The Top 10 UK Universities Watch

This discussion is closed.
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#341
Report 4 years ago
#341
(Original post by Capricancer)
Hmmm... I would certainly disagree with your belief that there are no poor universities in the RG.

Looking at the link i hyperlinked in my message, will inform you that 80.1% St Andrews graduates are employed compared to 76.8% of Nottingham graduates. Only a marginal amount more - but more nonetheless.

I think being at a university where you are surrounded by academically able students creates a more positive learning environment. Nottingham students have an average of 82 UCAS points less than St Andrews students (so that's A*A*Aaa compared to ABBaa) - not exactly the grades you would expect from someone going to a top 10 uni. Nottingham is a good university, don't get me wrong though.

I think it's up to the student themselves to pursue an all rounded experience, being at St Andrews doesn't necessarily mean you don't have that and neither does being at Nottingham guarantee that.
Nottingham averages 440 points over 24,000 students, the majority of them getting jobs 6 months in. That is more impressive. Get me wrong or not, St Andrews will never be a top 10 unless it offers more subjects and boosts it's research power for RG membership.
0
Capricancer
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#342
Report 4 years ago
#342
(Original post by Hollywood Hogan)
Nottingham averages 440 points over 24,000 students, the majority of them getting jobs 6 months in. That is more impressive. Get me wrong or not, St Andrews will never be a top 10 unless it offers more subjects and boosts it's research power for RG membership.
Edinburgh boasts an even larger undergrad student body (~300 more) yet has a higher average number of points so that isn't an excuse.

Even if St Andrews wasn't considered to be within the top 10 - Nottingham certainly wouldn't replace it. Considering that St Andrews offers 960 courses compared to Nottingham's 360, I would disagree with that point. Being part of the RG isn't the be all, end all as I have said before. In the recent REF 2014 (research assessment of universities) - St Andrews had a higher percentage of research ranked 4*/3* than Nottingham (82.2% compared to 80.2%).
0
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#343
Report 4 years ago
#343
(Original post by Capricancer)
Edinburgh boasts an even larger undergrad student body (~300 more) yet has a higher average number of points so that isn't an excuse.

Even if St Andrews wasn't considered to be within the top 10 - Nottingham certainly wouldn't replace it. Considering that St Andrews offers 960 courses compared to Nottingham's 360, I would disagree with that point. Being part of the RG isn't the be all, end all as I have said before. In the recent REF 2014 (research assessment of universities) - St Andrews had a higher percentage of research ranked 4*/3* than Nottingham (82.2% compared to 80.2%).
Nottingham makes a good case to be a top 10 due to the large graduate employer targeting on campus, plus the popularity the university has with the best private schools. For overall reputation it is still a notch below Bristol and Warwick, but many students still choose it for the graduate prospects and stunning campus. Having had direct contact with the university, they have said the entry requirements at Nottingham are to be gradually increased over the next 5 years. The Nottingham brand just sneaks it into 10th place, even if the brand itself was only really developed in the 90s.
0
Capricancer
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#344
Report 4 years ago
#344
(Original post by Hollywood Hogan)
Nottingham makes a good case to be a top 10 due to the large graduate employer targeting on campus, plus the popularity the university has with the best private schools. For overall reputation it is still a notch below Bristol and Warwick, but many students still choose it for the graduate prospects and stunning campus.
Nottingham is able to attract graduate employers because of it's large student body. It's all down to economies of scale and its location.

If you're going to use the argument that attracting a large number of private school kids makes your university good (which I disagree with), I can again counter your argument. St Andrews has the 5th highest intake of private school pupils in the country, Nottingham doesn't even make the top 10.

I would not bracket Nottingham with Bristol and Warwick. Maybe in the past, but certainly not now. IMO it's in the same bracket as Newcastle and Leeds.
0
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#345
Report 4 years ago
#345
(Original post by Capricancer)
Nottingham is able to attract graduate employers because of it's large student body. It's all down to economies of scale and its location.

If you're going to use the argument that attracting a large number of private school kids makes your university good (which I disagree with), I can again counter your argument. St Andrews has the 5th highest intake of private school pupils in the country, Nottingham doesn't even make the top 10.

I would not bracket Nottingham with Bristol and Warwick. Maybe in the past, but certainly not now. IMO it's in the same bracket as Newcastle and Leeds.
I think you have been tricked by the UK newspaper rankings. The only official rankings are done by QS, and Nottingham is at 77th in the World and 14th in the UK. Visit the University and you will never place it in the lowly company of Leeds and Newcastle again. Sevenoaks is one of the top 10 private schools in the UK, and received the best results last year for IB/A level grades. They have Nottingham down as a top 10 most applied to. St Andrews was not on the list.

