Article: Loughborough University is better than 80% of Russell Group universities
Scroll to see replies
Original post by PQ
But not one that has been backed up in any of the many studies of the NSS 
Since the studies of the NSS are the subject of my criticism - and seemingly everyone else's bar the golden class of politicians and NUS reps - that doesn't come as much of a surprise.
Original post by Fenice
Since the studies of the NSS are the subject of my criticism - and seemingly everyone else's bar the golden class of politicians and NUS reps - that doesn't come as much of a surprise.
Oh please - you've no idea what research has been done into the NSS. That's why you're main criticism is that it measures satisfaction (which it doesn't and was never designed to do).
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce/content/pubs/indirreports/2014/Review,of,the,NSS/2014_nssreviewa.pdf is a good summary of the current research. Page 37 onward discusses the main criticisms of the methodology/content/results. You're half baked idea that "smart kids are more critical"/"students at good universities expect more" doesn't even get a look in - it's a nonsense idea propagated by the press and school children who don't understand the methodology and research behind the survey.
Original post by PQ
If you're going to make these claims and generalisations about what is good and bad about the NSS at least do your research
Original post by PQ
I'm not IMPLYING anything
There is positive correlation between overall satisfaction (and teaching satisfaction) in the NSS and higher entry tariffs.
You stated
Which implies that you believe students with higher tariff scores have simple minds.
There is positive correlation between overall satisfaction (and teaching satisfaction) in the NSS and higher entry tariffs.
You stated
Which implies that you believe students with higher tariff scores have simple minds.
That isn't a logical conclusion. What he is saying is that students with lower expectations and who have worked less hard to get to university are going to be easier to satisfy than higher-performing students. It doesn't follow from that that there will be a negative correlation between overall satisfaction and higher entry tariffs. In the case of Loughborough and UCL, it makes sense that much greater differences in terms of competition for places, entry tariffs and popular reputation than there are differences in terms of teaching standards may create a situation in which Loughborough students are marginally more satisfied by their education than those at UCL even when the standards of teaching at the institutions do not reflect these respective scores.
Oxbridge, LSE, UCL, Imperial and Warwick and the universities which will always be high. They are internationally known and are comparable to Ivy league colleges in the US.
All the article is, is that Loughborough is doing well but please do not compare it to the prestige of these universities, it will never meet their level.
All the article is, is that Loughborough is doing well but please do not compare it to the prestige of these universities, it will never meet their level.
Original post by Fenice
That isn't a logical conclusion. What he is saying is that students with lower expectations and who have worked less hard to get to university are going to be easier to satisfy than higher-performing students. It doesn't follow from that that there will be a negative correlation between overall satisfaction and higher entry tariffs. In the case of Loughborough and UCL, it makes sense that much greater differences in terms of competition for places, entry tariffs and popular reputation than there are differences in terms of teaching standards may create a situation in which Loughborough students are marginally more satisfied by their education than those at UCL even when the standards of teaching at the institutions do not reflect these respective scores.
He can speak for himself - why are you speaking for him?
Original post by PQ
He can speak for himself - why are you speaking for him?
It speeds things up, especially when what is being said is glaringly obvious.
Why do you invariably insist on a sour and patronising tone of voice?
Original post by Fenice
It speeds things up, especially when what is being said is glaringly obvious.
Why do you invariably insist on a sour and patronising tone of voice?
Why do you invariably insist on a sour and patronising tone of voice?
Why do you insist that your gut instincts are the "common sense" reason for variations in NSS results in the face of evidence to the contrary?
Original post by PrinceHarrys
[video="youtube;ZANlYjuQJ-4"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZANlYjuQJ-4[/video]
Looks like an academically rigorous culture
Original post by PQ
Why do you insist that your gut instincts are the "common sense" reason for variations in NSS results in the face of evidence to the contrary?
I don't accept it as evidence to the contrary for the reasons I have given
Original post by Fenice
I don't accept it as evidence to the contrary for the reasons I have given
Copy and pasting a wikipedia page that doesn't actually reference any of the large scale studies of the NSS isn't exactly a reason.
Especially when your main criticism is "the influence of expectations on the results" which is highlighted by the NUS as something they would like the NSS changed to allow for and then make statements like:
Original post by Fenice
Since the studies of the NSS are the subject of my criticism - and seemingly everyone else's bar the golden class of politicians and NUS reps - that doesn't come as much of a surprise.
