Should St Andrews be in the Russell Group?

Poll

Should St Andrews be in the Russell Group?

Share your thoughts on this topic, here are mine:

The University of St Andrews is consistently ranked among the top 10 universities in the UK by domestic league tables. The ranking also place it ahead of many Russell Group universities in terms of research. Does it not deserves to be a part of the elite Russell Group? Why not?

Reply 1

The Owl of Minerva

14

I am sure it needs no validation through membership of the Russell group. Its a great uni anyway. A bit of a non-issue really.

Reply 2

alexsasg

15

It just goes to show that the Russell Group name isn't everything. Universities like ST Andrews, Bath and Lancaster always rank really highly yet aren't a part of it. I don't think it matters that much because people know that it is a really good uni regardless.

Reply 3

AviG123

OP

8

Of course, the University of St Andrews is great. But should it not get formal recognized for how good it is? Would it not benefit the university if it were to join the RG? Afterall, the majority of top universities are part of the RG. So why should St Andrews be any different.

Does it matter?

If there are a lot of pretty average unis in the Russel Group then i see no cause for wanting to join so badly.

St Andrews doesn't need their validation to know it's good. There are good universities that aren't in the Russel Group.

Reply 6

cambo211

19

Glad to see that a bunch of students are capable of judging a Universities research.

League tables mean **** all.

Reply 7

AviG123

OP

8

Original post by GPH92

Does it matter?

Why would people join the discussion if it didn't matter.

Reply 8

GPH92

14

Original post by AviG123

Why would people join the discussion if it didn't matter.

For company?

Reply 9

AviG123

OP

8

I guess the poll speaks for itself.

Reply 10

Clare~Bear

15

Whats the point of the RG? lots of data ranks unis in order or achievement, % employment after uni etc And like people have said on here, many unis are as good/better than RG unis, but aren't in it.

Reply 11

River85

17

Original post by AviG123

Share your thoughts on this topic, here are mine:

The University of St Andrews is consistently ranked among the top 10 universities in the UK by domestic league tables. The ranking also place it ahead of many Russell Group universities in terms of research. Does it not deserves to be a part of the elite Russell Group? Why not?

But the Russell Group isn't a group of universities who rank in the top 20 or so of league tables, or even the "best" 20 or so research universities.

Original post by AviG123

Of course, the University of St Andrews is great. But should it not get formal recognized for how good it is? Would it not benefit the university if it were to join the RG? Afterall, the majority of top universities are part of the RG. So why should St Andrews be any different.

It doesn't already?

Before I continue further, do you know what the Russell and 1994 Groups are and what their purpose is?

Reply 12

Joinedup

20

Original post by AviG123

I guess the poll speaks for itself.

you didn't have an option for 'doesn't matter'

Reply 13

poohat

18

The Russell Group isn't meant to be a group of the 'best' universities, its a group of the research intensive universities. If you look at the funding, St Andrews brings in less than 30% of the research funding of even the lowest RG member (Queen's University Belfast) and less than 10% of places like Oxford and Imperial. St Andrews is obviously a good university but it isnt a research powerhouse (at least in the sciences, which is where most research funding comes from; obviously humanities departments dont bring in large grants).

(Im excluding LSE since they only do social sciences)

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 14

Soft Cat

The Russell Group isn't a grouping of the UK's elite and most selective institutions as say the Ivy League are in America (which aren't necessarily the most selective in the US either).

They're simply the top 20 or so universities with the largest research grants mainly due to the fact that they have large biosience/medicine departments and are based in large-ish cities/regions, an ideal base for research.

There are universities and departments which as selective if not more so than the average RG university for example undergrad at Cass, Medicine/Dentistry at non-RG universities, etc.

Also I doubt many people would consider Liverpool to be more academically selective than St Andrew's (no disrespect to Liverpool). And Durham and Exeter and York were for years considered elite/selective institutions way before they joined the RG.

So St Andrew's doesn't really need to be a part of the RG to be considered an elite/selective institution it already is, was and always will be.

Reply 15

Soft Cat

Also the league tables mean jack all.

Besides I doubt the big cheeses at St Andrew's are losing any sleep over the issue.

Reply 16

MancStudent098

13

Original post by Soft Cat

The Russell Group isn't a grouping of the UK's elite and most selective institutions as say the Ivy League are in America (which aren't necessarily the most selective in the US either).

The Ivy League is just an athletics conference. It's actually very similar in a sense, it happens to contain a lot of the best US universities so people use 'Ivy League' as short hand for 'The best US unis' when Stanford, MIT, Chicago etc aren't actually in it. The Russell group gets used as shorthand for "good UK unis" when actually there are good UK unis that aren't in it, because at core it's about research output, not the calibre of student intake.

Reply 17

Soft Cat

Original post by MancStudent098

The Ivy League is just an athletics conference. It's actually very similar in a sense, it happens to contain a lot of the best US universities so people use 'Ivy League' as short hand for 'The best US unis' when Stanford, MIT, Chicago etc aren't actually in it. The Russell group gets used as shorthand for "good UK unis" when actually there are good UK unis that aren't in it, because at core it's about research output, not the calibre of student intake.

Yeah I know but the Ivy League colleges do consistently rank amongst the most selective/competitive institutions at undergrad and postgrad level and all rank inside the top 10/20 nationally. Stanford, MIT and Chicago are higher rated if not leagues ahead of some memebrs of the Ivy League like say Brown and Dartmouth.

But to refer to the RG as some sort of UK Ivy League Equivalent is rather audacious given that some of the universities in the RG don't even rank in the top 20 or 30 nationally and are hardly considered academically selective with the exception of say Medicine/Dentistry/Vet Med courses and perhaps the odd Law course or so.

I mean Leeds, Sheffield, Liverpool, Cardiff, Glasgow, good universities with a great reputation but not highly selective across most disciplines only the ones which are uber competitive.

At least the members of the Ivy League whilst not necessarily the best in the US as Berkely, MIT, Caltech, Stanford and Chicago would argue, are certainly far more selective than the average RG University bar Oxbridge, UCL, LSE, Imperial and Edinburgh which are just as selective as those if not more so.

Reply 18

MancStudent098

13

Original post by Soft Cat

Yeah I know but the Ivy League colleges do consistently rank amongst the most selective/competitive institutions at undergrad and postgrad level and all rank inside the top 10/20 nationally. Stanford, MIT and Chicago are higher rated if not leagues ahead of some memebrs of the Ivy League like say Brown and Dartmouth.

But to refer to the RG as some sort of UK Ivy League Equivalent is rather audacious given that some of the universities in the RG don't even rank in the top 20 or 30 nationally and are hardly considered academically selective with the exception of say Medicine/Dentistry/Vet Med courses and perhaps the odd Law course or so.

I mean Leeds, Sheffield, Liverpool, Cardiff, Glasgow, good universities with a great reputation but not highly selective across most disciplines only the ones which are uber competitive.

At least the members of the Ivy League whilst not necessarily the best in the US as Berkely, MIT, Caltech, Stanford and Chicago would argue, are certainly far more selective than the average RG University bar Oxbridge, UCL, LSE, Imperial and Edinburgh which are just as selective as those if not more so.

Hence the distinction between the words 'best' and 'good'.