This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- How would deal with this
- Should i include my sat score in mycambridge application
- Am I allowed to stay at Imperial accommodation?
- Aqa physics 2023
- applying on enrollment day
- how do i acheive 30 marks or more on english lan paper 2 q5?
- Trophy hunting: Botswana threatens to send 20,000 elephants to Germany
- How much money do I need to move out?
- Accommodation Leicester
- University with no A levels
- A poem - The Ages Rhyme
- Switching DSA Suppliers from Barry Bennett to Sight and Sound
- I am half russian, half israeli, ask me anything.
- teeth grinding habit
- Deciding on my a levels
- Is creatine expensive?
- What to wear for office job
- fashion design schools in europe?
- Am I being bullied by lecturer?
- Economics at Trinity Cambridge
Outrageous, simply outrageous
(Know of the similarly titled thred on this theme) but had to post this having just had the misfortune to learn of Durham Law Dept's poor showing in the Guardian's listings. I nearly fell off my chair when I saw ignoble institutions of the likes of East Anglia and Essex towering over the DLD, but having got over this initial shock I consoled myself with the fact that it was plainly a load of bol10ck5 given that under their criterion for 'employability' durham grads were supposedly less successful than many of these ex-polys, etc (although nothing against ex-polys per se, just a little surprised at this).
The only explanation I can assert for this is that those snivelling lefties have devised some relative test by which the lesser ambitions of persons attending those institutions are factored in to their analysis. Long live The Times.
In any case, I don't dispute that changing the criteria is likely to produce differing results, but this is just another example of the Guardian trying to be radical, but appearing abstruse.
The only explanation I can assert for this is that those snivelling lefties have devised some relative test by which the lesser ambitions of persons attending those institutions are factored in to their analysis. Long live The Times.
In any case, I don't dispute that changing the criteria is likely to produce differing results, but this is just another example of the Guardian trying to be radical, but appearing abstruse.
Scroll to see replies
The Guardian league tables arent very good. Use the Times.
Or it could just be that when it comes down to true quality East Anglia and Essex are very good Univerisites for law and Durham isn't as good as it and its students like to think it is. Being a safehaven for Oxbridge rejects does not make a good University and having the name Essex, with all its associations with bimbos and Ford Escorts, does not make a bad Univeristy. This all seems like quite a snobish reaction to something that really isn't that surprising.
*stands up and applauds Essex and East Anglia*
*stands up and applauds Essex and East Anglia*
house badger
...and Durham isn't as good as it and its students like to think it is.
I have no idea why people think that Durham is that great.
tkfmbp
Because of its international reputation perhaps ?
Or its A1 teaching and research ?
If you asked a big multinational about UEA or Essex, they'd say "huh?"
Im not saying they are bad Unis, in fact UEA made me an offer which i only turned down caus Durham made me one.
Or its A1 teaching and research ?
If you asked a big multinational about UEA or Essex, they'd say "huh?"
Im not saying they are bad Unis, in fact UEA made me an offer which i only turned down caus Durham made me one.
That's certainly not true about UEA, Norwich Law School has a very good reputation.
I know its a very good school, but I hardly think it deserves to be ranked above Durham, surely ?
I can accept UEA doing well in the rankings, perhaps not above Durham, but ok, its a good course and well taught.
However, the Guardian has lost all its credibility by placing Essex above Durham. Sorry to any Essex students, but its just wrong.
I can accept UEA doing well in the rankings, perhaps not above Durham, but ok, its a good course and well taught.
However, the Guardian has lost all its credibility by placing Essex above Durham. Sorry to any Essex students, but its just wrong.
Ignore the subject tables.....everyone with any interest in law knows that Durham is a very highly respected and rated uni for law, some league tables are a load of nonsense. All that matters is that the people who matter know that durham is a great uni for law, who cares what other people think?
G
G
tkfmbp
Because of its international reputation perhaps ?
Or its A1 teaching and research ?
If you asked a big multinational about UEA or Essex, they'd say "huh?"
Im not saying they are bad Unis, in fact UEA made me an offer which i only turned down caus Durham made me one.
Or its A1 teaching and research ?
If you asked a big multinational about UEA or Essex, they'd say "huh?"
Im not saying they are bad Unis, in fact UEA made me an offer which i only turned down caus Durham made me one.
LOL, Durham does not have that type of reputation. Also, Essex is quite good for law.
A league table assesses Subjects and Unis on a certain set of criteria. I suggest you find out what those critieria are before you start shouting blue murder. For instance I went over to Nottingham Trent a few weeks ago and their computing facilities were much, much better than what we have here in Nottingham, that would score them big plus points on some league tables. Look at Luton, probably one of the best places to study for a degree in Maths in the UK for some years, but it's only getting recognition now.
