Guardian University League Tables 2017
Scroll to see replies
Original post by JohnGreek
Glad to see the old Borough is still sending us its finest students
k
Very much doubt it, but it's verifiable. What's the course? Even if it's decent, it doesn't outweigh the fact that the mighty Lough is not in the top ten for either starting graduate salaries or lifetime earnings, so my point, on average, still stands.
Citation #2 needed
I'm sure they do. They wouldn't be able to market themselves otherwise.
The best students... academically? Or in terms of sporting prowess? Motivation is a icky topic because it likely applies to every university that is decent at something, not just academia.
L'boro's entry tariff is 411.3 according to the Guardian, and 410 according to CUG. That's thoroughly unimpressive, barely in the top 30 overall.
Its yield was 16.9% last year Source, which shows that it has a pretty hard time keeping its talent compared to other unis. Would expect an 'elite sport uni' with such a strong expertise to have a slightly higher retention, if I'm honest.
Got me to a few vac schemes and a course at a better university with ever so slightly higher entry standards than yours
I'm not actually, the point was entirely serious. It's why I'm still backing it up.
The comparative is actually me revising, not making friends. Is L'Boro the sort of place where you're expected to socialise a month before exams?
k
Very much doubt it, but it's verifiable. What's the course? Even if it's decent, it doesn't outweigh the fact that the mighty Lough is not in the top ten for either starting graduate salaries or lifetime earnings, so my point, on average, still stands.
Citation #2 needed
I'm sure they do. They wouldn't be able to market themselves otherwise.
The best students... academically? Or in terms of sporting prowess? Motivation is a icky topic because it likely applies to every university that is decent at something, not just academia.
L'boro's entry tariff is 411.3 according to the Guardian, and 410 according to CUG. That's thoroughly unimpressive, barely in the top 30 overall.
Its yield was 16.9% last year Source, which shows that it has a pretty hard time keeping its talent compared to other unis. Would expect an 'elite sport uni' with such a strong expertise to have a slightly higher retention, if I'm honest.
Got me to a few vac schemes and a course at a better university with ever so slightly higher entry standards than yours
I'm not actually, the point was entirely serious. It's why I'm still backing it up.
The comparative is actually me revising, not making friends. Is L'Boro the sort of place where you're expected to socialise a month before exams?
Avg grad earnings is by far the dumbest metric I've seen.. There are so many flaws with it that have pretty much nothing to do with the university itself.
Different subject mixes, different career ambitions (which in themselves have different terminal and starting avg compensation figures), different interests amongst students, location, company biases etc.. the list is long.
Loughborough is a perfectly respectable university with its own strengths and 411 avg points upon entry is nothing to sniff at.
(Although I'm only triggered by this argument because my sister is going there this year for one of their best subjects with an avg tariff of nearly 470 with only Edinburgh/Oxford being above it).
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by JohnGreek
If it wasn't, maybe the other poster shouldn't have brought it up. However, given the frequency with which he/she talks about 'earning more money than 95% of those at more research intensive unis', and caring about the job they'll surely end up getting, I guess it was a thing that still featured prominently on their radar.
Being in the top 30 for entry tariffs may make you respectable (insofar as you're in the top quartile of unis), but it doesn't make you 'elite', not when you're being beaten by the likes of Dundee, UEA and Strathclyde.
Being in the top 30 for entry tariffs may make you respectable (insofar as you're in the top quartile of unis), but it doesn't make you 'elite', not when you're being beaten by the likes of Dundee, UEA and Strathclyde.
Scottish students do more subjects that bear more UCAS points.. Strathclyde is the place where decent scottish people go who want to escape the 'rah'-ness of the ancient unis.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by JohnGreek
Glad to see the old Borough is still sending us its finest students
k
Very much doubt it, but it's verifiable. What's the course? Even if it's decent, it doesn't outweigh the fact that the mighty Lough is not in the top ten for either starting graduate salaries or lifetime earnings, so my point, on average, still stands.
Citation #2 needed
I'm sure they do. They wouldn't be able to market themselves otherwise.
The best students... academically? Or in terms of sporting prowess? Motivation is a icky topic because it likely applies to every university that is decent at something, not just academia.
L'boro's entry tariff is 411.3 according to the Guardian, and 410 according to CUG. That's thoroughly unimpressive, barely in the top 30 overall.
Its yield was 16.9% last year [Source], which shows that it has a pretty hard time keeping its talent compared to other unis. Would expect an 'elite sport uni' with such a strong expertise to have a slightly higher retention, if I'm honest.