I can't help but think that you're commenting without having done even basic research
Original post by PQ
Copy and pasting a wikipedia page that doesn't actually reference any of the large scale studies of the NSS isn't exactly a reason.
When that page references rebuttals from educational professionals and reliable reports of abuses by universities, that is reason to dispute the value of the studies, which is the heart of my contribution.
Especially when your main criticism is "the influence of expectations on the results" which is highlighted by the NUS as something they would like the NSS changed to allow for and then make statements like:
I can't help but think that you're commenting without having done even basic research
I can't help but think that you're commenting without having done even basic research
It is quite clear that I was saying the woeful NUS are one of the few organisations which lend solid support to the findings, not that they think they are perfect. You have however helpfully pointed out that even they find them lacking in exactly the area I have identified.
I have never claimed to have done a doctoral dissertation on this subject. Unlike a few sad souls of working age here I do not have endless amounts of time to squander in debates with teenagers on fairly trivial items. What I have done is construct a reasoned argument as well as reference information from an open encyclopaedia. You have not engaged with my posts at all except to impotently repeat your faith in the NSS, misrepresent cherry-picked sentences and demonstrate your unattractively pompous demeanour.
Original post by Fenice
When that page references rebuttals from educational professionals and reliable reports of abuses by universities, that is reason to dispute the value of the studies, which is the heart of my contribution.
It is quite clear that I was saying the woeful NUS are one of the few organisations which lend solid support to the findings, not that they think they are perfect. You have however helpfully pointed out that even they find them lacking in exactly the area I have identified.
I have never claimed to have done a doctoral dissertation on this subject. Unlike a few sad souls of working age here I do not have endless amounts of time to squander in debates with teenagers on fairly trivial items. What I have done is construct a reasoned argument as well as reference information from an open encyclopaedia. You have not engaged with my posts at all except to impotently repeat your faith in the NSS, misrepresent cherry-picked sentences and demonstrate your unattractively pompous demeanour.
It is quite clear that I was saying the woeful NUS are one of the few organisations which lend solid support to the findings, not that they think they are perfect. You have however helpfully pointed out that even they find them lacking in exactly the area I have identified.
I have never claimed to have done a doctoral dissertation on this subject. Unlike a few sad souls of working age here I do not have endless amounts of time to squander in debates with teenagers on fairly trivial items. What I have done is construct a reasoned argument as well as reference information from an open encyclopaedia. You have not engaged with my posts at all except to impotently repeat your faith in the NSS, misrepresent cherry-picked sentences and demonstrate your unattractively pompous demeanour.
a) writing letters to the THE complaining about the marketisation of HE isn't the same as looking at the underlying factors and drivers behind various NSS results. The lit review I linked you to shows the things that *do* influence NSS scores. "High expectations" isn't one of them.
b) I've not once stated that the NSS is perfect or stated "faith in the NSS" - I've just pointed out that there's no evidence to support your claim. I did link you to a very good report summarising the flaws of the NSS. Instead of engaging in that you've repeated your unproved, unevidenced "common sense" theory while accusing me of bias.
c) could you give me an example of where I've misrepresented you?
d) as for pompous:
Original post by Fenice
University X is filled with third-rate students making use of second-rate resources surrounded by first-rate postgraduate research and an enviable number of biothermal toilets. These tables emphasise the areas that are either peripheral, dodgily measured or completely irrelevant to prospective undergraduates and are therefore totally inadvisable resources when deciding which universities to apply to for undergraduate degrees.
Original post by Fenice
That isn't a logical conclusion. What he is saying is that students with lower expectations and who have worked less hard to get to university are going to be easier to satisfy than higher-performing students. It doesn't follow from that that there will be a negative correlation between overall satisfaction and higher entry tariffs. In the case of Loughborough and UCL, it makes sense that much greater differences in terms of competition for places, entry tariffs and popular reputation than there are differences in terms of teaching standards may create a situation in which Loughborough students are marginally more satisfied by their education than those at UCL even when the standards of teaching at the institutions do not reflect these respective scores.
Yes thankyou
Original post by PQ
He can speak for himself - why are you speaking for him?
I think its more defending a position then defending individuals.
yes I can speak for myself but in this case he seems to have understood my position and defined it well. I would just repeat what he said but with my own words, if I had typed up a reply before I had seen his comment.
