what other people think about you.


Can or will? What does 'can' even mean? It's a concept from thin air. Either there's a reliable, set structure with an assigned outcome and associated probability, or there isn't. In which case, anything can happen. Hardly in the glossy brochure.


"can" mean there's a chance of it happening and that chance increases with the actual effort you put in. It's not definite, but hardwork pays off - doesn't mean you that if you graduated from a top uni, jobs will be spoon fed to you. You gotta make contacts and increase your employability.

Ridiculous statement. This is the IC section, rendering your first comment irrelevant. The second is again from thin air (propaganda); there's loads of grads who'd laugh at that. Do you have a job? How many interviews have you had? Academics are often largely irrelevant anyway; once face-face, a gazillion quirks and prejudices come into play. Hot blonde with Imperial degree =/= Dorky chinese nerd with Imperial degree.


I'm referring to what you said about education being a scam, not just in Imperial.


Perhaps ... for SOME ... but not at that cost; rip off. A few friends and parties? A library? LOL.


That may have been the case on you, but this largely depends on the student and how he manage his life at uni.

Except at IC, it mostly is about rote learning; most of the students are rote learning-hard working-nerds. The bright ones who can think go to Oxbridge.


Talk about prejudice....


And why not actually learn useful stuff that actually helps in 'real life', rather than total rubbish (mainly jargon) that isn't helpful at all in the 'real world'? It's a load of BS and people rarely ever get to apply the content they learn. It's mental masturbation; historically a trait of the middle classes, who had too much time on their hands


I agree, there are a lot of things we're being taught that are just completely unnecessary; but, how do you suggest education should be like? What's the solution you have in mind?

Well, it's hardly a conspiracy, that much we can agree on. A system designed for the higher powers to make money, via good advertisement and biased stats; hardly a big shocker. Still fools 18 year olds and clueless parents, though.


Two ways to look at this. If you get a good degree and get a nice job, the system is great. If you graduated and had been unemployed, it's a conspiracy.

A lot of IC's material is also dressed up Further Maths using fancy notation and words; it's made overcomplicated, satisfying the ego's of lecturers and inflating perceived course rep.


It may seem "dressed up Further Maths" to you, but the A Level Further Maths is just the basic, while the Maths at uni is the more advanced version. The fancy notations make the calculations quicker to write, easier to read, and to take less space on paper, while what you see as overcomplications are actually the helpful techniques which allow us to use the technology we use today; and also advance it.

Most people in top jobs are well bread posh white people ... walk down Sloane Square and see for yourself. Scam.

Stop caring about them and comparing yourself to them -- focus on achieving your goals and doing what you enjoy.
Original post by Alpha-Omega
Really? Where I live, people here don't judge people on their choices on academic life. Plus, why do you even care if others judge you - it's your life, do what you want. You care too much on what other people think about you.

At this age I won't, but I'm speaking of 16-18 year olds fed false notions from clueless teachers and parents. There is a stigma.

Original post by Alpha-Omega
"can" mean there's a chance of it happening and that chance increases with the actual effort you put in. It's not definite, but hardwork pays off - doesn't mean you that if you graduated from a top uni, jobs will be spoon fed to you. You gotta make contacts and increase your employability.

Ok, though that's hardly how they present the idea to teens.

Original post by Alpha-Omega
I'm referring to what you said about education being a scam, not just in Imperial.
.
Ok, so it seems you agree that regarding other courses and unis, there is deception involved.

Original post by Alpha-Omega
That may have been the case on you, but this largely depends on the student and how he manage his life at uni.

Paying a fortune for friends, parties and library access is not logically sound.

Original post by Alpha-Omega
I agree, there are a lot of things we're being taught that are just completely unnecessary; but, how do you suggest education should be like? What's the solution you have in mind?

Exactly. There's little point in uni then. A bright 18/19 year old heading to Oxbridge/ICL/LSE is able to go into employment and learn on the job; they need to this anyway after a degree! The material learnt at uni is a farce. My theoretical physics degree is a farce. What use is it? A maths degree, what use is it? Direct, applicable, essential use that is. I'll never need it.

If they need a way to sort out the best, make them do psychometric/IQ tests. And/or extra hard exams to gain entry into the company (rather than for a degree!). Again, employers do this anyway. A degree is a money spinner and superfluous.

Original post by Alpha-Omega
Two ways to look at this. If you get a good degree and get a nice job, the system is great. If you graduated and had been unemployed, it's a conspiracy.

Ok, but it's still a hoop and a money spinner prior to the passage of employment, from the perspective of the employed (based on the above statements I made)

Original post by Alpha-Omega
It may seem "dressed up Further Maths" to you, but the A Level Further Maths is just the basic, while the Maths at uni is the more advanced version. The fancy notations make the calculations quicker to write, easier to read, and to take less space on paper, while what you see as overcomplications are actually the helpful techniques which allow us to use the technology we use today; and also advance it.