Got me to a few vac schemes and a course at a better university with ever so slightly higher entry standards than yours
I'm not actually, the point was entirely serious. It's why I'm still backing it up.
The comparative is actually me revising, not making friends. Is L'Boro the sort of place where you're expected to socialise a month before exams?
k
Very much doubt it, but it's verifiable. What's the course? Even if it's decent, it doesn't outweigh the fact that the mighty Lough is not in the top ten for either starting graduate salaries or lifetime earnings, so my point, on average, still stands.
Citation #2 needed
I'm sure they do. They wouldn't be able to market themselves otherwise.
The best students... academically? Or in terms of sporting prowess? Motivation is a icky topic because it likely applies to every university that is decent at something, not just academia.
L'boro's entry tariff is 411.3 according to the Guardian, and 410 according to CUG. That's thoroughly unimpressive, barely in the top 30 overall.
Its yield was 16.9% last year [Source], which shows that it has a pretty hard time keeping its talent compared to other unis. Would expect an 'elite sport uni' with such a strong expertise to have a slightly higher retention, if I'm honest.
Got me to a few vac schemes and a course at a better university with ever so slightly higher entry standards than yours
I'm not actually, the point was entirely serious. It's why I'm still backing it up.
The comparative is actually me revising, not making friends. Is L'Boro the sort of place where you're expected to socialise a month before exams?
What is your point about entry standards? Why is that relevant? Are you bragging about your grades? I wouldn't be surprised if I got higher grades than you. Not that that matters, but you really shouldn't be bragging about your grades online. What degree do you even do?
This isn't a debate about what universities are better, this is simply me calling you a snob. No one cares if you 'went to a better university' in the long run. There are people that didn't even go to college that are infinitely more successful than you will ever be. Pipe down
Original post by JohnGreek
If it wasn't, maybe the other poster shouldn't have brought it up. However, given the frequency with which he/she talks about 'earning more money than 95% of those at more research intensive unis', and caring about the job they'll surely end up getting, I guess it was a thing that still featured prominently on their radar.
Being in the top 30 for entry tariffs may make you respectable (insofar as you're in the top quartile of unis), but it doesn't make you 'elite', not when you're being beaten by the likes of Dundee, UEA and Strathclyde.
Being in the top 30 for entry tariffs may make you respectable (insofar as you're in the top quartile of unis), but it doesn't make you 'elite', not when you're being beaten by the likes of Dundee, UEA and Strathclyde.
The way you say 'beaten' like it's a competition for higher entry standards? You're using ENTRY STANDARDS as a more important metric than AVERAGE STARTING SALARY. Let that sink in... Are you saying your a level results matter more than how much you earn in the long run? If you are, you need to get your priorities in check.
Original post by JohnGreek
LSE Law. I wasn't bragging about my grades, just that Loughborough's grades are sub-par for the elite university it pretends to be. 411 UCAS points is distinctly decent, but not exactly gobsmattering.
Using exceptions as a means of proving my rule? You're doing my work for me. You're basically using a one-in-a-million billionaire as a sign that 'where you go to uni doesn't count', while disregarding the repeated evidence on higher earning potential of graduates from better universities, even if that is partly mitigated by things like higher entry tariffs, parental income, and so on:
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/graduate-earnings-what-you-study-and-where-matters-but-so-does-parents-income (in general)
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/government-publishes-data-law-graduate-earnings-university (for Law)
I really don't mind being called a snob, particularly given that my views are substantiated with something more than hot air and angry capital letters.
Never said that. I was addressing your point about the 'elite students' and 'highly motivated people' that seem to be ten a penny at the Borough. They don't seem to be that elite given L'boro's high offer rate, consistent appearance in Clearing, and low yields (i.e. low ratio of offers to enrolments).
Would you mind providing some figures as to the apparently stupendous amounts of money you'll end up making in the long run? Even a Unistats page on starting graduate salaries will do. The only study I've seen on long-term earnings is this: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/wp1606.pdf, which doesn't include Loughborough.
Using exceptions as a means of proving my rule? You're doing my work for me. You're basically using a one-in-a-million billionaire as a sign that 'where you go to uni doesn't count', while disregarding the repeated evidence on higher earning potential of graduates from better universities, even if that is partly mitigated by things like higher entry tariffs, parental income, and so on:
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/graduate-earnings-what-you-study-and-where-matters-but-so-does-parents-income (in general)
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/government-publishes-data-law-graduate-earnings-university (for Law)
I really don't mind being called a snob, particularly given that my views are substantiated with something more than hot air and angry capital letters.