Leeds and Newcastle don't have the same brand appeal as Nottingham, neither does York.
0
sladewilson
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#346
Report 4 years ago
#346
I think that it's better to go to a lower ranked University, as you will be able to cope with the work load better and have a better social life. The experience is just as important as the degree in itself. So, if you go to University, come out with a First, and have learnt nothing in terms of social skills, life skills, etc. then it's just a wasted experience.

University rankings don't mean anything anyways. I'm at a top 10 college, but hoping to work as a Software Developer, which doesn't require any degree whatsoever. Also, my current degree is completely unrelated to my current (future) career profession.
0
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#347
Report 4 years ago
#347
(Original post by sladewilson)
I think that it's better to go to a lower ranked University, as you will be able to cope with the work load better and have a better social life. The experience is just as important as the degree in itself. So, if you go to University, come out with a First, and have learnt nothing in terms of social skills, life skills, etc. then it's just a wasted experience.

University rankings don't mean anything anyways. I'm at a top 10 college, but hoping to work as a Software Developer, which doesn't require any degree whatsoever. Also, my current degree is completely unrelated to my current (future) career profession.
University reputation does matter a lot, but it is just one box ticked out of many others. Rankings matter less, as most are unofficial and add criteria like student satisfaction.
0
Capricancer
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#348
Report 4 years ago
#348
(Original post by Hollywood Hogan)
I think you have been tricked by the UK newspaper rankings. The only official rankings are done by QS, and Nottingham is at 77th in the World and 14th in the UK. Visit the University and you will never place it in the lowly company of Leeds and Newcastle again. Sevenoaks is one of the top 10 private schools in the UK, and received the best results last year for IB/A level grades. They have Nottingham down as a top 10 most applied to. St Andrews was not on the list.
I have been looking up data to back up my points, however you have not. St Andrews outperforms Nottingham in terms of the academic ability of its students, graduate prospects and prestige. Maybe if Nottingham were more selective with their student intake then it would be considered a Top 10.

I like how you deem the only league table which ranks Nottingham to be higher (by 11 places) than St Andrews to be relevant. Are you going to ignore the Times Higher Education Ranking which ranks St Andrews 60 places above Nottingham? Or the Guardian, Sunday Times and CUG which all rank it 19 places above Nottingham?

I think your point about Sevenoaks, even if they have the best results for IB/A Level, is completely irrelevant considering that Nottingham has an average of 82 UCAS points less than St Andrews.
0
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#349
Report 4 years ago
#349
(Original post by Capricancer)
I have been looking up data to back up my points, however you have not. St Andrews outperforms Nottingham in terms of the academic ability of its students, graduate prospects and prestige. Maybe if Nottingham were more selective with their student intake then it would be considered a Top 10.

I like how you deem the only league table which ranks Nottingham to be higher (by 11 places) than St Andrews to be relevant. Are you going to ignore the Times Higher Education Ranking which ranks St Andrews 60 places above Nottingham? Or the Guardian, Sunday Times and CUG which all rank it 19 places above Nottingham?

I think your point about Sevenoaks, even if they have the best results for IB/A Level, is completely irrelevant considering that Nottingham has an average of 82 UCAS points less than St Andrews.
As I said, the UK newspaper rankings are UNOFFICIAL. That means they get ignored by the UK government and top UK universities at the business end of their performance assessments and standings. You might like them, but you know what, you don't mean a thing compared to the circles that do matter when it comes to rankings.

If Sevenoaks likes Nottingham, that shows the reputation Nottingham has with a prestigious private school.

St Andrews is too small to be a premier UK university.
0
Capricancer
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#350
Report 4 years ago
#350
(Original post by Hollywood Hogan)
As I said, the UK newspaper rankings are UNOFFICIAL. That means they get ignored by the UK government and top UK universities at the business end of their performance assessments and standings. You might like them, but you know what, you don't mean a thing compared to the circles that do matter when it comes to rankings.

If Sevenoaks likes Nottingham, that shows the reputation Nottingham has with a prestigious private school.
You are kidding yourself if you think that universities don't care about rankings. They realise that potential students look them up and are always keen to boast how well they have done on their prospectuses/online press releases.

And somehow you think your opinion is superior to mine?