Original post by Luke7456
Yes thankyou
I think its more defending a position then defending individuals.
yes I can speak for myself but in this case he seems to have understood my position and defined it well. I would just repeat what he said but with my own words, if I had typed up a reply before I had seen his comment.
I think its more defending a position then defending individuals.
yes I can speak for myself but in this case he seems to have understood my position and defined it well. I would just repeat what he said but with my own words, if I had typed up a reply before I had seen his comment.
In which case I'd recommend a read of http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce/content/pubs/indirreports/2014/Review,of,the,NSS/2014_nssreviewa.pdf which summarises the various studies on the NSS and highlights things that DO influence the scores and things that don't.
Your "idea" that "simple minds" are more satisfied is not evidenced within the NSS. (and there's actually a growing amount of evidence that it isn't true in general too: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19659985 )
Original post by trustmeimlying1
I mainly observed yeh Mr. Neill but yeh seem a dick.
For why? My reply was to someone saying they "could never study somewhere (L'boro) " because their students like to party, to drink vodka, and have drinking games. My point is all universities are by definition full of students, some of whom like to have a party, and/or have a drink, and/or play drinking games. Even Oxbridge (as per my riposte), and specifically considering the OP's further reply, even in America (despite the higher age of legal drinking there). Shock horror.
That said, many other students enjoy university, study for their degree and have a good time, all without alchohol.
Original post by jneill
On what basis is it "2nd rank"? The RG is not a ranking method, it's a lobby group.
Are Bath and St Andrews also "2nd rank" because they aren't in the RG.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Are Bath and St Andrews also "2nd rank" because they aren't in the RG.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I wish more people would understand this
Original post by jneill
On point
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Fenice
I'd be interested to know whether you as a company has been in any sort of communication with Loughborough regarding an appearance on TSR.
PS You've created faulty links to the league tables
I'd be interested to know whether you as a company has been in any sort of communication with Loughborough regarding an appearance on TSR.
PS You've created faulty links to the league tables
No comms - this isn't sponsored content which I post on page two of the comments.
Sponsored content is clearly marked on TSR.
We discuss and share content on the majority of league table updates - it always creates a lot of discussion and given this one has 100 comments, it seems members are still wanting to share their opinion.
Original post by She-Ra
No comms - this isn't sponsored content which I post on page two of the comments.
Sponsored content is clearly marked on TSR.
We discuss and share content on the majority of league table updates - it always creates a lot of discussion and given this one has 100 comments, it seems members are still wanting to share their opinion.
Sponsored content is clearly marked on TSR.
We discuss and share content on the majority of league table updates - it always creates a lot of discussion and given this one has 100 comments, it seems members are still wanting to share their opinion.
There's more to being a great university than having a high ranking in UK league tables. Loughborough is at least two decades behind most universities in the Russell Group. It doesn't have the resources, income streams or infrastructure of more reputable universities, let alone the best courses or talent. Any serious top student should aim higher if they have any serious ambitions in life.
Original post by Magic Streets
There's more to being a great university than having a high ranking in UK league tables. Loughborough is at least two decades behind most universities in the Russell Group. It doesn't have the resources, income streams or infrastructure of more reputable universities, let alone the best courses or talent. Any serious top student should aim higher if they have any serious ambitions in life.
What do you think of unis like Nottingham which are comparatively well placed in the world rankings but lie lowly in the national rankings?
Original post by citibankrec
What do you think of unis like Nottingham which are comparatively well placed in the world rankings but lie lowly in the national rankings?
Nottingham has a good name in the business World, and a £600 million income, as well as vast resources and assets, both in the UK and overseas. They could do with selecting the best talent over quantity though in the UK. They seem to be using high student numbers as a means to fund new developments.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Loughborough- russell groups
- Loughborough vs. Southampton for Mechanical Engineering
- If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to be
- Fine Art - Loughborough or Edinburgh?
- Rank these for me please
- Low gcse maths grade, could I still do architecture?
- Loughborough vs Uni of Sheffield for 2024 intake?
- university choices
- Would my Gcses be good enough for a russel group?
- uni application
- Nottingham vs qmul vs Loughborough
- Scared to apply for uni because of my GCSEs.
- can i get into university with 2 a levels and a btec
- Will going to Trent lower my graduate prospects?
- Is the Russell Group still relevant?
- Top 15 universities
- want to apply uni
- Both economics and business at a level
- The Best Universities for Boosting Graduate Earnings
- Do Russel Group unis make a difference?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