Never said that. I was addressing your point about the 'elite students' and 'highly motivated people' that seem to be ten a penny at the Borough. They don't seem to be that elite given L'boro's high offer rate, consistent appearance in Clearing, and low yields (i.e. low ratio of offers to enrolments).
Would you mind providing some figures as to the apparently stupendous amounts of money you'll end up making in the long run? Even a Unistats page on starting graduate salaries will do. The only study I've seen on long-term earnings is this: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/wp1606.pdf, which doesn't include Loughborough.
TLDR, don't really have time for this.
My uni is excellent.
I'm enjoying my life.
I take a course which I thoroughly enjoy and which will likely lead me onto a starting salary of £30k+
I love myself (unlike you maybe?) and couldn't be happier. My university doesn't define me (unlike you clearly) I feel sad myself for even debating someone like you online, glad it's over. I tried to defend my uni from a snob like you but it's not worth it, you're stuck in your own little world.
What are you even doing still replying to me? Searching for some kind of validation?
Original post by lw8
The way you say 'beaten' like it's a competition for higher entry standards? You're using ENTRY STANDARDS as a more important metric than AVERAGE STARTING SALARY. Let that sink in... Are you saying your a level results matter more than how much you earn in the long run? If you are, you need to get your priorities in check.
entry standards can't be BSed because it's entirely about how strong the students are coming in and the university's ability to attract strong students.
avg starting salary on a university wide scale is just dumb, for reasons i've already talked about.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by JohnGreek
Would you mind providing some figures as to the apparently stupendous amounts of money you'll end up making in the long run? Even a Unistats page on starting graduate salaries will do. The only study I've seen on long-term earnings is this: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/wp1606.pdf (pg 36-37), which doesn't include Loughborough.
Would you mind providing some figures as to the apparently stupendous amounts of money you'll end up making in the long run? Even a Unistats page on starting graduate salaries will do. The only study I've seen on long-term earnings is this: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/wp1606.pdf (pg 36-37), which doesn't include Loughborough.
The poster can't do that..
For all you know you both may well end up in the same TC class earning the same £40 odd thousand in a few years or you could both be unemployed and this whole argument would be moot lol
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by JohnGreek
Aha, I also have a TL;DR for this discussion!
Fails to address any of the data raised regarding uni admission
Fails to provide any source as to the salary you claim you will earn
Fails to provide details of degree or A-level grades (which were 'probably higher than mine'
Fails to support assertions as to L'boro being an 'elite university' with highly motivated students
But
Makes sure to include plenty of ad homs and lots of effort into sounding condescending
Makes sure to include plenty of childish insults about 'not having friends' and 'being a snob'
Makes sure to remind us about how great a time he/she is having and how much money he/she is gonna make while accusing the other of 'self- validation' (interesting given that I never mentioned my uni or curse until the very last post)
If this is how L'boro students argue in real life, I think that you've proven my descriptions of that university as being highly accurate. Thanks for doing my job for me!
Fails to address any of the data raised regarding uni admission
Fails to provide any source as to the salary you claim you will earn
Fails to provide details of degree or A-level grades (which were 'probably higher than mine'
Fails to support assertions as to L'boro being an 'elite university' with highly motivated students
But
Makes sure to include plenty of ad homs and lots of effort into sounding condescending
Makes sure to include plenty of childish insults about 'not having friends' and 'being a snob'
Makes sure to remind us about how great a time he/she is having and how much money he/she is gonna make while accusing the other of 'self- validation' (interesting given that I never mentioned my uni or curse until the very last post)
If this is how L'boro students argue in real life, I think that you've proven my descriptions of that university as being highly accurate. Thanks for doing my job for me!
I'm simply telling you I'm ending this discussion for the better of us both, it's not worth it. I didn't even read your last post; hence 'TLDR'. You seem to have spent a ridiculous amount of time 'arguing' your point to a complete randomer online who couldn't care less.
You're wasting your time kid, go workout/better yourself or something.
I don't need to prove myself to some random troll online. Have a good life!
For your satisfaction; my source is unistats. My course is Economics. Happy now?
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Princepieman
The poster can't do that..
For all you know you both may well end up in the same TC class earning the same £40 odd thousand in a few years or you could both be unemployed and this whole argument would be moot lol
Posted from TSR Mobile
For all you know you both may well end up in the same TC class earning the same £40 odd thousand in a few years or you could both be unemployed and this whole argument would be moot lol
Posted from TSR Mobile
Thank you. This dude thinks the university you go to defines you. Typical LSE student 😴.
