Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Are there any truly 'bad' universities in the UK? Watch

    • Offline

      13
      (Original post by TheSownRose)
      But I didn't specify. And yes, they can ... but so can people at Oxbridge.

      It's not the best place to aim for the top from, but far from impossible, but that doesn't mean it's a waste of time.
      Well I specified.

      No, it's not the best place to aim for the top from, ergo, it's best to aim for the top quality universities that could help one's career.

      For example, do you think if you stayed at LSE you could have been an optometrist? Well you still could, but you would have to complete your course before commencing on optometry.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      15
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by im so academic)
      Well I specified.

      No, it's not the best place to aim for the top from, ergo, it's best to aim for the top quality universities that could help one's career.

      For example, do you think if you stayed at LSE you could have been an optometrist? Well you still could, but you would have to complete your course before commencing on optometry.
      But if the career you want is high street solicitor and you like Hertfordshire, that's great.

      No, I'd have to complete BMS, then pay ridiculous money that I don't have to do a second degree in optometry, then take more exams to become qualified. Why waste the time?
      Offline

      14
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by puddlejumper)
      So basically you are a schoolkid with no personal experience of university and you are talking to someone with two degrees and a professional qualification from three different universities. Hmmm.
      For someone so qualified you sure don't have much to show for it. I answered your points and instead of commenting decided to attempt an insult which wasn't very clever. Tidy.
      Offline

      14
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Baula)
      I'm probably going to get negged for this but if the requirements for one uni is AAA and the other is CCC, the first is bound to have a better reputation because the smarter students are there. It doesn't really say that much about the teaching but more about the students, in my opinion.
      I'd agree in some ways, but anyone must be able to admit that as grade requirements go up, so should standard of teaching, facilities, etc. Or are you suggesting top universities have poorer teaching quality than 'lesser' universities? :confused:
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Wookie42)
      I'd agree in some ways, but anyone must be able to admit that as grade requirements go up, so should standard of teaching, facilities, etc. Or are you suggesting top universities have poorer teaching quality than 'lesser' universities? :confused:
      but it deosn't.. take my university and that of aberdeen - both very similar academically yet for something like chem you'd need AAA here whereas at aberdeen you'd need CCC. They're both top notch ancient unis, teaching quality will be pretty much identical and yet it's way more competitive here because it's a trendier place to go..
      Offline

      14
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Sambo2)
      but it deosn't.. take my university and that of aberdeen - both very similar academically yet for something like chem you'd need AAA here whereas at aberdeen you'd need CCC. They're both top notch ancient unis, teaching quality will be pretty much identical and yet it's way more competitive here because it's a trendier place to go..
      I was talking in generalities and we all know Aberdeen/some Scottish unis have to reduce their requirements for English students - I bet direct entry into second year isn't CCC at Aberdeen, while for the four year degree it is..
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Wookie42)
      I was talking in generalities and we all know Aberdeen/some Scottish unis have to reduce their requirements for English students - I bet direct entry into second year isn't CCC at Aberdeen, while for the four year degree it is..
      mine is a scottish uni too... the example still holds true - entry requirements reflect fashion not teaching quality on the whole - though obviously this only holds true to an extent.
      Offline

      14
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Sambo2)
      mine is a scottish uni too... the example still holds true - entry requirements reflect fashion not teaching quality on the whole - though obviously this only holds true to an extent.
      I don't think I quite understand. Aberdeen ask for BBB at A level for the four year degree, and then for the English equivalent they require A at Chemistry and then at least BB - maybe you could use a different example? I never said there was some kind of 'absolute direct correlation' between entry requirements and teaching standards, I just meant that as grade requirements go up, so does the university standard and so does the teaching quality when talking generally. I'm well aware this isn't the same in every case, but I don't think its a radical idea to suggest such a thing..

      EDIT: Holy crap its 3am. Night.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      The hell? What are you herpes? I thought you were gone?

      Okay fine forget next week we'll go again.

      (Original post by im so academic)
      Bull**** - you get a top quality education at one institution, and the other, well, I wouldn't.
      Well that depends doesn't it? If you wanted to study animation Herts is one of the best universities in the country which makes it one of the leading institutions in Europe, ain't that a thing?

      You wouldn't be able to study anything remotely like it at Oxbridge so where do you draw your comparison?

      If Herts offer a course in a subject that Oxbridge doesn't go near I think Herts wins...

      That can't be right can it? Lets examine that for a second.

      I hate football but as far as I'm aware if one team shows up to a match and the other doesn't I think the team that actually showed up wins. Even if the team that didn't show up is full of big names and has stupid amounts of wealth and has piles of awards and a long history of some of the greatest players ever if they don't show up to compete, they can't win.

