The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

The bumper thread of University League Tables discussion - includes an info post

Scroll to see replies

Reply 240
Avatar for samtec
samtec
For those wondering why LSE isn't up there, these are global rankings and as far as I can remember LSE has never really performed all that well in any of the global ones, not even in the times one. Global rankings take different factors into consideration than our national ones do and it seems LSE lacks in one particular area that prevents it doing well globally.
He must be talking about a different world ranking table, The Times QS one isn't out yet for 2010.
samtec
For those wondering why LSE isn't up there, these are global rankings and as far as I can remember LSE has never really performed all that well in any of the global ones, not even in the times one. Global rankings take different factors into consideration than our national ones do and it seems LSE lacks in one particular area that prevents it doing well globally.

thus a failure in its methodology
Yeaaaaaaaah Rhul is number one as usual.
LSE Doesn't do well because this focuses heavily on science subjects and the size of the university is important. I must say that i am suprised by Warwick though, but shows that it is not as much of a world beater as it claims.

Now the THES say that they have sorted out the citation problems in their new ranking, im guessing LSE will definately be in the world top 20 this year and perhaps in the top 10 (it has been 11th in the world twice afterall)
Reply 245
Avatar for phen
phen
14
O JOY! NEW WORLD UNI RANKINGS OUT TODAY!! I've been looking forward to this day for months now!

TSR :frown: sigh
UCL is gonna take a blow if this is reflecting what other tables will say.. 3 down to 21 eeek
Did you happen to see where Queen Mary was? It usually ranks well in the ARWU (alongside Warwick and Durham at around 150).
I couldnt find Lancaster in this list.
It ranks (for the UK) LSE at 20 and QMUL at 23, with both having moved down from last year...I'm not so sure about this one lol.

There is so much disparity between all the rankings that to be honest I'm starting to think they have little to no value now.
This is an academic ranking, which means it has nothing to do with student's satisfaction and entry standards that decide national rankings and which relies heavily on a uni's RESEARCH output and quality, esp. in the fields of natural sciences. LSE is a social science uni and therefore doesn't perform well in this ranking.
tillytots
UCL is gonna take a blow if this is reflecting what other tables will say.. 3 down to 21 eeek


I hope they really didn't believe they were no. 4 mwahaha
Reply 252
Avatar for River85
River85
17
tillytots
UCL is gonna take a blow if this is reflecting what other tables will say.. 3 down to 21 eeek


vander Beth
I hope they really didn't believe they were no. 4 mwahaha


This is a different table. You're referring to the THES World Rankings. This is the Academic Ranking of World Universities. UCL's position has remained the same in this table as I think it was 21st last year.

Inspironie
thus a failure in its methodology


It's not a failure in methodolgy. That university rankings can vary so much (not just domestic to international but also one international table to another international). What this shows is that you can use statistics to show pretty much anything.

Phantom_X
LOL LSE is in the 200's category ?

yeah, i think i'll discard this table.


Why? Because it doesn't conform to your pre-conceived ranking?

No one table has a distinctly flawed methodology.
AfghanistanBananistan
I thought i would post this here since their web site is down at the time of writing.

The ARWU ranking is pretty much the same as last years, but it is interesting since most consider this to be the most effective ACADEMIC ranking of the biggest multifaculty universities in the world (esp in academia)

The UK top 10 are (last years in brackets):

5 Cambridge (4)
10 Oxford (10)
21 UCL (21)
26 Imperial (26)
44 Manchester (41)
54 Edinburgh (53)
63 King’s London (65)
66 Bristol (61)
84 Nottingham (83)
88 Sheffield (81)
99 Birmingham (94)

The link is: http://www.arwu.org/


im going to kings so thats okay :biggrin:
*sees all the posts on methodology and reasons for LSE's low ranking*

I am glad to see so many LSE students paying attention to the first lecture on MI4M1
Well I suppose If I wanted to go to another country to study this might be useful but then again I would probably go after I have experience of work in this country. By then my work experience would be far more important than degree or university.
garbage
Reply 257
Avatar for Ultimate1
Ultimate1
Focus08
The ranking is right, I wouldn't apply to those places, eww

Not even your beloved Warwick? :perv:
Goddammit York is so low.

fail
I believe this methodology is more creditable than the ones we use in national rankings. Student satisfaction started to gain the biggest weighing in the Times Good Uni Guide when an Exeter-based consortium linked to the university took over the formulation of the methodology of the table. Funnily enough, student satsfaction was always Exeter's only outstanding credential. And so I believe this was done to prop up Exeter in the rankings to give the impression that it was a more reputable university than it actually is, so that they could gradually raise their entry standards and subsequently maintain the position they cheated to get to, even if the formula some day changes massively.

Obviously, the other tables followed suit in favouring student satisfaction over all other measures, as the Times Guide is seen as the benchmark for national university guides. Thus, Exeter also started to rise rapidly in the other tables too.

It's just a hunch, but the dots really do seem to connect if you look into it.

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you