This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- UCL reputation in uk
- Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
- Unis similar to Glasgow and St andrews
- N/A
- Why KCL is so overrated?
- KCL vs Edinburgh?
- is UCL better than Durham?
- Bath vs Glasgow
- Rank these for me please
- Bath, Queen Mary, or Royal Holloway for Economics?
- St Andrews or King's College London for postgraduate master degree?
- University of Glasgow or University of Bath
- Which is more prestigeous Bristol or Exeter?
- How good/elite is the University of St. Andrews?
- PPE at Warwick vs. Manchester
- Is UCL the best after Oxbridge?
- Which university would you go to for a career in commercial law?
- Is Queen's University Belfast or Trinity College Dublin better?
- KCL or Nottingham
- Confused about which uni to go to
Rank UK Universities by Prestige
Scroll to see replies
Original post by polaritymolecule
A degree from the University of Oxford will give you a better chance of a job than the University of Ulster. So in theory, prestige is everything
The employment statistics for those at Cambridge who do Classics is terrible, so your point is actually invalid. An engineer from Aston for example will fair better in the real world than the classicist from Oxbridge.
For lols I will point out that I actually do Classics
Original post by danny111
You wouldn't believe who else makes use of rankings (economists acatually publish papers on rankings of economic departments).
Good grief. Why?
Chances are, RAE scores will be based on the most recent research conducted by the university. By the time the results have been collated, published and analysed by the individuals to whom the results may be of use, the universities will have conducted further research, and the results will no longer be accurate.
Original post by S.R
I used to fap over university rankings and then I grew up and realized that life's not about going to the 6th best university instead of the 10th best. When I was at school all I used to care about was getting into the most prestigious university over actually going somewhere that I'd like. I ended up hating it at two of the universities on your list. Now fast forward a couple years and i'd like to get into any reputable university eg Russell Group, graduate and start my career. It is true that going to a good university makes you stand out and has better facilities but I look back on my days of being unhappy with a university just because it was number 7 rather than number 4 which was just plain ridiculous. In the real world real achievements = doing well on your degree/making a difference to the world/making money, none of which have have anything to do with getting into a top 5 uni or whatever.
Hahahaha... rep to you!, the starting made me actually laugh out loud
Original post by Aeschylus
Strange. 2 years ago and we'd be into 10 pages by now
Good to see the Warwick obsession hasn't gone away.
Good to see the Warwick obsession hasn't gone away.
I'm with you. Spotted this and was looking forward to seeing mass digital wrath at the exact positioning of people's uni/alma mater/where they want to go when they actually apply in 2018 (delete as appropriate). Utterly horrified to find people slating the premise, TSR not getting outraged about some random's particular interpretation of university prestige just isn't right.
Original post by fnm
Could be stickied?
Some of the stickies get ignored as well. Could sticky this one at the top of the homepage though, it's TSR's bread and butter.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by JollyGreenAtheist
Good grief. Why?
Chances are, RAE scores will be based on the most recent research conducted by the university. By the time the results have been collated, published and analysed by the individuals to whom the results may be of use, the universities will have conducted further research, and the results will no longer be accurate.
Chances are, RAE scores will be based on the most recent research conducted by the university. By the time the results have been collated, published and analysed by the individuals to whom the results may be of use, the universities will have conducted further research, and the results will no longer be accurate.
They also rank economic journals and departments by fields of expertise.
Guys whats the fuss about? We all know that Bolton is the most prestigious University
Original post by polaritymolecule
Guys whats the fuss about? We all know that Bolton is the most prestigious University
That true? I heard a rumour, wasn't sure.
Original post by danny111
That true? I heard a rumour, wasn't sure.
Yea Bro, they take in the finest students each year
Original post by polaritymolecule
Yea Bro, they take in the finest students each year
You one of them? How do I get in, need to bribe someone?
Original post by jnkesd
1. University of Oxford
2. University of Cambridge
1. University of Oxford
2. University of Cambridge
Most absurd part of this thread.
Original post by danny111
You one of them? How do I get in, need to bribe someone?
Yea dude, studying for my baking degree. And yea, a little bribe with a few hundred K might do the trick
Original post by roh
I'm with you. Spotted this and was looking forward to seeing mass digital wrath at the exact positioning of people's uni/alma mater/where they want to go when they actually apply in 2018 (delete as appropriate). Utterly horrified to find people slating the premise, TSR not getting outraged about some random's particular interpretation of university prestige just isn't right.
