The Alternative Economics League Table (TAELT) 2009 Watch

This discussion is closed.
Paulwhy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#301
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#301
My latest attempt to reflect where quality is out of line with competition levels:
A couple of the uni have ++ or -- after them. What does that mean?
They are an indication of how IMO course quality compares with the TAELT competition rating.

So Birmingham is +++ because whilst it is "easy" to get offers from it is a good course. I don't go as far as the newspapers (Times has it as 7th, Independent as 12th and the Gaurdian as 7th) but it is better than 21st i.e. Birmingham is an improving course, and I would have it as top 15.

Exeter and SOAS are -- as I am not convinced their courses are as good as the AAB.2.1 courses in the group below them. i.e. Exeter is Ba and SOAS Economics shares a common 1st year with the Ba Economics and Development Studies course.
0
xxxchrisxxx
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#302
Report 10 years ago
#302
is this a ranking of competitiveness or quality? would it look different if they were arranged by to quality and reputation? (noob)
0
Paulwhy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#303
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#303
(Original post by xxxchrisxxx)
is this a ranking of competitiveness or quality? would it look different if they were arranged by to quality and reputation? (noob)
It is arranged in order of competion. There are 2 measures of competition used:
i)Typical A-level offer. (primary sort characteristic)
ii)Average total A-level points (secondary sort characteristic)

In a couple of cases (Warwick. Edinburgh) the unis give low offers for tactical/holistic reasons. Hence they are moved up. The reason for focusing on competition is that they enable prospective applicants to focus on feasibility.

Quality is a subjective thing i.e. everyone puts different weights on the different qualities a uni could have. But there is an objective aspect to quality and I would expect higher quality/reputation places to be in general harder to get into. Hence TAELT is also a measure of quality. A couple of unis are I think lower/higher quality than their level of competition would suggest. Hence the ++ and -- flags.
0
Paulwhy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#304
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#304
Given the recent batch of rejections from Bristol and as it seems they reject a lot of candidates with offers from Top5 unis, I think they are more competitive than the other AAB.1.1 unis. Hence the new group.
AAB.1.0(340 Points) (Rejecting a lot of applicants with Top 5 offers!)(Bsc)
8) Bristol AAA-ABB including A in Mathematics M** E**p 458
0
Moveslowly
Badges: 1
#305
Report 10 years ago
#305
Thanks paulwhy for your hardwork on the league table. I really wonder how St. Andrew do in Economics. I did not actually get good feedbacks from some other posts - no doubt that entry to Andie is competitive, but it was more regarding on their lectures, facilities for Deparment of Economics.
Again, I got offer for Economics and Philosophy. My first choice (which is LSE) has just sunk into the deep sea yesterday night. Warwick and Edinburgh is still pending. I cant help to worry. Is a Philosophy honors a good one for me, if I am applying for top MBAs in the future?
0
Paulwhy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#306
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#306
I have now put the questions into a seperate post.

And Added in a holistic status flag:
A couple of the uni have H or HHH after them. What does that mean?
H stands for holistic, and HHH stands for very very holistic.
Bristol is H and Edinburgh is HHH.

What does holistic mean?
Holistic means considering the whole person. And hence selection has less weight on academics than you might expect.
0
Paulwhy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#307
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#307
New question explaining the Bristol move:
Why is Bristol in the separate AAB.1.0 group?
Well given:
i) how many students with top 5 offers were rejected by Bristol this cycle (08/09)
ii)that Bristol were AAA in 2007 and that they are the only uni out of all 61 to go for a lower offer during the last 2 years. Suggests Bristol would still clear at AAA.
iii)that Bristol are making a number of AAA offers
Hence it seemed sensible to reflect this by giving it a more competitive group than the other AAB.1.1 unis.
0
Paulwhy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#308
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#308
New question about what the lack of E**p means:
So if there is no E**p or E*P after a uni does that mean my application is not weakened if I do not have economics?
As with maths it just means:
1) that I have not found any reference where that uni states a preference for students who studied economics at school.
2) that is just because certain universities give virtually no info on what their entry requirements are.
3) my rule of thumb would be that for all competitive unis e.g. AAB.1.1+ that not having Economics A-level would be a significant disadvantage. Reasons for this include:
i)hard to do a good econ PS when you have not studied economics at A-level.
ii)doing A-level means you have got background knowledge and reassures unis that you are making an informed choice.
0
dangaming
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#309
Report 10 years ago
#309
Low activity in this thread for obvious reasons.... Expecting to see a mini surge during Extra and a lot more during Clearing.

I think you've done an excellent job and would love to make some reccomendations to make it even better for the next cycle of applicants. I'm nowhere near the brightest person on this forum with respect to grades as peoples spoilers tell me again again, however, i did apply/ am applying during two cycles (07/08 and 08/09), particurly last year i did a lot of research regarding the nature of this topic (probably too much when i should have been studying), thus feel I have some useful points to offer.

