Sunday times - highest paid graduates

Welcome to the real world. Not TSR's little fantasy about getting starting wages of £40k.

It would be even more great if they done one for the course. For example Law, the highest paid students that graduated from a Law degree where from the following universities. That would be great man

oh just the position of Oxbridge on the list!

It's not particularly surprising to be honest. It'd be more surprising if salaries were based on achievement or some other idealistic end.

Not really. For example, Manchester (where I incidentally go) is the biggest campus university in Western Europe, so it makes sense that top employers are going to focus on such a place where the supply [of fairly decent students] is highest -- that doesn't mean that they accept the greatest number of students [in proportion to the total student body] from Manchester, however. In other words, they may only take a few fish from a big pond like Manchester, but many fish from a smaller pond like the LSE: the mere size of Manchester, however, means that it's worth the while of lots of employers pitching up their rods there, if I stick with the metaphor.

I thought it was more interesting to see who's giving Warwick a run for it's money given the cheery TSR consensus about it's brilliance.

Yeah, Warwick must be gutted - the only non-London uni apart from Oxbridge and Bath in the top ten, despite the fact that it has a big arts intake. Obviously the fact that it's not at the top of the list means TSR's opinion of its brilliance is wrong.

So is it now acceptable to state the fact that arts courses do lead to lesser paid jobs? I mean, we keep hearing how they are as useful to the economy as any science graduate and teach all sorts of skills employers are just craving for, why is this not being reflected in the salary tables?

This is exactly what I'd expect. LSE and Imperial are obviously going to be higher since they don't have people studying subjects like History of Art and Sociology dragging the starting salaries down.

It's probably not being reflected in the league tables because supply far exceeds the demand.
Let's say out of the ninety odd universities, eighty offer English, and they each have 100 places. That means there is around 8000 English graduates each year. Now most universities offer more places than that, and that's not including graduates from History, Philosophy etc. Most graduates from such subjects apply for the same jobs, e.g journalism so that's why humanities degrees hold less weight these days.

It's a well known fact most science courses aren't overly competitive, so there will be more competition for the graduates. However, since they're cutting funding for humanities, they'll have to cut places, meaning that the degrees will gradually gain more value.

Sorry, science degrees aren't competitive? If by competitive you mean fewer people apply because they either can't hack it or want an easier ride then sure. However, competitiveness can be just as well judged by the entry requirements and how many people last the entire course and don't fall by the wayside. Also, your argument falls for Economics and Law, both humanities subjects with high starting salaries.

Because Dundee is a smaller Uni but does have a lot of Medical students. Therefore its average is boosted by the higher doctor starting salary than at the other two, where although they have a lot of medics....they have a lot of History of Art etc dragging the average down.

Sorry I never saved the law table image.
What universities are you interested in?

I'd generally say no, science degrees aren't that competitive, exempting medicine. That's why I presume the entry requirements for subjects such as Straight Physics and Biology are usually lower than straight History and English.Based on the amount of applicants and entry requirements, it still indicates that sciences aren't overly competitive.Oh and Law and Economics are classed as social sciences, so my point still stands.

Or maybe the entry requirements are lower because:
a) Fewer people are taking them because they are hard
b) The subjects they request at high school level are the harder ones (such as Maths or Physics) as opposed to any odd A level.
Competitiveness isn't to do with blanket entry requirements, its to do with how many people can actually a) enter the course and b) do very well in it. Your argument confuses popularity with competitiveness, a middle-ranking university may have more applicants than MIT, that does not make it more competitive. And law's a humanities subject.