There's also now a tendency for a large majority to oppose people saying that e.g. if you get a B you have failed at life.
I suspect that the impression one might have got not too long ago when looking at threads like this on here might just have come down to a few posters. I would suggest that ISA contributed fairly substantially.
Original post by TimmonaPortella
Most absurd part of this thread.
was expecting this comment to be so much earlier in the thread
Original post by TimmonaPortella
There's also now a tendency for a large majority to oppose people saying that e.g. if you get a B you have failed at life.
I suspect that the impression one might have got not too long ago when looking at threads like this on here might just have come down to a few posters. I would suggest that ISA contributed fairly substantially.
I suspect that the impression one might have got not too long ago when looking at threads like this on here might just have come down to a few posters. I would suggest that ISA contributed fairly substantially.
Strong possibility I suspect.
ISA was a truly outstanding troll, it was a sad day when she morphed from being on a single track to Oxbridge to suddenly being worried about her weight all the time.
Isn't the first or the last time this thread had been done - but can I give a employers perspective?
Albeit I've only recruited nursing staff but when doing so you have 20-50 nurses all over the country wanting a job, all from different universities. In nursing there are some better than others, e.g Nottingham, York, Manchester. However when deciding to offer an interview or a job that's probably one of the last things I consider.
Employers with a head on will want to see what you've done with your degree, extra curricular, interest in the field and experience in working environments. I'd rather offer an interview to a nurse from Anglia Ruskin Uni who spent her degree doing outside interest, volunteered in St. John's, did a dissertation topic in specialty applied for, had working experience than a nurse from Manchester who got a first class but that seemed to be it....
Albeit I've only recruited nursing staff but when doing so you have 20-50 nurses all over the country wanting a job, all from different universities. In nursing there are some better than others, e.g Nottingham, York, Manchester. However when deciding to offer an interview or a job that's probably one of the last things I consider.
Employers with a head on will want to see what you've done with your degree, extra curricular, interest in the field and experience in working environments. I'd rather offer an interview to a nurse from Anglia Ruskin Uni who spent her degree doing outside interest, volunteered in St. John's, did a dissertation topic in specialty applied for, had working experience than a nurse from Manchester who got a first class but that seemed to be it....
Original post by cambio wechsel
Employers certainly do this. However their grading system is very much less fine-grained than is supposed here and amounts to bunching 140 odd universities into 4 or 5 groups that we can most of us likely guess at.
You're dead right that it is a total nonsense when people on here ask whether their employment prospects will be better served by going to Nottingham or Bristol or whatever it is. It is as well a bit misguided when people try to ride trends in the table "I see Exeter is up 4 places" - the employers' notions of where's hot and not were fixed in about 1988, which is when they were applying to university.
You're dead right that it is a total nonsense when people on here ask whether their employment prospects will be better served by going to Nottingham or Bristol or whatever it is. It is as well a bit misguided when people try to ride trends in the table "I see Exeter is up 4 places" - the employers' notions of where's hot and not were fixed in about 1988, which is when they were applying to university.
Original post by jnkesd
Actually it does matter, it's what makes a degree worth something in the job market. A university could provide the best education in the world but if no one's heard of the institution no one would care to attend. For universities reputation is everything. Prestige is reputation.
Not true: perhaps it matters in the short run in terms of getting the first job but then it is talent. I just find threads like this a nonsense, and question the prestige addled types that post them in the first place.
Original post by Azarimanka
Not true: perhaps it matters in the short run in terms of getting the first job but then it is talent. I just find threads like this a nonsense, and question the prestige addled types that post them in the first place.
As much as I would tend to agree, both in factually and I want it to be true, but overall no way.
If career progress was solely based on merit, then why is there so much nepotism and general favouritism based on things other than merit?
Original post by danny111
As much as I would tend to agree, both in factually and I want it to be true, but overall no way.
If career progress was solely based on merit, then why is there so much nepotism and general favouritism based on things other than merit?
If career progress was solely based on merit, then why is there so much nepotism and general favouritism based on things other than merit?
It is true that people from the top universities dominate, but this may be more a representation that the most intelligent and able people tend to be at these universities. Nepotism and favouritism are simply part of human nature I'm afraid.