Original post by Princepieman
entry standards can't be BSed because it's entirely about how strong the students are coming in and the university's ability to attract strong students.
avg starting salary on a university wide scale is just dumb, for reasons i've already talked about.
Posted from TSR Mobile
avg starting salary on a university wide scale is just dumb, for reasons i've already talked about.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I understand your points but entry standards don't show the ability of the people on the course. Many get higher grades than the entry standards for the course itself. Many don't even do the A level of the course they are taking, and thus a BBB student is at a much higher level than an AAA student who didn't actually do the a level of the course they are taking.
Original post by JohnGreek
To be fair with you, I get where you're coming from. I wouldn't want to identify by my university either if I went to Loughborough I guess that's a luxury that a more reputable uni gives you.
I think that I've proven that, even if you did attempt to prove your point to a 'random troll online', you wouldn't be able to. This, I suspect, is why you moved from a 'I'm gonna make more money than you' approach to a 'I don't care about what you say lalala' approach. But sure, it was nice discussing with you. I hope that our discussion proved illuminating to the other 100 or so people who've read this thread in the meantime.
I guess that's a luxury that a more reputable uni gives you.I think that I've proven that, even if you did attempt to prove your point to a 'random troll online', you wouldn't be able to. This, I suspect, is why you moved from a 'I'm gonna make more money than you' approach to a 'I don't care about what you say lalala' approach. But sure, it was nice discussing with you. I hope that our discussion proved illuminating to the other 100 or so people who've read this thread in the meantime.
Wow, you really are an arrogant person. Would hate to have to meet someone like you in real life. I imagine it's all an act though and you're really just insecure behind your computer screen. (btw: I love how you speak about l'boro like it ain't a top 10 uni
) Good dayOriginal post by JohnGreek
I was obviously talking about averages. It's the only way to meaningfully make a comparison between different universities. If the poster couldn't do that, then he/she should have spent a little less time going on about salaries. He/she took on a burden that they couldn't prove, and, hey presto, they couldn't prove it.
Did I not just provide you with a source that clearly says the average starting salary is 30k? End of the day, it doesn't
ing matter. Do a degree that you enjoy and not what others tell you is 'reputable' or 'respectable'.
Original post by lw8
For your satisfaction; my source is unistats. My course is Economics. Happy now?
Somehow I was expecting engineering
So, just by way of comparison Loughborough Econ average salary after 40 months is £32k. LSE is £35k. Higher but not that much.
Especially given student satisfaction 94% vs 71%...
There'll be the 2018 rankings soon and then we can have this thread discussion all over again \o/
Original post by Doonesbury
Somehow I was expecting engineering
So, just by way of comparison Loughborough Econ average salary after 40 months is £32k. LSE is £35k. Higher but not that much.
Especially given student satisfaction 94% vs 71%...
So, just by way of comparison Loughborough Econ average salary after 40 months is £32k. LSE is £35k. Higher but not that much.
Especially given student satisfaction 94% vs 71%...
I know right! I was shocked by that fact. I always considered LSE to be some sort of holy grail for economics, whilst it is arguably the best, im happy with my uni and the opportunities it offers
Original post by Doonesbury
Somehow I was expecting engineering
So, just by way of comparison Loughborough Econ average salary after 40 months is £32k. LSE is £35k. Higher but not that much.
Especially given student satisfaction 94% vs 71%...
So, just by way of comparison Loughborough Econ average salary after 40 months is £32k. LSE is £35k. Higher but not that much.
Especially given student satisfaction 94% vs 71%...
Original post by lw8
I know right! I was shocked by that fact. I always considered LSE to be some sort of holy grail for economics, whilst it is arguably the best, im happy with my uni and the opportunities it offers
The 40 month figure on unistats is for the entire UK not for that specific university.
The 6 month figure (Typical salary range: £28,000.00 - £50,000.00, median £37k for LSE and Typical salary range: £24,000.00 - £33,000.00, median £30k for Loughborough) is the one that is specific for that course. Although with only 20 responses (50% of the cohort) for Loughborough (v 55 for LSE - 65% of the cohort) the sample size isn't great.
Law at LSE is an odd one - the salaries are very high but unemployment rate is extremely high (15% after 5 years) https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=4460642
Across all UK graduates Economics grads definitely earn more than Law grads 5 years after graduation (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/573732/SFR60-2016_LEO_Subject_tables.xlsx ) with similar unemployment rates - even when split out by prior grades (AAA+ tariff median salary for econ £48k 5 years after graduating, 7.2% unemployed. For Law £37.5k and 6.3% unemployed).
Original post by PQ
The 40 month figure on unistats is for the entire UK not for that specific university.
