Most overrated and underrated universities in Britain?

Rankings don't define prestige. Nottingham is held almost in the same regard as Warwick and Bristol by graduate employers traditionally. Few universities have ever been described as a prime alternative to Oxbridge, only Durham and Nottingham, by the Times. It is people like you who are giving students, who download UK rankings and select Lancaster, Exeter or Heriot Watt from the good ranking over Manchester and Nottingham, false hope and less prosperous career prospects in the elite fields like Law and Banking. By prestige Nottingham is still a top 10-12 university, that will never change, not now, nor in 50 years time. The tariff points average is also expected to increase year on year at Nottingham, and 440 points is good given that the university has 24,000 undergraduates, Durham has 16,000, UCL has 16,000, St Andrews has 9,000.

Nottingham was ranked 171 in the world in the THE rankings just a few days ago. Nobody has heard of Nottingham outside the UK. Many universities have campuses, SGUL, RCSI have campuses abroad. I don't think people define them as elite universities.

440 tariff points is still quite low. It just means the average student from Nottingham did not do as well on their A-levels as students from St Andrews, UCL and Durham and a whole slew of other universities.

24,000 undergraduates will never equate to 500 plus tariff points, even if it were Oxbridge. Also the university has said they will increase the average to 460 points minimum over the next 5 years.

Yeah it would. If Oxbridge increased its enrollment even if it doubled it would be taking students who would've otherwise gone to UCL, St Andrews, Durham, Warwick, Imperial and LSE. Their Tariff would have dropped slightly but would still be well over 500.

Maybe and maybe not. Either way, only the ''G5'' universities are super elite. St Andrews isn't even a UK top 10, and Durham is miles behind UCL.

Not according to UCAS tariffs.

The G5 are good at both undergrad and postgrad however Durham and St Andrews are good for undergrad.

The league tables are good at showing which universities are good for an undergraduate education as they mostly value things like student satisfaction and UCAS tariffs and graduate employment. I agree that student satisfaction is not perfect by any means and is influenced by many extraneous factors like student expectations but they are still somewhat useful.

Generally universities with lower student satisfactions really do have aspects that students don't like including a less responsive administration.

The good name a university has counts above all else. Exeter, Lancaster and the like will always be seen as second rate compared to the traditional heavyweights. Rankings won't save them, unless perhaps a good international meta ranking.

Leicester. Just finished there and almost everyone I spoke to had Leicester as a back-up choice rather than as the place they were looking for as no. 1 choice. It's actually a very good uni.

And UCL is ranked lower, but is ten fold better overall. The good name a uni has means a million times more than rankings.

St Andrews does have a good name and so does UCL.

The problem with you Hogan is that all you can about is promoting your own school. You'll use whatever rankings ranks your school the best and then try and justify it.

What's your view, mine is:

Most overrated: Warwick, Leeds.

Most underrated: Liverpool, Sussex.

Are you kidding, St Andrews wasn't ranked 26th, it hasn't been out of the top 15 in 15 years. Link us if you want to prove your case. Hogan, i know you are old, but 10 years ago was 2004, this was post-Prince.

St Andrews is a top 5 because it has the age, the alumni, the prestige, and the UCAS tariff. Maybe its not a top 5 for a postgrad degree, but for undergrad there is no doubt, its a top 5.

Durham is vastly overrated, when I was discussing with 5 of my friends a few months ago where they were thinking of applying all 5 literally thought Durham was absolute perfection and was their no.1 choice...a few months later after the open day and only 1 is still applying, the other 4 thought it was nowhere near as good when they went. Just shows how a really good reputation can actually be damaging to a university if it doesn't live up to it.

I've never heard that claim before. Over the years I've become increasingly wary to get involved in rankings debates that cover universities as a whole, but its widely considered that Oxbridge, UCL, LSE and Imperial are the top 5 in the UK.

The aforementioned uni's:
a) Are consistently ranked at the top of domestic academic rankings
b) Are consistently ranked at the top of international academic rankings
c) Are consistently ranked at the top of domestic and international employers rankings (see the LinkedIn rankings for an interesting new ranking)
d) Are world-leading in nearly all of their subject areas (both in terms of undergrad/postgrad and research)

St Andrews does not meet those requirements. Sure it's a top uni, but it's not a top 5.