My general feeling first and foremost is that: Nottingham is too high, Bristol is a little bit too low, Manchester Bsc is a bit low and Manchester BA is a little bit high with regards to the table. The first are down to applicant per place/offer reasons and the last due to lack of relevant data.

Now I'm not naive enough to believe my own personal experiences with UCAS have much bearing on things, in fact, they're proabbaly as useful as 'religous experiences' are in the justification for God. Nevertheless, i'm hoping other posters can concur with what I put out.

I have already mentioned this before but i'll mention it again. For the 07/08 cycle, Nottingham straight Economics had 1500 applicants and made 1000 offers for 250 places. This came straight from the admissions tutor's mouth. At the time I asked him (the bald guy) what if all or at least most of them made the offer had had firmed or insurance Nottingham. He didnt seem too fussed and said it was very unliely to happedn and they always end up with about 250. As many people that year know, they ended up with about 350, but up until that year their calculations worked. Thus meaning this year is harder than usual to get into Notts. So nottingham should keep its position for now, but it should be justified for that very reason (the **** up of the year before). In a normal year notts is relatively easy get into. 2 in 3 applicants getting an offer seems very high, even if they restirict next year it will still be very high. A lot of ppl apply to Notts despite not being preicted AAA, they automatically get screened out. If ur predicted AAA, ur likely to get into Notts (bar this cycle). Which begs the question why more ppl arent applying to nottingham? Essentielly few ppl realise how big their department is, and even if they do, ppl tend to pick the places they like rather then see larger departments as easier to get into. In this respect, UCAS Economis goes against the monetaris theory that supply creates its own demand.

Bristol had 23 applicants per place for economics, this is ridiculously high. I cant find how many offers they make however i suspect its not that more than than the number of places for the following reason. Im too tired to find the link that says this, but Im certain it is there on the wesite. On it Bristol say that 95% of the offers they give are made firm. This sounds very high and a tad suspicios on Bristols part as to how they achieve this. Either way, the applicants per place issue means that luck (in alight hearted sense) plays a much bigger role than it does when applying to other unis. People with Oxbridge offers next to Bristol rejections are a sympton of this fact and not significant by itself.

To conclude, i dont think u should consider applicants per place/offer when considering a departments competitiiveness for reasons u state in ur 1st post. Nonetheless in extremeties with regards to Notts and Bristol, they are relevant and should be factored in.

With regards to manchester Bsc i'm almost certain that the UCAS tariff and to a lesser extent the graduate destinations statistics are way off the real figures. The data refers to BA and Bsc combined, however the BA students far outnumber the latter (1st year: 190 vs 45). The data thus slightly overrates BA students as a whole and underates Bsc applicants as a whole. That particualr data should be removed and their competitiveness assessed indepent of these figures.

Btw i got increasingly tired while typing this so excuse any blatant inaccuracies and ill so what you think of this.
0
MIKE ESSIEN IS QUITE SIK
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#310
Report 10 years ago
#310
^^interesting post, what unis have you applied to this year
0
dangaming
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#311
Report 10 years ago
#311
^^interesting post, what unis have you applied to this year
Omg i just saw how long my post was. This year I applied to Warwick, Bristol, York, Manchester Bsc and Birmingham. Got a rejection from Manc almost starught away so obv i didnt fit their criterea. Got offer from york the other week.

A level: Economics A, MAths B, French B
AS: Philosophy B, F.MAths B

I'm in gap year and re did C1 as i was marginally off an A in Maths.
0
MIKE ESSIEN IS QUITE SIK
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#312
Report 10 years ago
#312
ohhh so your on a gap year, would you rate manchester above birmingham
0
dangaming
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#313
Report 10 years ago
#313
(Original post by MIKE ESSIEN IS QUITE SIK)
ohhh so your on a gap year, would you rate manchester above birmingham
I think most ppl would rate Birmingham over the Manc BA course. Birmingham vs Manc Bsc is more difficult. Do you mean which one is better? This table is bout which one is harder to get into. I think Manc Bsc is harder to get into, but i also think Birmingham has a better depertment. But not by much. You should use other personal factors to decide between them
0
Paulwhy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#314
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#314
(Original post by dangaming)
Low activity in this thread for obvious reasons.... Expecting to see a mini surge during Extra and a lot more during Clearing.
Yes that is certainly possible.

(Original post by dangaming)
I think you've done an excellent job and would love to make some reccomendations to make it even better for the next cycle of applicants. I'm nowhere near the brightest person on this forum with respect to grades as peoples spoilers tell me again again, however, i did apply/ am applying during two cycles (07/08 and 08/09), particurly last year i did a lot of research regarding the nature of this topic (probably too much when i should have been studying), thus feel I have some useful points to offer.
Thank you for making a contribution.