But the numbers are different for the same course. I think it was Which? rather than Unistats. But i guess they use the same source...
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Doonesbury
But the numbers are different for the same course. I think it was Which? rather than Unistats. But i guess they use the same source...
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Odd but not unlikely - they're both sourced from all UK economics graduates responding to the longitudinal DLHE - it could be that the two courses use slightly different HESA subject codes or HESA have accounted for gender mix or similar and so the sample population for "similar courses" is different. https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/publications/long-destinations-2010-11 has the public longitudinal DLHE data - but it's only broken down for "Social Studies" not broken out for Econ.
Original post by PQ
The 40 month figure on unistats is for the entire UK not for that specific university.
The 6 month figure (Typical salary range: £28,000.00 - £50,000.00, median £37k for LSE and Typical salary range: £24,000.00 - £33,000.00, median £30k for Loughborough) is the one that is specific for that course. Although with only 20 responses (50% of the cohort) for Loughborough (v 55 for LSE - 65% of the cohort) the sample size isn't great.
Law at LSE is an odd one - the salaries are very high but unemployment rate is extremely high (15% after 5 years) https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=4460642
Across all UK graduates Economics grads definitely earn more than Law grads 5 years after graduation (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/573732/SFR60-2016_LEO_Subject_tables.xlsx ) with similar unemployment rates - even when split out by prior grades (AAA+ tariff median salary for econ £48k 5 years after graduating, 7.2% unemployed. For Law £37.5k and 6.3% unemployed).
The 6 month figure (Typical salary range: £28,000.00 - £50,000.00, median £37k for LSE and Typical salary range: £24,000.00 - £33,000.00, median £30k for Loughborough) is the one that is specific for that course. Although with only 20 responses (50% of the cohort) for Loughborough (v 55 for LSE - 65% of the cohort) the sample size isn't great.
Law at LSE is an odd one - the salaries are very high but unemployment rate is extremely high (15% after 5 years) https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=4460642
Across all UK graduates Economics grads definitely earn more than Law grads 5 years after graduation (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/573732/SFR60-2016_LEO_Subject_tables.xlsx ) with similar unemployment rates - even when split out by prior grades (AAA+ tariff median salary for econ £48k 5 years after graduating, 7.2% unemployed. For Law £37.5k and 6.3% unemployed).
Thanks for this, you've summarised a lot of information I was struggling to understand honestly.
Original post by PQ
Odd but not unlikely - they're both sourced from all UK economics graduates responding to the longitudinal DLHE - it could be that the two courses use slightly different HESA subject codes or HESA have accounted for gender mix or similar and so the sample population for "similar courses" is different. https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/publications/long-destinations-2010-11 has the public longitudinal DLHE data - but it's only broken down for "Social Studies" not broken out for Econ.
It was Whatuni. Sourcing KIS 2016.
Lboro - Economics at 40 months - £32k :
https://www.whatuni.com/degrees/economics-bsc-hons/loughborough-university/cd/54933770/3608/
LSE - Economics at 40 months - £35k :
https://www.whatuni.com/degrees/economics-bsc-hons/london-school-of-economics-and-political-science-university-of-london/cd/54987366/5884/
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- How do I find the league tables for modern foreign language degrees?
- ucas rank or guardian rank
- Rankings for modern langauges?
- University Rankings Herriot Watt, Dundee or Strathclyde
- Guardian/Daily Mail Uni/Times Rankings 2024
- English Degree Subject Requirements
- Uni of Aberdeen
- About public health programme in Middlesex University
- Keele, Kent or UWE Bristol?
- Ravensbourne or UCA for fashion
- For those applying for Graphic Design, Illustration, Vis Com courses
- loughborough vs lancaster for computer science
- Mechanical engineering
- Best unis for AI?
- St Andrews vs Oxbridge
- Greenwich vs Kingston for computer science? in 2023
- comparing unis
- Does anyone know how reliable the Guardian's 'Average UCAS Score' section is?
- Courses Currently In Clearing at Kingston University London
- Guardian League Table 2024
Latest
Last reply 2 minutes ago
JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime lawLast reply 2 minutes ago
Official University of Edinburgh Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 20 minutes ago
Woodhouse College applicants 2024Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Last reply 1 month ago
Do employers care more about the degree subject or the uni you went to?Last reply 1 month ago
Schools failing bright pupils says teen taking 28 a levelsTrending
Last reply 1 week ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Last reply 1 month ago
Do employers care more about the degree subject or the uni you went to?Last reply 1 month ago
Schools failing bright pupils says teen taking 28 a levels
