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

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Uclan.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wisefire)
    Well that's the thing... I actually do have a lot of connections now, I think. I'll explain my situation and each person and relationship in a PM later if you want. All I'll say is my environment would lead you to believe I'm advantaged, yet I feel I'm far from it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile

    Yes please do.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Junglee)
    I would like to know the answer to this too!
    They were hot at Nottingham and Royal Holloway. The latter had a lot of girls that reminded me of Kate Middleton in her youth.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mansun)
    University education at the best universities is meant to be research led, so that the latest developments are fed from the scientists and other academics back into the undergraduate and postgraduate courses. So on that front, having world class research departments does matter.

    Also universities themselves measure themselves on their quality of research and levels of funding received from industry as a sign of how they are progressing against their peers overseas. Without high quality research a university can hardly be classified as an elite world class university based on just good teaching. Otherwise you may as well go to Luton, who claim to have a great teaching university.

    A lot of ex-poly students do well for themselves by doing industrial placements at good companies like IBM and Glaxosmithkline. Granted they may not be good enough for Goldman Sachs, but not everyone wants to work in the City doing 80-100 hour weeks. A 40 hour week graduate job in a nice company like Microsoft is just as good to most, and gettable even for students from lesser universities.

    Cardiff better than St Andrews? Why don't you ask both Unis? They would both probably laugh and say each is completely different in their missions, goals, and values. St Andrews is more exclusive but offers a lot of ancient language courses which is kind of odd. Cardiff is a brilliant 3rd choice uni to fall back on in case you don't get into a top 10-15 uni, and I rate it top 25 uni at the least (some would say top 20). The campus at Cardiff is exceptional, and the city is really nice and lively. From my own uni experiences, I can definitely say that I would rather trade the ego and reputation factor of somewhere like St Andrews, being located in the middle of nowhere, for the buzzing city of Cardiff. I went to neither, as I chose Nottingham.

    I can understand why students from, say LSE, would snigger at Economics students from Coventry or Luton, but I don't understand why some students try this on with Russell Group Unis like Leeds and Cardiff, two excellent world class research universities and with plenty of alumni represented in top professions? St Andrews students and supporters sniggering at Cardiff is stupidity and insanity to the extreme.
    I seriously doubt that research filters down to undergraduate level as quickly as you're making out; courses would have to be updated every single year if it were, taking up a hell of a lot of academics' time. St Andrew's does have high-quality research - if you look at the most recent RAE, they performed very well. They aren't all about ancient language courses and humanities; St Andrews has a very good reputation in maths, medicine and physics. You seem to have forgotten what the RG represents too. It was never intended to be a barometer of quality, just a lobbying group for universities with a large amount of research funding (i.e. membership was/is based on volume of research rather than quality). York and Durham, two of the country's top universities, were only allowed into the RG very recently. I agree that, due to the location, I never considered St Andrews, but that isn't relevant - we're talking about the academic merits of these institutions. I'm not "sniggering" at Cardiff - were it not for the difficulties that getting there for an interview would have posed, I'd have applied there instead of Nottingham. It is, however, widely acknowledged that it is, with the probable exception of QUB, the weakest member of the RG.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mansun)
    They were hot at Nottingham and Royal Holloway. The latter had a lot of girls that reminded me of Kate Middleton in her youth.
    Why does "poshest students" have anything directly to do with "hot girls"? :confused:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrSupernova)
    I seriously doubt that research filters down to undergraduate level as quickly as you're making out; courses would have to be updated every single year if it were, taking up a hell of a lot of academics' time. St Andrew's does have high-quality research - if you look at the most recent RAE, they performed very well. They aren't all about ancient language courses and humanities; St Andrews has a very good reputation in maths, medicine and physics. You seem to have forgotten what the RG represents too. It was never intended to be a barometer of quality, just a lobbying group for universities with a large amount of research funding (i.e. membership was/is based on volume of research rather than quality). York and Durham, two of the country's top universities, were only allowed into the RG very recently. I agree that, due to the location, I never considered St Andrews, but that isn't relevant - we're talking about the academic merits of these institutions. I'm not "sniggering" at Cardiff - were it not for the difficulties that getting there for an interview would have posed, I'd have applied there instead of Nottingham. It is, however, widely acknowledged that it is, with the probable exception of QUB, the weakest member of the RG.


