This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Times Good University Guide 2007 Published

I've managed to find an article published today detailing the 2006 university league tables for the times......

Here are the tables !!!!

and here is a commentary article :

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,716-2209120,00.html

Well done

Alias667

I've managed to find an article published today detailing the 2006 university league tables for the times......

so here it is ! it isnt the full league tables, but details quite a number of the positions this year :

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,716-2209120,00.html

the tables will be published in the paper in todays (mondays) paper, and everyday all week, so ill add the full tables as soon as i get them....

Just a click away: 'The Times Good University Guide' 2007 rankings.

Reply 3

Drogue

19

Lol @ Loughborough in 5th - ranked below Bristol, Warwick, Bath and Durham in everything that really matters: research, entry standards, good honours, employment, etc. yet somehow above them, all because of the student satisfaction survey. A survey filled in by people with knowledge only of one university, and so not really a basis for comparison. When Northampton, which I know very well to be utter ****e, has a score above Imperial, I'd guess it's a pretty bad measure of anything academic.

The same, to a lesser extent, between Oxford and Cambridge. Oxford wins because of spending, when the academics should really be weighted higher, IMHO. Cambridge is top of 2/3 of the degrees it offers, Oxford nearer 1/3.

In terms of their ability to attract the best students (ie. entry offers), it goes:
Cambridge
Oxford
Imperial
LSE
Durham
Warwick
York
Nottingham

Which seems a lot more realistic as the top few, if you're judging academics primarily, not trying to compare a measure of student satisfaction.

Another issue I always have with it is how it measures graduate prospects - in terms of employment numbers, not quality of employment. York really has worse graduate prospects than Kingston or Abertay Dundee? Surrey being better than UCL, Oxford, Warwick or Edinburgh? Try telling that to graduate employers. UCL, Warwick and Oxford regularly get people into the hardest-to-get-into employers - top banks, consultancies government, academia, etc., which Surrey doesn't. Nothing against Surrey at all, but it doesn't create more employable students than UCL.

A bit disappointed at the way the table's going. It could easily be made into a useful guide, as the subject tables are. Look at the US way - uses spending, but weighted very low, grades, reputation, and academia rates highly and a far better notion of graduate employment. Then you end up with sensible tables.

Reply 4

swallows

7

Agreed. It's starting to look like the Guardian tables...(shock horror)

Reply 5

WokSz

17

Warwick is 8th ... OMG!

Reply 6

Alasdair

14

Sussex, 27th....hrm, could be worse. Above Glasgow, none the less?! My father won't be pleased...

That said, league tables are stupid anyway. Brighton Uni (59) has a higher starting graduate salary than Sussex (27) for example, and apart from LSE, none of the top ten even DO my degree (International Relations).

So all in all, it's just a way for posh Uni's to feel good about themselves, and their students to brag about it.

So, how long until the "5A's at 'A' Level, Unconditional offer from LSE, Oxford and Durham" sig brigade start adding their (usually prospective) Universities' rankings to their sigs??

Reply 7

Johnny

10

Drogue

Another issue I always have with it is how it measures graduate prospects - in terms of employment numbers, not quality of employment. York really has worse graduate prospects than Kingston or Abertay Dundee? Surrey being better than UCL, Oxford, Warwick or Edinburgh? Try telling that to graduate employers. UCL, Warwick and Oxford regularly get people into the hardest-to-get-into employers - top banks, consultancies government, academia, etc., which Surrey doesn't. Nothing against Surrey at all, but it doesn't create more employable students than UCL.

Don't be so quick to knock what you percieve to be a third rate university. Surrey's undergraduate 'Sound Recording (Tonmeister)' degree programme carries an impressive reputation in the sound engineering world. I wonder how many students from UCL (and the like) walk straight into jobs at EMI Abbey Road Studios, arguably the best sound recording studio in the world?

It goes without saying that in general Surrey is outmatched by UCL and I would like to make plain the fact that this is not what I am arguing. However to say (rather dismissively imo) that Surrey 'doesn't create more employable students than UCL' is simply incorrect; all graduates on the tonmeister course at Surrey are snatched up by the "hardest-to-get-into employers" within six months of graduation.

Reply 8

forever_lost

1

There are so many variables they just cannot measure. In terms of grad. recruitment there needs to be consideration for 1)london vs up north wages 2)quality/competitvness of job. I imagine lots of Oxbridge people go into low paid (but well respected) academic jobs and alike. Sure Lough. leads to you being a supermarket manager but you dont need a degree for that.

Student Satisfaction Survery...... i mean wtf is up with that?

What are peoples idea for aperfect universty league table? Mine would be:

Entry Grades
Grad recruiters opinions
% 1'st e.t.c
noble prize winners/respected lecturers

Reply 9

gooseymcgoose

11

Cambridge has a higher research assessment, higher entry standards, has higher standards for awarding honours, and better employment prospects... yet comes second to Oxford. Given that they acknowledge this as ridiculous themselves for years now, why not change the weightings?

Reply 10

forever_lost

1

I like it... Birmingham 33.

Reply 11

Knogle

16

Thanks for the link. :smile:

Thought I'd include the rankings here for easier reference:

Reply 12

Evil-Tuna

2

It surpasses the Guardian's ranking table in terms of being amusing. TV is a disappointment. But look at Leicester and Loughborough!

:smile:

Reply 13

drmoney89

1

forever_lost

noble prize winners/respected lecturers

its a pretty weak indicator. but on another note...these rankings are stil much better than guardian.

Reply 14

shady lane

16

Did anyone notice the #3 ranked "Imperial College"...no London whatsoever
but "University College London" is two spots below.
so they really are getting out of the University of London...sooner rather than later it seems

Reply 15

Clarence

14

Tut tut Glasgow 28th. Bad Form.

Reply 16

JadedHippy

11

Edinburgh at 11th. Pretty pleased.

Jaded

Reply 17

Knogle

16

shady lane

Did anyone notice the #3 ranked "Imperial College"...no London whatsoever
but "University College London" is two spots below.
so they really are getting out of the University of London...sooner rather than later it seems