Yeah thats because they're very different unis, LSE is mainly social science and humanities based, whilst Imperial is very scientific; the only crossover i believe is in geography(?). I'm not going to even pretend i know much about Imperial as i haven't even applied there ahah. So surely the two unis aren't comparable? But UCL being above LSE is something I dont understand?
Lol there's no Geography at Imperial...it doesn't even count as Science. The only crossover is Maths and LSE doesn't even do straight Maths.
Yeah thats because they're very different unis, LSE is mainly social science and humanities based, whilst Imperial is very scientific; the only crossover i believe is in geography(?). I'm not going to even pretend i know much about Imperial as i haven't even applied there ahah. So surely the two unis aren't comparable? But UCL being above LSE is something I dont understand?
Nope, there's no crossover really (well, there's Maths but the departments are hardly comparable - LSE's is fairly weak). Imperial do Geology degrees not Geography.
Manchester is only marginally better than those universities... particularly Newcastle. Some one from Manchester will have practically the same prospects as some one in Newcastle
True, but it is a large factor in these rankings, along with employer activity. Students shouldnt be particuarly skeptical about the research power of an institution for example.
True, but it is a large factor in these rankings, along with employer activity. Students shouldnt be particuarly skeptical about the research power of an institution for example.
And end up at York, uea, Newcastle or Sussex ahead of Manchester? Lol god no.
Or want a green campus uni rather than a city red brick in middle of a busy city? Also (for physics at least) be in a dept of 300 students per year rather than 100.
Neither is wrong, just anyone choosingchoosing solely on any league table is daft. More to university than a ranking
Nope, there's no crossover really (well, there's Maths but the departments are hardly comparable - LSE's is fairly weak). Imperial do Geology degrees not Geography.
Well don't i look silly now, did say i didn't know much about imperial but my issue is more along the lines of how can Imperial be compared to LSE and vice versa when they're completely different, and how come UCL is above LSE when LSE do half their subjects and yet in the student room its an accepted view by some that if you get into LSE and UCL you should pick LSE?
Tut. Typical TSR. Any chance to take a bash at us poor BSc Geography students. haha.
Imperial does lotsa stuff that arguably comes under the wing of geography at postgrad, such as remote sensing. Understandable that they don't do the more generalist undergrad geography degrees that the likes of UCL do, being a more technical uni.
Tut. Typical TSR. Any chance to take a bash at us poor BSc Geography students. haha.
Imperial does lotsa stuff that arguably comes under the wing of geography at postgrad, such as remote sensing. Understandable that they don't do the more generalist undergrad geography degrees that the likes of UCL do, being a more technical uni.
In case you misunderstood I wasn't bashing Geography at all.
Well don't i look silly now, did say i didn't know much about imperial but my issue is more along the lines of how can Imperial be compared to LSE and vice versa when they're completely different, and how come UCL is above LSE when LSE do half their subjects and yet in the student room its an accepted view by some that if you get into LSE and UCL you should pick LSE?
The THE rankings have a heavy weighting on citations (and the sort of academic profile citations give you internationally). Citation scores are always higher in science and engineering subjects than in arts and social sciences.
Biology, I understand that Leeds has quite a low reputation for biology, especially in comparison to those other universities.
However I am leaning towards Leeds due to the social aspect and I that I quite like the city.
You've kind of answered your own question. Reputation is absolutely secondary about how you feel about the university and area. Have you looked at slight variations in biological courses that each uni will offer
And end up at York, uea, Newcastle or Sussex ahead of Manchester? Lol god no.
I personally would put York above those other universities in terms of reputation (still decent universities). Overall, Manchester does do well in international rankings, but your tone suggests that Manchester is completely on another level to York overall, and I'd disagree.
In national rankings, up until the last couple of years or so, York have consistently been in the top 10. It's also part of the Sutton Trust 13 (of which Manchester is not), and our research is world-leading. York's recent teaching record has actually been rated higher than Ox and Cam. And, according to the Complete University Guide, York's entry standards are also slightly higher, aswell as, according to The Sunday Times, the average UCAS points obtained by students.
Could you elaborate on your view of York when compared to Manchester?