The Top 10 UK Universities

It actually is their own fault they weren't founded earlier. There is no such thing as sympathy points for universities. Besides Nobels only started being awarded in the early 1900s.

You can't use the UoL when you want them and throw them away when you don't. UoL is like the university of california, it doesn't really mean anything. Berkeley is as much a different university from Riverside as UCL is from QMUL or Birkbeck.

To be honest, it just looks like you are grasping at straws here. We can talk when people are turning down Oxbridge offers for UCL and Imperial in large numbers.

I was only bringing up the University of London because you went by a completely irrelevant metric of nobel laureates. Fundamentally, Imperial has only been separate recently and so I don't think it is unfair to bring up the nobel laureates from the UoL. I still don't understand how having nobel laurietes proves anything, it's not like you are being taught by Rutherford at Cambridge Similarly, if you look at the individual colleges for Cambridge, you will see similar proportions of nobel laureates as those at the individual UoL colleges.. If you want to measure the quality of research, just look at the RAE which came out this year which put Imperial 2nd and Oxbridge 5th/6th.

The RAE put Oxford 1st, Imperial was 8th... You are looking at the ranking that puts the institute of cancer research 1st... The one everyone cares about is the research power rankings and in that Oxford and Cambridge were 1st and 3rd respectively.

Also, don't forget Imperial isn't even part of UoL anymore.

Each college at Oxbridge has only a few hundred students. If you want to compare UoL to Cambridge then each student at Cambridge gets the funding, attention and value of about 7 London students. Prestige is about selectivity as well, if your university isn't a selective school, its not prestigious. If your grandmother could walk in and pick up a degree, then it just isn't as prestigious as if only the top scorers on an exam could do the same

I was looking at the overall score by the REF 2014, which put Imperial 2nd and Oxbridge 4th/5th by GPA. Fundamentally, if you want to pick an choose which data to say such University is ahead, then go ahead. The REF latest results shown on the Times Higher Education chose to portray Impeiral as 2nd. I wouldn't be surprised if Imperial has a smaller research power considering how we have far few departments than Oxbridge.

Also, you seem to be ignoring the fact that the only reason i am bringing up the UoL is the fact that you are highlighting a bull**** metric of nobel laurietes. You can't say that Oxbridge has so many nobels and then ignore the portion of history in which Imperial has been part of the UoL. Also you argue about selectivity but don't seem to realize that Imperial and UCL have a lower acceptance rate than Oxbridge.

I was looking at the overall score by the REF 2014, which put Imperial 2nd and Oxbridge 4th/5th by GPA. Fundamentally, if you want to pick an choose which data to say such University is ahead, then go ahead. The REF latest results shown on the Times Higher Education chose to portray Impeiral as 2nd. I wouldn't be surprised if Imperial has a smaller research power considering how we have far few departments than Oxbridge.

Also, you seem to be ignoring the fact that the only reason i am bringing up the UoL is the fact that you are highlighting a bull**** metric of nobel laurietes. You can't say that Oxbridge has so many nobels and then ignore the portion of history in which Imperial has been part of the UoL. Also you argue about selectivity but don't seem to realize that Imperial and UCL have a lower acceptance rate than Oxbridge.

Imperial/UCL have a lower acceptance rate than Oxbridge because they get all the people applying 'for a punt' - whereas with Oxbridge having admissions tests and interviews, people are far less willing to just 'have a go'. That is to say, despite Imperial/UCL having a lower acceptance rate, that doesn't make it harder to get in.

Also I'm not quite sure how Imperial can be ranked higher on REF than Oxford. Even just looking at the departments shared by Oxford and Imperial, Oxford clearly did better overall.

First number is %age classified as 4* and the second is %age 3*

I was looking at the overall score by the REF 2014, which put Imperial 2nd and Oxbridge 4th/5th by GPA. Fundamentally, if you want to pick an choose which data to say such University is ahead, then go ahead. The REF latest results shown on the Times Higher Education chose to portray Impeiral as 2nd. I wouldn't be surprised if Imperial has a smaller research power considering how we have far few departments than Oxbridge.

Also, you seem to be ignoring the fact that the only reason i am bringing up the UoL is the fact that you are highlighting a bull**** metric of nobel laurietes. You can't say that Oxbridge has so many nobels and then ignore the portion of history in which Imperial has been part of the UoL. Also you argue about selectivity but don't seem to realize that Imperial and UCL have a lower acceptance rate than Oxbridge.