(Original post by dangaming)
My general feeling first and foremost is that: Nottingham is too high, Bristol is a little bit too low, Manchester Bsc is a bit low and Manchester BA is a little bit high with regards to the table. The first are down to applicant per place/offer reasons and the last due to lack of relevant data.

Now I'm not naive enough to believe my own personal experiences with UCAS have much bearing on things, in fact, they're proabbaly as useful as 'religous experiences' are in the justification for God. Nevertheless, i'm hoping other posters can concur with what I put out.

I have already mentioned this before but i'll mention it again. For the 07/08 cycle, Nottingham straight Economics had 1500 applicants and made 1000 offers for 250 places. This came straight from the admissions tutor's mouth. At the time I asked him (the bald guy) what if all or at least most of them made the offer had had firmed or insurance Nottingham. He didnt seem too fussed and said it was very unliely to happedn and they always end up with about 250. As many people that year know, they ended up with about 350, but up until that year their calculations worked. Thus meaning this year is harder than usual to get into Notts. So nottingham should keep its position for now, but it should be justified for that very reason (the **** up of the year before). In a normal year notts is relatively easy get into. 2 in 3 applicants getting an offer seems very high, even if they restirict next year it will still be very high. A lot of ppl apply to Notts despite not being preicted AAA, they automatically get screened out. If ur predicted AAA, ur likely to get into Notts (bar this cycle). Which begs the question why more ppl arent applying to nottingham? Essentielly few ppl realise how big their department is, and even if they do, ppl tend to pick the places they like rather then see larger departments as easier to get into. In this respect, UCAS Economis goes against the monetaris theory that supply creates its own demand.

Bristol had 23 applicants per place for economics, this is ridiculously high. I cant find how many offers they make however i suspect its not that more than than the number of places for the following reason. Im too tired to find the link that says this, but Im certain it is there on the wesite. On it Bristol say that 95% of the offers they give are made firm. This sounds very high and a tad suspicios on Bristols part as to how they achieve this. Either way, the applicants per place issue means that luck (in alight hearted sense) plays a much bigger role than it does when applying to other unis. People with Oxbridge offers next to Bristol rejections are a sympton of this fact and not significant by itself.

To conclude, i dont think u should consider applicants per place/offer when considering a departments competitiiveness for reasons u state in ur 1st post. Nonetheless in extremeties with regards to Notts and Bristol, they are relevant and should be factored in.
Hopefully I can get some decent data from the offers thread and this will help tell how competitive they are. But now Bristol are 8th and Notts 7th so that is not a big difference.
where did you get the 23 applicants: place ratio from?

(Original post by dangaming)
With regards to manchester Bsc i'm almost certain that the UCAS tariff and to a lesser extent the graduate destinations statistics are way off the real figures. The data refers to BA and Bsc combined, however the BA students far outnumber the latter (1st year: 190 vs 45). The data thus slightly overrates BA students as a whole and underates Bsc applicants as a whole. That particualr data should be removed and their competitiveness assessed indepent of these figures.
Yes it is not great that Manchester is combined for BA and BSc. Interstingly TAELT has Manchester at 16th which is a lot lot higher than any of the Newspapers (Times 39th,Independent 36th,Guardian 30th). Yes they include entry standards but the weights are low: Times 1/9, gaurdian 0.085. Also the Entry standards for Manchester were it's best bit:

Entry Standards 17th
NSS 51st
Grad jobs 49th
student/staff 24th
Spending 18th
Completion 35th
Good Honours 36th
Grad Prospects 51st.



(Original post by dangaming)
Btw i got increasingly tired while typing this so excuse any blatant inaccuracies and ill so what you think of this.
Yes you sound tired.
0
prospectivEEconomist
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#315
Report 10 years ago
#315
(Original post by dangaming)
Low activity in this thread for obvious reasons.... Expecting to see a mini surge during Extra and a lot more during Clearing.

I think you've done an excellent job and would love to make some reccomendations to make it even better for the next cycle of applicants. I'm nowhere near the brightest person on this forum with respect to grades as peoples spoilers tell me again again, however, i did apply/ am applying during two cycles (07/08 and 08/09), particurly last year i did a lot of research regarding the nature of this topic (probably too much when i should have been studying), thus feel I have some useful points to offer.

My general feeling first and foremost is that: Nottingham is too high, Bristol is a little bit too low, Manchester Bsc is a bit low and Manchester BA is a little bit high with regards to the table. The first are down to applicant per place/offer reasons and the last due to lack of relevant data.