I have never even heard of Sevenoaks until now, talk to me when you have data from Eton or Harrow. North of the border, Nottingham does not command any admiration.
0
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#351
Report 4 years ago
#351
(Original post by Capricancer)
You are kidding yourself if you think that universities don't care about rankings. They realise that potential students look them up and are always keen to boast how well they have done on their prospectuses/online press releases.

And somehow you think your opinion is superior to mine?

I have never even heard of Sevenoaks until now, talk to me when you have data from Eton or Harrow. North of the border, Nottingham does not command any admiration.
Nottingham was number 1 for being most targeted by the top 100 graduate employers 2013/14. And Sevenoaks got the best results for IB/A levels last year (at a cost of 30k a year fees).

The only real academic powerhouse from Scotland is Edinburgh, followed by Glasgow. St Andrews is like a large exclusive private school that is famous for attracting rich kids from privileged backgrounds and little else. Superficial prestige created by Royalty.

Universities certainly care much more about QS and REF rankings than random junk compiled by newspapers.
0
Capricancer
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#352
Report 4 years ago
#352
(Original post by Hollywood Hogan)
Nottingham was number 1 for being most targeted by the top 100 graduate employers 2013/14. And Sevenoaks got the best results for IB/A levels last year (at a cost of 30k a year fees).

The only real academic powerhouse from Scotland is Edinburgh, followed by Glasgow. St Andrews is like a large exclusive private school that is famous for attracting rich kids from privileged backgrounds and little else. Superficial prestige created by Royalty.
As I said, I believe that it can be attributed to its large student body. Economies of Scales in action.

I would agree with you except for the fact that it has the 6th highest average UCAS points of all UK universities so for you to say it has "little else" makes no sense. I like how you're attempting to put down St Andrews for its ability to attract wealthy private school students yet you brag about the tuition fee cost at Sevenoaks.

St Andrews is the oldest university of the 4 Scottish Ancients, that fact alone contributes to its prestige. The attendance of royalty has only added to that prestige. Edinburgh University is above St Andrews in my ranking if that pleases you in any way. It's a shame that you feel the need to belittle St Andrews in order to raise Nottingham's profile.

Nottingham is a good university (as I have said before) but it does not belong within the Top 10. It belongs in the 15-20 bracket of UK universities along with Newcastle, Leeds, Glasgow and Birmingham.
0
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#353
Report 4 years ago
#353
(Original post by Capricancer)
As I said, I believe that it can be attributed to its large student body. Economies of Scales in action.

I would agree with you except for the fact that it has the 6th highest average UCAS points of all UK universities so for you to say it has "little else" makes no sense. I like how you're attempting to put down St Andrews for its ability to attract wealthy private school students yet you brag about the tuition fee cost at Sevenoaks.

St Andrews is the oldest university of the 4 Scottish Ancients, that fact alone contributes to its prestige. The attendance of royalty has only added to that prestige. Edinburgh University is above St Andrews in my ranking if that pleases you in any way. It's a shame that you feel the need to belittle St Andrews in order to raise Nottingham's profile.

Nottingham is a good university (as I have said before) but it does not belong within the Top 10. It belongs in the 15-20 bracket of UK universities along with Newcastle, Leeds, Aberdeen and Birmingham.
Only your little bracket chooses to ignore the fact that Nottingham is on the list of premier universities which Oxford regards as good enough to allow entry into their postgraduate programmes. Another young whipper-snapper who downloads newspaper rankings and forms unfounded opinions in his/her head.

Sadly, due to not being invited into the Russell Group in 2012, St Andrews is in the top 20-30 region in the eyes of academia.
0
Capricancer
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#354
Report 4 years ago
#354
(Original post by Hollywood Hogan)
Only your little bracket chooses to ignore the fact that Nottingham is on the list of premier universities which Oxford regards as good enough to allow entry into their postgraduate programmes. Another young whipper-snapper who downloads newspaper rankings and forms unfounded opinions in his/her head.
I don't know what your obsession is with trying to get me to admit that Nottingham is in the Top 10.

I haven't "chosen" to ignore anything as you never presented me with this information before. Are you saying Oxford would not admit a graduate from Newcastle, Leeds, Aberdeen or Birmingham into their postgrad programme because of where they graduated from?

Do you understand the definition of unfounded? My opinions are based on data I have seen, some of which are found in newspaper rankings along with the opinions of sixth form advisors, HR depts. from my work experience and peers.
0
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#355
Report 4 years ago
#355
(Original post by Capricancer)
I don't know what your obsession is with trying to get me to admit that Nottingham is in the Top 10.