    Posted from TSR Mobile


    QMC, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle , Glasgow and yes Manchester despite its street fame
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    QMC, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle , Glasgow and yes Manchester despite its street fame
    I disagree about Newcastle and Manchester. Why Glasgow though?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gabriel96)
    I disagree about Newcastle and Manchester. Why Glasgow though?

    You're free to do anything but all 3 consistently rank outside the top 20
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrSupernova)
    I seriously doubt that research filters down to undergraduate level as quickly as you're making out; courses would have to be updated every single year if it were, taking up a hell of a lot of academics' time. St Andrew's does have high-quality research - if you look at the most recent RAE, they performed very well. They aren't all about ancient language courses and humanities; St Andrews has a very good reputation in maths, medicine and physics. You seem to have forgotten what the RG represents too. It was never intended to be a barometer of quality, just a lobbying group for universities with a large amount of research funding (i.e. membership was/is based on volume of research rather than quality). York and Durham, two of the country's top universities, were only allowed into the RG very recently. I agree that, due to the location, I never considered St Andrews, but that isn't relevant - we're talking about the academic merits of these institutions. I'm not "sniggering" at Cardiff - were it not for the difficulties that getting there for an interview would have posed, I'd have applied there instead of Nottingham. It is, however, widely acknowledged that it is, with the probable exception of QUB, the weakest member of the RG.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I am not saying the latest research revamps entire third year syllabuses every year, but I do know that certain modules get tweaked to include the findings and publications of the very latest research being undertaken at the university.

    St Andrews is a very good university, arguably the poshest after Oxbridge (Durham & Bristol would rival that claim), but I can't rate it as a top 10 university just because Prince William wasn't good enough for Oxbridge, leading to a record increase in popularity amongst posh students. I would place Edinburgh and Nottingham ahead of St Andrews for academic reputation alone. Newspaper league tables are worthless, in the words of Vice Chancellor of UCL, Malcolm Grant (not sure if he still is).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    tweaking is just tweaking.

    Minor crap
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    You're free to do anything but all 3 consistently rank outside the top 20
    Maybe Glasgow and Manchester does (which is surprising to me at least with Manchester) but Newcastle is usually around the 20 mark which isn't too bad - I'd say Newcastle and probably Manchester, maybe even Glasgow, at least belong in the average category of the Russell Group with universities like Liverpool, Cardiff, Queen Mary, QUB and maybe Sheffild and Birmingham being in the lower category with the expected lot being at the top category.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mansun)
    You are sad enough to post drivel so you are.
    Ignore him, I remember being in a 'debate' with him before. He hates Nottingham (seems to have a bit of a sore spot regarding it). To be honest, he's just a loser who makes up his own terminology like 'RG2' which is apparently meant to mean 2nd tier RG Unis :rolleyes:

    (Original post by Wisefire)

    You've got to remember it's 80% that come from the top 6/targets. There's another 20%. Mostly from semi-targets, such as Notts, KCL, Cass etc... They must have had contacts to either give them more workshops or experiences, or to actually get them into banking. But 6 figures+ is easily attainable in banking if you keep working, and get up to a senior position EVEN in the back office.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Don't think that 'semi-target' and 'non-target' students need contacts to break in, many do it solely by their own merit. I'm a first year student at a 'semi-target', have done two business related 3+ month internships at very well known corporates, and I haven't begun my second year yet. I'd like to think I'll have a decent shot when applying for IB next year without a helping hand.

    (Though obviously, never reject a helping hand if it comes your way )
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gabriel96)
    Maybe Glasgow and Manchester does (which is surprising to me at least with Manchester) but Newcastle is usually around the 20 mark which isn't too bad - I'd say Newcastle and probably Manchester, maybe even Glasgow, at least belong in the average category of the Russell Group with universities like Liverpool, Cardiff, Queen Mary, QUB and maybe Sheffild and Birmingham being in the lower category with the expected lot being at the top category.

    Everyone is entitled to an opinion but a better opinion is a substantiated one.

    By that, your assessments are all upside down.

    Sheffield and Birmingham being in the upper category of RG2, at least half the time they are in the top 20.

    Again outside the 20 is outside, ( obviously street fame counts little academically as Manchester finds out ) can't really fob that one off.