I'm really glad that the Guardian is untangling teaching from research as it gives ex-polys a chance to show what they are good at and get some kudos amongst the general public, I felt that the previous league table systems were just bound to favour red-bricks by including criteria that weren't really to do with undergraduate studies (such as RAE ratings).
I'm really glad that the Guardian is untangling teaching from research as it gives ex-polys a chance to show what they are good at and get some kudos amongst the general public, I felt that the previous league table systems were just bound to favour red-bricks by including criteria that weren't really to do with undergraduate studies (such as RAE ratings).
Dajo123
LOL, Durham does not have that type of reputation. Also, Essex is quite good for law.
I think you'll find it does. On the basis that its top 5 for Law in the country (if not top 3). And since UK law degrees are well respected internationally, i would say that gave Durham exactly that type of reputation.
EDIT: and essex being "quite good" just isn't the same is it.
But surely it's only top 5 on the basis of other league tables with different criteria. I'm not knocking Durham at all, but surely the point of league tables is to assess universities on certain criteria and order them accordingly. As long as you don't take them too seriously, I don't see what the problem is.
tkfmbp
I think you'll find it does. On the basis that its top 5 for Law in the country (if not top 3). And since UK law degrees are well respected internationally, i would say that gave Durham exactly that type of reputation.
EDIT: and essex being "quite good" just isn't the same is it.
EDIT: and essex being "quite good" just isn't the same is it.
Yep, you just pick the league tables that suit you and debunk the rest.
If we're going to judge it purely by reputation, which I do not think is a good measure to solely base your judgement of an undergraduate degree, Oxford and Cambridge are clearly top, they are followed by the big London schools such as UCL and LSE. Then I think Durham follows along with the likes of Bristol, Nottingham, Warwick and other redbricks. Durham's reputation is good but nothing special.
A Universities reputation although being useful for getting your CV noticed does not teach you law or turn you into a good lawyer and that is where Universites such as Essex and UEA do well and Durham falls down. Whenever a thread like this comes up Durham students get hyper defensive and my rep takes a dive but the point still stands Durham is not as good as many people think. You'll graduate as good a lawyer from Essex or UEA, despite not having such a good sounding name next to your degree, as you will from Durham.
A Universities reputation although being useful for getting your CV noticed does not teach you law or turn you into a good lawyer and that is where Universites such as Essex and UEA do well and Durham falls down. Whenever a thread like this comes up Durham students get hyper defensive and my rep takes a dive but the point still stands Durham is not as good as many people think. You'll graduate as good a lawyer from Essex or UEA, despite not having such a good sounding name next to your degree, as you will from Durham.
house badger
You'll graduate as good a lawyer from Essex or UEA, despite not having such a good sounding name next to your degree, as you will from Durham.
I agree wid you, ive been lookin in2 things an outside of Oxbridge and University of London every other university is viewed by law firms as being more or less the same.
ColdFire
I agree wid you, ive been lookin in2 things an outside of Oxbridge and University of London every other university is viewed by law firms as being more or less the same.
Not quite, Notts, B'ham, Durham, Bristol, Mancs, are still considered better than the former polytechnics. There's a hierarchy below the top couple but being able to tell what it is other than in vague terms is something that's beyond me. Better using a vague mix of quality of the Uni, the course and whether you like the Uni.
Obviously the rep of a uni won't make u a good lawyer per se, but it will certainly attract better applicants and academics/ readers which is why good unis tend to be self-perpetuating in terms of success - surely much of Oxbridge's success is based on this (notwithstanding its also a more rigorous method of learning law).
Besides, Oxbridge grads clearly benefit from having read law there as opposed to other unis, purely on the basis of its rep (and quite rightly, cos its the best) so it seems strange to be knocking other top depts whose students should benefit from theirs.
Also durham is probably the best looking place to read law.
Besides, Oxbridge grads clearly benefit from having read law there as opposed to other unis, purely on the basis of its rep (and quite rightly, cos its the best) so it seems strange to be knocking other top depts whose students should benefit from theirs.
Also durham is probably the best looking place to read law.
Related discussions
- How would deal with this
- Should i include my sat score in mycambridge application
- Am I allowed to stay at Imperial accommodation?
- Aqa physics 2023
- applying on enrollment day
- how do i acheive 30 marks or more on english lan paper 2 q5?
- Trophy hunting: Botswana threatens to send 20,000 elephants to Germany
- How much money do I need to move out?
- Accommodation Leicester
- University with no A levels
- A poem - The Ages Rhyme
- Switching DSA Suppliers from Barry Bennett to Sight and Sound
- I am half russian, half israeli, ask me anything.
- teeth grinding habit
- Deciding on my a levels
- Is creatine expensive?
- What to wear for office job
- fashion design schools in europe?
- Am I being bullied by lecturer?
- Economics at Trinity Cambridge