Hardly more advanced. A lot of it is the same stuff, yet made overcomplicated with pointless terminology, notation, etc. It makes it only harder and more confusing, yet a simple A-Level FM book from Waterstones can teach it perfectly; at little expense.It's an ego exercise for lecturers trying to show off, at the expense of actually teaching their high-fee paying students. That's a scam to me.

Diff Equations, Matrices, Complex numbers, Eigenvectors, Polar Integration, etc. Simple A-Level material milked for all it's worth to make money, and yet overcomplicated with useless jargon and weird notation. A waste of time, money and effort.

AlphaStop
caring about them and comparing yourself to them -- focus on achieving your goals and doing what you enjoy.

Fine line between not caring and being oblivious
(edited 12 years ago)
:nothing:
Reply 11
The teaching quality is fine. Teaching depends on how good the particular lecturer is, and this is pretty random across all decent universities (you can get a good or bad lecturer anywhere). The low student satisfaction scores come mainly from the poor social life, which is caused by multiple factors
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 12
Original post by canlah2
I have been looking at the CUG table which ranked Imperial highly 3rd 2011 and dropped to fifth this year. What really puzzled me is that a reputable Uni such as Imperial has one of the lowest Student Satisfaction level recorded. (I understand this is a measure of teaching quality from final year student survey).

My questions are :-

1) If teaching quality is so unsatisfactory, why Imperial still able to produce quality graduates

2) Do you find the teaching not up to the required standard ?

3) In what aspects of teaching you think Imperial is having a problem with students ?


1. The students they recruit are extremly high achievers. They are able to compensate for poor teaching with self motivated study and an ability to work things out for themselves.

3. Quite often a strong research university is pretty awful at the amount of good teaching time and feedback it gives to undergraduates. Classes can be taken by PhD students rather than the more famous members of staff. People in higher education are not necessarily good teachers or trained to be so. Teaching is a discipline in itself and being fantastically brainy at a subject as many lecturers and professors are is not actually any guide to how good they will be as actual teachers and lecturers.

Older, prestigious institutions can be slow to adapt to changing times. Students want good teaching, appropriate and timely feedback and support. In the old days you were lucky if your tutor even knew your name!
Reply 13
No lecture courses are taught by PhD students at Imperial and I doubt they are at any other good university either. PhD students can take tutorials, and mark coursework (not exams) however.

You are right that being a good researcher doesnt necessarily make someone a good lecturer though, and since the top universities mainly look at research when hiring staff, its possible to get poor lecturers. That said, a good researcher is more iikely to have a deep understanding of the subject, and hence has more insight into which parts are really important, which can make the courses they teach to undergraduates more interesting
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 14
Original post by Physics Enemy


Except at IC, it mostly is about rote learning; most of the students are rote learning-hard working-nerds. The bright ones who can think go to Oxbridge.


And study advanced STEP?
Original post by Raiden10
And study advanced STEP?

Who does?
Reply 16
Original post by Physics Enemy
Who does?


Perhaps I have you confused with someone else. I was just very exasperated.

But of course, Imperial isn't going to please everybody. It's not the friendliest place.
Original post by Raiden10
Perhaps I have you confused with someone else. I was just very exasperated.

But of course, Imperial isn't going to please everybody. It's not the friendliest place.

To be fair I did make a sweeping statement. There are some bright people at IC, yet a lot of grafters/rote learners. Then again, there's some of these at Oxbridge too ... even STEP can be semi rote learnt at high levels of practise. Mmmm.

IC courses (and maybe all/most courses? I can't comment) are graft/rote-learnt orientated though ... very 'anti STEP/BMO' in their design.

Agreed, it's not friendly at all. Very cold and harsh atmosphere; bad for learning all in all.
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 18
I assume youre in maths from your post history? An undergraduate degree is going to have a lot of rote learning no matter where you go, what else do you think youre going to do? Yes, you need to develop problem solving skills and mathematical maturity along the way, but at the end of the day there's a huge amount of material that you simply have to learn, and reading/memorising proofs is one of the best ways to learn how to do your own. Its not like youre going to be developing new mathematics as an undergrad (unless youre a prodigy); the frontiers of new research are much further beyond university level in maths than they are in most other subjects. The place to display independent learning skills is through your projects, and Imperial offers you one of those at the end of every year.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by poohat
I assume youre in maths? An undergraduate degree is going to have a lot of rote learning no matter where you go, what else do you think youre going to do? Yes, you need to develop problem solving skills and mathematical maturity along the way, but at the end of the day there's a huge amount of material that you simply have to learn, and reading/memorising proofs is one of the best ways to learn how to do your own. Its not like youre going to be developing new maths as an undergrad; the frontiers of new research are much further beyond university level in maths than they are in most other subjects - an undergrad degree barely gets you up to the start of the 20th century. The place to display independent learning skills is through your projects, and Imperial offers you one of those at the end of year.

It's very boring, what's the point in rote learning proofs or intricate pieces of theory one doesn't really understand? What use is that in a 9am-5pm? For 9k a year + living expenses? Insane.

Latest