Cambridge, Oxford, UCL,LSE, Imperial, Bristol, Edinburgh, Warwick, Durham, St Andrews.

In no particular order.

By the way, its all very well comparing research etc but the fact remains that the overwhelming majority of people go to uni due to the potential of earning more money in the future. That's what matters most to most people when choosing a uni

Posted from TSR Mobile

Perhaps it's because of the fact that your little table doesn't take into account all the different engineering and medical disciplines offered. If you look at all the subjects Imperial has a higher GPA overall. If you look at my previous posts, I did argue that Imperial was ranked higher of 8/14 subjects, that still leaves 6 which they were lower.

Fundamentally, I don't care after a certain point, as Uni is only as good as you can achieve. If you believe that Oxbridge students are "brighter" because of arbitrary interview tests then you are misguided. Neither of which have been shown by google to prove any correlation over the success of the applicant. Fundamentally, 80% of Imperial students are Oxbridge rejects. We still achieve success and are just as competitive as any other Oxbridge candidate out there.

Perhaps it's because of the fact that your little table doesn't take into account all the different engineering and medical disciplines offered. If you look at all the subjects Imperial has a higher GPA overall. If you look at my previous posts, I did argue that Imperial was ranked higher of 8/14 subjects, that still leaves 6 which they were lower.

Fundamentally, I don't care after a certain point, as Uni is only as good as you can achieve. If you believe that Oxbridge students are "brighter" because of arbitrary interview tests then you are misguided. Neither of which have been shown by google to prove any correlation over the success of the applicant. Fundamentally, 80% of Imperial students are Oxbridge rejects. We still achieve success and are just as competitive as any other Oxbridge candidate out there.

Oxbridge students are predominate in law, media and politics. They are also score the highest on the MRCP part 1 and 2. Their intelligence is clearly leading to something on average.

Sorry, I'll update my little table.



These are the only units Oxford and Imperial share. Adding the extra units has only gone and made it even more bewildering how anyone thinks Imperial did better than Oxford on REF

Funding another university to such levels that will allow it to employ Oxbridge-like means of teaching will mean that funding from Oxbridge (or other universities) will have to decrease. Thus, since funding is already too tight, it comes down to whether we want to petentially harm the reputation of Oxbridge and create a third, similar, university or keep things the way they are.

In my opinion -given these reasons- the UK government is right, if what we assume is true. Oxford and Cambridge benefit the UK not only because they themselves are prestigious, but because they are linked with the wider UK academia. I would say that they are the main(!) reason the UK as a whole is considered a centre of academic excellence, which of course benefits the UK economy immensely.

As such, a third ultra-prestigious university is not really needed. Unlike most other countries, which only boast one-two very good universities with the rest being under-funded and generally bad, you will receive a good education outside of Oxbridge (say the top 15?), which I believe is more than enough.

EDIT: And by the way, there are quite a few other universities which are older than Oxbridge.

What about aeronaughtics, mechanical, civil etc? If you feel you are smarter at interpreting than the Times Higher Education feel free to write an article explaining how you are better at interpreting data.

Did you not read: "These are the only units Oxford and Imperial share"?

I don't particularly care how the Times decide to interpret the results. You said Imperial was ranked higher in 8/14 subjects - where has this statistic been plucked from? There aren't even 14 units shared between Oxford and Imperial, and Imperial only had a higher proportion of the submission deemed world-class in two of the eleven shared units (and in both cases Oxford trailed by 3-4%) whereas in the nine units where Oxford had a higher proportion of research deemed world class, on average Oxford was nearly 10 percentage points ahead of Imperial.

It's also worth pointing out that from the Times' GPA ranking the difference between Oxford and Imperial's GPA is 0.02, arguably a non-existent difference when you take into account how they calculate the GPA. It doesn't take into account the fact that, for non-science units, there seems to be a lower proportion of research deemed 4* all around, clearly this is going to boost Imperial's GPA considering all their units are from those where it seems to be a higher proportion of submissions are awarded 4*.

Looking back at this thread and i am in pure amazement at the amount of academic masturbation going on by posters trying to feed their egos. It seems as if people are trying to feed their own ego's somewhat.

Looking back at this thread and i am in pure amazement at the amount of academic masturbation going on by posters trying to feed their egos. It seems as if people are trying to feed their own ego's somewhat.

I got the rankings form the complete University guide.

x

x