      You want to study something like Law Oxbridge wins hands down but the world is bigger than the Oxbridge bubble and there are entire multi billion pound sectors where an Oxbridge degree gets as much play as one from London Met.

      (Original post by im so academic)
      Film/animation - yeah, because there are such things as "film conservatoire" or "animation scholarships". :rolleyes:
      You honestly don't see that being thrown back at you?

      Animation scholarships are as common as any other scholarship, probably hard to get and unnecessary for most UK students but readily available if you're good enough.

      Gobelins, UCLA, Ringling, NCCA Bournemouth, Vancouver Film School, Calarts, ENSAD, School of Visual Arts and just to piss you off I'll include Herts. They all offer them.

      As for "film conservatoire" the term conservatoire basically means a specialist school and there are indeed film conservatoires in fact there are conservatoires for pretty much everything.

      I don't know what possessed you to make that claim did you not understand what a conservatoire is? What you said was there are no specialist film schools and if you actually thought that was true I don't know what to tell you, I hate people who are incapable of making a point without going through google first but you clearly need to if you think that's the case.

      All of the institutions above can be considered specialist film schools.

      (Original post by im so academic)
      You cannot compare those subjects. Music can be studied academically and only those who have a "special gift" can acclaim to the highest points of Music. For some careers, you need a top-quality music education to get anywhere, or even to harness one's education of the subject etc etc.
      This just gets better and better. Replace the word music with any other subject and it's still true which means there is no point being made other than those with incredible talent do well.

      A subject is either credible or it isn't, it isn't credible here and mickey mouse there the world doesn't work that way and the difference between subjects can be paper thin.

      Film and animation are nothing more than still images shown in a sequence, what you will eventually claim (because I will challenge you to validate Oxfords BFA) is that the study of one image can be academically credible but the study of two can't, it's a preposterous position to argue.
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Wookie42)
      I don't think I quite understand. Aberdeen ask for BBB at A level for the four year degree, and then for the English equivalent they require A at Chemistry and then at least BB - maybe you could use a different example? I never said there was some kind of 'absolute direct correlation' between entry requirements and teaching standards, I just meant that as grade requirements go up, so does the university standard and so does the teaching quality when talking generally. I'm well aware this isn't the same in every case, but I don't think its a radical idea to suggest such a thing..
      I do understand - even if you look at second year entry it's still AAA to ABB difference - look within universities - before prince william geos to st andrews and after - grades go up, deos teaching improve?? no. Grades don't reflect teaching, they reflect competition for places - teaching quality is just one factor that effects this (but since no applicant really has even the first incling what undergrad teaching is like, this is only a percieved factor - hence really it's all about fashion.
      Offline

      13
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Wookie42)
      I'd agree in some ways, but anyone must be able to admit that as grade requirements go up, so should standard of teaching, facilities, etc. Or are you suggesting top universities have poorer teaching quality than 'lesser' universities? :confused:
      No, I'm not suggesting that. I'll admit that I would expect the standard of teaching to be better but this is not always the case. Many people on this forum have already posted that 'lesser' universities are higher in the league for their course. To me that would suggest good teaching quality. For example, (based on the Guardian's league table) Huddersfield is higher than the University of Sheffield for English, yet asks less for entry requirements. Again, to me that would suggest a high level of teaching from a 'lesser' university.

      I just want to add that I am in no way trying to argue that top universities have poor teaching! I'm just trying to make the point that there are no "truly bad universities in the UK."
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Diminutive)
      Because it has an average entry requirement of 180 ucas points. Garbage in, Garbage out. Simples.
      You mean rubbish
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Lukebradburn)
      You mean rubbish
      Hmm, I normally do despise "Americanisms" over good ol' british, but "GIGO" (Pronounced like Guy-go) is a well-known term in computing and possibly other fields. So in this instance, I meant Garbage =p
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Wookie42)
      For someone so qualified you sure don't have much to show for it. I answered your points and instead of commenting decided to attempt an insult which wasn't very clever. Tidy.
      I've got more than you, dearest. As for personal insults I suggest that you read your own post before casting stones.
      Offline

      14
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Wozzie)
      The hell? What are you herpes? I thought you were gone?

      Okay fine forget next week we'll go again.



      Well that depends doesn't it? If you wanted to study animation Herts is one of the best universities in the country which makes it one of the leading institutions in Europe, ain't that a thing?

      You wouldn't be able to study anything remotely like it at Oxbridge so where do you draw your comparison?

      If Herts offer a course in a subject that Oxbridge doesn't go near I think Herts wins...

      That can't be right can it? Lets examine that for a second.

