Is Leicester really a top 20 university as they claim?

In the Complete University Guide they are #19, previously #16.
http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings

In the Sunday Times Rankings they are #14. Previously #17.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/University_Guide/

icu.org has Leicester at #16.
http://www.4icu.org/gb/

In the Guardian rankings they are #21 which is close, previously they were #13.
http://www.theguardian.com/education/ng-interactive/2014/jun/02/university-league-tables-2015-the-complete-list

On FindTheBest.co.uk they are #22 which is close.
http://universities.findthebest.co.uk/

So I'd say they still deserve that claim. In most world rankings I've seen they are much higher than Bath in fact.

But in the QS world rankings Leicester is ranked 202? Bath is at 187?

http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2013#sorting=rank+region=+country=208+faculty=+stars=false+search=

I'm not convinced, regardless of what media league tables say. Russell Group membership, tradition, and reputation wise I would place Leicester outside the top 25, maybe top 30 is the right position. Russell Group universities are considered the best, as well as St Andrews and Bath. That is just the way it is. Leicester may well come on board.

Why does Russell Group status make them the best in the country. So much fail in believing that Russell Group=all the best universities.

But in the QS world rankings Leicester is ranked 202? Bath is at 187?

http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2013#sorting=rank+region=+country=208+faculty=+stars=false+search=

I'm not convinced, regardless of what media league tables say. Russell Group membership, tradition, and reputation wise I would place Leicester outside the top 25, maybe top 30 is the right position. Russell Group universities are considered the best, as well as St Andrews and Bath. That is just the way it is. Leicester may well come on board.

I was looking at the THE rankings mainly, where Leicester Uni is #161 and Bath is in the #276-300 category.

If the rankings are based on prestigiousness/renown/reputation, then I'd agree with you, but in terms of teaching/experience I'd consider Leicester a top 20 uni.

There seems to be a world of difference between what league tables say, and what academia and top employers say. Bath is better than Leicester generally speaking for the courses it offers, and almost anyone who knows what they are talking about would agree. The younger generation tend to read league tables and hearsay, and then later find out they were to some extent misled. I've seen Leicester University close up, and I think overall it is around 28-30 in rank, and not top 20. Not being in the Russell Group is a huge blow. The grades on average you need to get into Bath are like AAAB. Even Oxbridge students really admire Bath as a top notch university, but not quite as much Leicester.

Don't get disheartened, Leicester is a good university, and boasts a medical school. It is top 30 definitely. It just isn't quite as good as Liverpool, Leeds, Manchester etc.

I don't mind, Leicester seems good to me. I know someone quite high up in an IT job in London, I got offers from Leicester and Bristol (Bristol was my firm, I missed the offer) and he said when their business looks at potential employees they probably wouldn't determine based on the university with candidates from these two universities, despite Bristol being Russel Group and Leicester not. I guess a lot of places may be different though.

I'm mainly curious about why you made this thread when you seem so confident in your own opinion already :P

Christ just look at the league tables. It's top 20 for everything. It's no good spouting off some elitist bull**** about russell group looking to start an argument.

It is objectively a top 20 university.

The point to get across is that league tables only provide a snapshot of the strength of a university. Leicester isn't quite up there with the big boys, it is a little behind them. It doesn't get held in the same regard as, say, Glasgow.

x

What are you basing this on though? You're choosing to disregard what the experts say and just replacing it with what you think is correct. What authority are you speaking with? It's just your opinion.

In fact, why are you even asking this question if you're so made up in your mind what you think Leicester is like/how it is regarded? What authority are you speaking with?

Well, Russell Group membership is the obvious method I use to assess a university for academic strength. Secondly, I look at whether a university has a medical/dental/vet school, as these courses in the vast majority of cases are entrusted to the better universities to award degrees. Thirdly, RAE ratings are of some value in measuring research strength. Fourthly, how many of the top 100 firms target the best universities (Notts and Manchester come top). And fifth, based on my own experiences from academia, business, and general consensus.

Ok, let's focus on fifth. Your academia, business, and 'general consensus'. What is this? What are your credentials? Because at the moment you sound like a pasty kid with his own idea of what's prestigious or high ranking without any real substance to back it up.

BSc Biochemistry Nottingham

MSc Microbiology Birkbeck

MSc Musculoskeletal Science UCL

Plus 8 years of experience in business (blue chip firms).

Yet you're on the student room trying to debate with Undergraduates on why Leicester isn't top 20... on the Leicester uni sub-forum.

Why?

Oh wait, yeah, you're bull****ting.

I would say probably not. The Russell Group, Bath and St Andrews have a better case, generally speaking. Leicester may well join that league at some point, however.