I haven't "chosen" to ignore anything as you never presented me with this information before. Are you saying Oxford would not admit a graduate from Newcastle, Leeds, Aberdeen or Birmingham into their postgrad programme because of where they graduated from?

Do you understand the definition of unfounded? My opinions are based on data I have seen, some of which are found newspaper rankings along with opinions of sixth form advisors, HR depts. from my work experience and peers.
You placed Nottingham in the same bracket as Aberdeen. On what authority? Even the most biased of student knows that Nottingham carries more weight than the others you stated. Birmingham is doing better in QS rankings currently, but with employers Notts is far more reputable still.
0
Capricancer
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#356
Report 4 years ago
#356
(Original post by Hollywood Hogan)
You placed Nottingham in the same bracket as Aberdeen. On what authority? Even the most biased of student knows that Nottingham carries more weight than the others you stated. Birmingham is doing better in QS rankings currently, but with employers Notts is far more reputable still.
Aberdeen has an even higher number of UCAS points than Nottingham.

However, after I reconsidered other factors - I realised I should have put Glasgow instead of Aberdeen. My apologies if that offends you.
I would actually say that Birmingham (and Glasgow) is more prestigious than Nottingham but each to our own.
0
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#357
Report 4 years ago
#357
(Original post by Capricancer)
Aberdeen has an even higher number of UCAS points than Nottingham.

However, after I reconsidered other factors - I realised I should have put Glasgow instead of Aberdeen. My apologies if that offends you.
I would actually say that Birmingham (and Glasgow) is more prestigious than Nottingham but each to our own.
And I bet you never visited either? Birmingham lags way behind Nottingham for facilities and quality of buildings on campus. Nottingham is a rich university, partly due to the size, and partly due to increased industrial funding (ranked 5th). The recent fire crippled the Glaxosmithkline funded new Chemistry building, only for another to be built in it's place.

I bet the Aberdeen students are all Scots keen to avoid tuition fees south of the border. A small university.

Glasgow is comparable to Nottingham, but Notts is viewed as better by employers and academia still.

Come back when any of the above unis build striking campuses abroad like Nottingham has done. Nottingham is a truly global university.
1
Capricancer
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#358
Report 4 years ago
#358
(Original post by Hollywood Hogan)
And I bet you never visited either? Birmingham lags way behind Nottingham for facilities and quality of buildings on campus. Nottingham is a rich university, partly due to the size, and partly due to increased industrial funding. The recent fire crippled the Glaxosmithkline funded new Chemistry building, only for another to be built in it's place.

I bet the Aberdeen students are all Scots keen to avoid tuition fees south of the border. A small university.

Glasgow is comparable to Nottingham, but Notts is viewed as better by employers and academia still.
I have actually visited Birmingham and liked the US vibes I got off the campus. I have not visited Nottingham and admittedly have no idea about the recent facilities.

So what? That doesnt take anything away from it being a university with a higher number of UCAS points than Nottingham.

Why do you think Notts is viewed more positively than Glasgow by academics? According to you, QS is the only official league table - so Glasgow is better.
0
Hollywood Hogan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#359
Report 4 years ago
#359
(Original post by Capricancer)
I have actually visited Birmingham and liked the US vibes I got off the campus. I have not visited Nottingham and admittedly have no idea about the recent facilities.

So what? That doesnt take anything away from it being a university with a higher number of UCAS points than Nottingham.

Why do you think Notts is viewed more positively than Glasgow by academics? According to you, QS is the only official league table - so Glasgow is better.
QS and REF currently. But employer targeting league tables count also as unis set targets for how many top employers parade themselves on site. Currently Nottingham, Manchester and Warwick have the upper hand with top employers.

I doubt very much the american students will be too impressed by the crappy Selly Oak high street next door to Birmingham uni.
0
Capricancer
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#360
Report 4 years ago
#360
(Original post by Hollywood Hogan)
QS and REF currently. But employer targeting league tables count also as unis set targets for how many top employers parade themselves on site. Currently Nottingham, Manchester and Warwick have the upper hand with top employers.

I doubt very much the american students will be too impressed by the crappy Selly Oak high street next door to Birmingham uni.
Well St Andrews has more of their research rated as 4*/3* than Nottingham (2% more). Why don't you acknowledge that point?
"unis set targets for how many top employers parade themselves on site" - do you have a source for this?

Wow, you're actually incredibly rude.
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

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (278)
37.98%
No - but I will (53)
7.24%
No - I don't want to (53)
7.24%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (348)
47.54%

Watched Threads

View All