      I hate football but as far as I'm aware if one team shows up to a match and the other doesn't I think the team that actually showed up wins. Even if the team that didn't show up is full of big names and has stupid amounts of wealth and has piles of awards and a long history of some of the greatest players ever if they don't show up to compete, they can't win.

      You want to study something like Law Oxbridge wins hands down but the world is bigger than the Oxbridge bubble and there are entire multi billion pound sectors where an Oxbridge degree gets as much play as one from London Met.



      You honestly don't see that being thrown back at you?

      Animation scholarships are as common as any other scholarship, probably hard to get and unnecessary for most UK students but readily available if you're good enough.

      Gobelins, UCLA, Ringling, NCCA Bournemouth, Vancouver Film School, Calarts, ENSAD, School of Visual Arts and just to piss you off I'll include Herts. They all offer them.

      As for "film conservatoire" the term conservatoire basically means a specialist school and there are indeed film conservatoires in fact there are conservatoires for pretty much everything.

      I don't know what possessed you to make that claim did you not understand what a conservatoire is? What you said was there are no specialist film schools and if you actually thought that was true I don't know what to tell you, I hate people who are incapable of making a point without going through google first but you clearly need to if you think that's the case.

      All of the institutions above can be considered specialist film schools.



      This just gets better and better. Replace the word music with any other subject and it's still true which means there is no point being made other than those with incredible talent do well.

      A subject is either credible or it isn't, it isn't credible here and mickey mouse there the world doesn't work that way and the difference between subjects can be paper thin.

      Film and animation are nothing more than still images shown in a sequence, what you will eventually claim (because I will challenge you to validate Oxfords BFA) is that the study of one image can be academically credible but the study of two can't, it's a preposterous position to argue.
      I'm amazed. Bravo. It truly saddens me that there are people who are supposed to be 'intelligent' and yet are so completely ignorant. You can not be considered intelligent if you don't have knowledge. It is a pleasure when such voids of knowledge rooted primarily through attitudes of snobbery are challenged and filled by one who isn't hindered by the need to 'look down on others just to feel good' and simply states things the way they are.

      I'm so academic, please do yourself a favour and take note of what has been said to you. You have a lot to learn, and having a poor attitude can only hinder you from developing in the real world and reaching your full potential.
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Wookie42)
      I'd agree in some ways, but anyone must be able to admit that as grade requirements go up, so should standard of teaching, facilities, etc. Or are you suggesting top universities have poorer teaching quality than 'lesser' universities? :confused:
      You are making erroneous assumptions that there is a correlation between admission requirements and the standard of teaching at an institution. And really there isn't.

      I've attended three univeristies and I have been taught by graduates from Oxbridge, Durham and the like and I can tell you from experience that there are some who were good at teaching and some who were poor teachers. They all had good degrees and were all very intelligent but being intelligent and knowledgeable of a subject doesn't automatically make you a good teacher.

      And undergraduates NEED good teachers not good researchers.

      As for facilities being better at Oxbridge than elsewhere then you are joking! Please take a look at the facilities available at other universities before coming out with such rubbish. Just because Oxbridge is pretty and photogenic doesn't make it a good facility!

      Please, the purpose of education is to open your mind. Try it, you might like it.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by im so academic)
      1st Greenwich Maths =/= 1st Cambridge Maths

      That just shows you how difficult it is to attain a 1st at Cambridge Maths and it's of a reputable quality seeing as students have to do STEP before they are admitted (which I doubt Greenwich graduates could even do).

      What an insult to Cambridge to even compare the two courses. :lolwut:

      Just look at the course content for God's sake.
      What do you have against Greenwich, no one is making you go there. I have applied and would be happy to get an offer from them!!
      Offline

      9
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by HaileyD)
      What do you have against Greenwich, no one is making you go there. I have applied and would be happy to get an offer from them!!
      I think he's just saying a Cambridge maths degree is harder than a Greenwich one. Seems pretty reasonable to me, it isn't exactly a terrible insult to Greenwich.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Jonty99)
      I think he's just saying a Cambridge maths degree is harder than a Greenwich one. Seems pretty reasonable to me, it isn't exactly a terrible insult to Greenwich.
      It was just the snobbish way in which it was wrote, I don't see the need for it. Then again, I am new to TSR so maybe I am just being naive.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      I think there are.

      If you say that if there was a bad school, they would close it down, you probably miss the point that uni is a profitable business for some institutions (i.e. city or town, owners of shared buildings) which would develop enough pressure not to happen so and, furthermore, no one wants to be criticised by EU for not having enough graduates in their population.
     
     
     
  1. 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.

  2. Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
    Uni match

    Applying to uni?

    Our tool will help you find the perfect course

    Articles:

    Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

    Quick link:

    Educational debate unanswered threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  3. 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.

  4. The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.