As someone who spent a long time in various positions relating to hiring and placing staff, I'm pretty sure that 95% of employers don't care about university rankings. The 5% tend to be specialist graduate recruiters or academic employers looking for very specific things, or operate a bit of an old boys' network. The rest will probably have heard of Oxbridge plus a handful of universities they've had direct experience of. They have better things to do than worry about whether Bath is ranked above Bristol. Even proper 'graduate' schemes seem to take a very relaxed view. My brother got onto a graduate scheme at PWC with a low 2:1 in sociology from Brighton. He qualified as a chartered accountant a couple of years ago and seems to be coping rather well.
I think even those employers who do look at apparent prestige do so with a pinch of salt. There's so much in the relative 'prestige' of an institution that is truly irrelevant to your education, it surprises me how it's even factored in. Research, for example. How does the quality of research carried out at your university really affect the education you receive unless you're a researcher yourself? The fact that my lecturer is doing some very expensive and important research for someone doesn't mean he's any better at explaining basic theory (completely unrelated to his research, which it'd take you 10 years to understand) to undergraduate students. If anything, I tend to find that those academics heavily involved in research are far more interested in research than teaching. Research quality only realistically becomes relevant in 99% of departments during postgraduate study, when you become a researcher yourself.
Entry grades are used for rankings too. Does the fact that an institution requires AAA automatically mean the teaching is better or that students will be better employees? No. Your A levels are a decent basic measure of pre-adulthood intelligence in an academic setting but that's it. You can't define the quality of education at a university based on the grades someone achieved elsewhere. Does a poll of academics' personal preferences (used in most ranking systems) mean anything? Considering that polls of academics have often managed to rank non-existent departments quite highly (for example, Princeton law school achieved a 7th place finish in the mid-2000s, despite Princeton not having a law school), this is probably irrelevant too.
Rankings and 'prestige' perception measures what can be measured, not what is relevant. And the relevant stuff can't be measured.
The overwhelming majority of employers (rightly) employ the candidate, not the institution.
I think even those employers who do look at apparent prestige do so with a pinch of salt. There's so much in the relative 'prestige' of an institution that is truly irrelevant to your education, it surprises me how it's even factored in. Research, for example. How does the quality of research carried out at your university really affect the education you receive unless you're a researcher yourself? The fact that my lecturer is doing some very expensive and important research for someone doesn't mean he's any better at explaining basic theory (completely unrelated to his research, which it'd take you 10 years to understand) to undergraduate students. If anything, I tend to find that those academics heavily involved in research are far more interested in research than teaching. Research quality only realistically becomes relevant in 99% of departments during postgraduate study, when you become a researcher yourself.
Entry grades are used for rankings too. Does the fact that an institution requires AAA automatically mean the teaching is better or that students will be better employees? No. Your A levels are a decent basic measure of pre-adulthood intelligence in an academic setting but that's it. You can't define the quality of education at a university based on the grades someone achieved elsewhere. Does a poll of academics' personal preferences (used in most ranking systems) mean anything? Considering that polls of academics have often managed to rank non-existent departments quite highly (for example, Princeton law school achieved a 7th place finish in the mid-2000s, despite Princeton not having a law school), this is probably irrelevant too.
Rankings and 'prestige' perception measures what can be measured, not what is relevant. And the relevant stuff can't be measured.
The overwhelming majority of employers (rightly) employ the candidate, not the institution.
(edited 11 years ago)
Related discussions
- UCL reputation in uk
- Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
- Unis similar to Glasgow and St andrews
- N/A
- Why KCL is so overrated?
- KCL vs Edinburgh?
- is UCL better than Durham?
- Bath vs Glasgow
- Rank these for me please
- Bath, Queen Mary, or Royal Holloway for Economics?
- St Andrews or King's College London for postgraduate master degree?
- University of Glasgow or University of Bath
- Which is more prestigeous Bristol or Exeter?
- How good/elite is the University of St. Andrews?
- PPE at Warwick vs. Manchester
- Is UCL the best after Oxbridge?
- Which university would you go to for a career in commercial law?
- Is Queen's University Belfast or Trinity College Dublin better?
- KCL or Nottingham
- Confused about which uni to go to
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day 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 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day 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 ?