Now I'm not naive enough to believe my own personal experiences with UCAS have much bearing on things, in fact, they're proabbaly as useful as 'religous experiences' are in the justification for God. Nevertheless, i'm hoping other posters can concur with what I put out.

I have already mentioned this before but i'll mention it again. For the 07/08 cycle, Nottingham straight Economics had 1500 applicants and made 1000 offers for 250 places. This came straight from the admissions tutor's mouth. At the time I asked him (the bald guy) what if all or at least most of them made the offer had had firmed or insurance Nottingham. He didnt seem too fussed and said it was very unliely to happedn and they always end up with about 250. As many people that year know, they ended up with about 350, but up until that year their calculations worked. Thus meaning this year is harder than usual to get into Notts. So nottingham should keep its position for now, but it should be justified for that very reason (the **** up of the year before). In a normal year notts is relatively easy get into. 2 in 3 applicants getting an offer seems very high, even if they restirict next year it will still be very high. A lot of ppl apply to Notts despite not being preicted AAA, they automatically get screened out. If ur predicted AAA, ur likely to get into Notts (bar this cycle). Which begs the question why more ppl arent applying to nottingham? Essentielly few ppl realise how big their department is, and even if they do, ppl tend to pick the places they like rather then see larger departments as easier to get into. In this respect, UCAS Economis goes against the monetaris theory that supply creates its own demand.

Bristol had 23 applicants per place for economics, this is ridiculously high. I cant find how many offers they make however i suspect its not that more than than the number of places for the following reason. Im too tired to find the link that says this, but Im certain it is there on the wesite. On it Bristol say that 95% of the offers they give are made firm. This sounds very high and a tad suspicios on Bristols part as to how they achieve this. Either way, the applicants per place issue means that luck (in alight hearted sense) plays a much bigger role than it does when applying to other unis. People with Oxbridge offers next to Bristol rejections are a sympton of this fact and not significant by itself.

To conclude, i dont think u should consider applicants per place/offer when considering a departments competitiiveness for reasons u state in ur 1st post. Nonetheless in extremeties with regards to Notts and Bristol, they are relevant and should be factored in.

With regards to manchester Bsc i'm almost certain that the UCAS tariff and to a lesser extent the graduate destinations statistics are way off the real figures. The data refers to BA and Bsc combined, however the BA students far outnumber the latter (1st year: 190 vs 45). The data thus slightly overrates BA students as a whole and underates Bsc applicants as a whole. That particualr data should be removed and their competitiveness assessed indepent of these figures.

Btw i got increasingly tired while typing this so excuse any blatant inaccuracies and ill so what you think of this.
Do you actually study at the Nottingham School of Economics? I am a first year student and asked them how many offers they give out and they refused to tell me. I don't see why they should tell you...
0
dangaming
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#316
Report 10 years ago
#316
Do you actually study at the Nottingham School of Economics? I am a first year student and asked them how many offers they give out and they refused to tell me. I don't see why they should tell you...
No, however when i got an offer from them last cycle i attended their open day. I heard it then from the admissions tutor. I dont even think i asked he just said it during the opening.

where did you get the 23 applicants: place ratio from?
Would link for you but can no longer find it. Up until very recently bristol had the number of applicants ( 900 and something?) and places (40 something?) on their website.
0
.ACS.
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#317
Report 10 years ago
#317
(Original post by dangaming)
Would link for you but can no longer find it. Up until very recently bristol had the number of applicants ( 900 and something?) and places (40 something?) on their website.
They have it here. They have it as 20.6 or ~21 applicants per place.
0
dangaming
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#318
Report 10 years ago
#318
They have it here. They have it as 20.6 or ~21 applicants per place.
My bad. I knew it was somewhere.
0
Paulwhy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#319
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#319
(Original post by .ACS.)
They have it here. They have it as 20.6 or ~21 applicants per place.
Thanks for that.
0
studentbug
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#320
Report 10 years ago
#320
(Original post by Paulwhy)
Thanks for that.
Hi

What is your opinion (if any) of Manchester's BSC in economics ? Have you personally had any experiences with Manchester BSC graduates at Warwick?

thanks
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

University open days

  • Cardiff Metropolitan University
    Undergraduate Open Day - Llandaff Campus Undergraduate
    Sat, 27 Apr '19
  • University of East Anglia
    Could you inspire the next generation? Find out more about becoming a Primary teacher with UEA… Postgraduate
    Sat, 27 Apr '19
  • Anglia Ruskin University
    Health, Education, Medicine and Social Care; Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences; Business and Law; Science and Engineering Undergraduate
    Sat, 27 Apr '19

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (512)
37.76%
No - but I will (104)
7.67%
No - I don't want to (93)
6.86%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (647)
47.71%

Watched Threads

View All