    Liverpool, Cardiff, Queen Mary, QUB are ALWAYS outside the top 20.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    tweaking is just tweaking.

    Minor crap
    Tweaking can mean a lot of significance in the sciences.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mansun)
    Tweaking can mean a lot of significance in the sciences.
    Give an Eg ?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gabriel96)
    . . . but Newcastle is usually around the 20 mark. ..
    Around the 20 mark, as determined by what? Flawed newspaper league tables? Has it not dawned yet that these league tables are superficial and biased? You could add all kinds of different criteria, like Nobel Prize winners, RAE departments with 5* ratings, research citations globally, university finances, ratings as given by CEOs in top City firms etc. Where would Newcastle be in a league table then? Top 10? Top 30?

    I have said before that I rate Newcastle a top 15-20 university, on the basis that it is in the Russell Group, and on general reputation from what I hear from graduates and recruiters. But even that can be viewed as flawed, as the reality is we can't possibly say that e.g. Durham is better than Newcastle so easily with real facts and figures and very careful comparison between departments and research status.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mansun)
    Around the 20 mark, as determined by what? Flawed newspaper league tables? Has it not dawned yet that these league tables are superficial and biased? You could add all kinds of different criteria, like Nobel Prize winners, RAE departments with 5* ratings, research citations globally, university finances, ratings as given by CEOs in top City firms etc. Where would Newcastle be in a league table then? Top 10? Top 30?

    I have said before that I rate Newcastle a top 15-20 university, on the basis that it is in the Russell Group, and on general reputation from what I hear from graduates and recruiters. But even that can be viewed as flawed, as the reality is we can't possibly say Durham is better than Newcastle so easily with real facts and figures.
    We get it, you don't like newspaper league tables! haha I just think that, even with their flaws, they're convenient. In terms of ranking universities, I would just go by my impression of how prestigious they are and that would tell me that Durham is better than Newcastle. You're right, it is hard to define the ranks of different universities. When I was choosing mine, I went for what I consider to be a top university (St Andrews) as my firm and what I consider to be a very good university (Newcastle) as my insurance. There's a whole bunch of categories that we can rate universities on but I think the ones that are used in the newspaper league tables are reasonably good categories in comparing universities.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gabriel96)
    We get it, you don't like newspaper league tables! haha I just think that, even with their flaws, they're convenient. In terms of ranking universities, I would just go by my impression of how prestigious they are and that would tell me that Durham is better than Newcastle. You're right, it is hard to define the ranks of different universities. When I was choosing mine, I went for what I consider to be a top university (St Andrews) as my firm and what I consider to be a very good university (Newcastle) as my insurance. There's a whole bunch of categories that we can rate universities on but I think the ones that are used in the newspaper league tables are reasonably good categories in comparing universities.
    I seem to remember the Times rating St Andrews 26th in the early/mid 00s, when the student satisfaction survey came into the equation, to which I was outraged and never took the rankings seriously again. That year I think Aston and Loughborough shot up into the top 15. That plus what Malcolm Grant said when asked what he thought of UCL being ranked 4th in the World, he said the rankings were ''worthless'' as they couldn't capture the differences of universities, and that you could use endless amounts of data to compare universities with equal uncertainty.

    General reputation matters a lot, and Newcastle is considered very good, as is Leeds, as is Bristol etc. The only time people truly raise their eyebrows in the business and academic world generally is when the G5 are mentioned (Oxbridge, Imperial, LSE, UCL). I agree with that perception without too much whining, but it is the private schools who seem to stir up this stupid debate of Durham and St Andrews being the next best thing after the G5, when in reality there is no concrete evidence to back this up with. Yes, they are posher and a grade or two harder to get into than many other unis in the Russell Group, but does posh make them better universities academically speaking? St Andrews has been barred from the Russell Group, and only this week I was told that the Russell Group has no immediate plans to let them in as they don't meet the criteria which the other 24 members have passed.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    Give an Eg ?
    Contact the lecturers at Nottingham, they would be only too glad to help.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mansun)
    Contact the lecturers at Nottingham, they would be only too glad to help.

    So this great ' breakthrough ' is so earth shattering that only lecturers at a B grade university know about it ?

    Enough said.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • 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.

  • 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.