Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Not that it really matters in the grand scheme of things... a couple of places on a particular league table does not equal the end of the world. But, I have noticed Manchester and Nottingham seem to be dropping and Exeter has risen - all great, though.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    Before I offer my full reply, I'd like to know what you think of this.

    You are suggesting that LSE is in decline, as shown by its fall in the THES rankings.

    Durham was in the 70s back in my first year there. Then I think it dropped to 130. Since that time it has flittered between 100 - 120 or so. Lower than its position a few years ago which it has never retained. Does this mean it's in decline?

    If it is in decline, then how do you reconcile that with domestic tables? Its position in them has remained the same during this time. In fact, in the Independent it has risen. So, does this mean it is in decline but also improving?

    Yes, domestic tables use a completely different methodology. I'm aware of that. This only highlights my point. Why is one table right, but the other wrong? Not one of them is "wrong". They are right, in that they are ranked according to the relevant criteria. As they can differ so much they cannot be used as a reliable means of determining the quality of a university in relation to its peers.

    This isn't perhaps the strongest example, has it didn't have a consistant position to begin with. I could probably find a better example if I weren't so tired.

    Also, do you have any evidence to back up your claim that the academic standard of LSE students has declined in recent years? They are not the only university to rely solely on academic grades and personal statements as few universities interview or demand additional admissions tests. LSE still has very high entry standards. This is quite clear.

    UCL don't offer interview or offer additional admissions tests. I'm aware that for law LSE don't use the LNAT, whereas UCL do, but I don't see this as evidence that their intake is therefore of a lower quality. Cambridge have ditched the LNAT after all (although still interview, of course) and I doubt the quality of their students will decline.



    Not really. Why just use top twenty? That seems very arbitary. Secondly, there are yearly fluctuations in league tables which means there is not a definitive top 20.

    There are also many different tables, with different "top twenties", as they can use different methodology. I maintain that there is no definitive top 20.

    As far as we can compare universiies, I maintain that there is no significant difference between most of the Russell Group and 1994 Group universities. I could go into more detail about this, and provide evidence (as I have done before) but too tired at the moment.

    Departments can also vary widely within universities. Taking your argument further, and applying it to subject specific domestic tables (which you probably don't want me to do). Durham is in the top five for philosophy and top ten for politics. However, it certainly doesn't offer better teaching, research and overall quality compared to universities ranked below it (including outside the top 20). Reading for philosophy, Aberwystwth for politics. You might argue that these are exceptions. Possibly so, but I still find your top twenty very arbitary.



    Nope, there are a wide variety of different tables often using wildly different metholodogies. I've seen UCL ranked anything from 25th to 80 something in other tables. What makes one table right but the other wrong?



    It's quite simple: -

    You say LSE has experienced a significant decline in the THES rankings.

    The THES rankings still place LSE in much the same place as they have been in recent years (at least in the subjects they teach).

    Therefore there is no decline.

    Even if you do insist on using the general tables, because a university has dropped places doesn't mean that it has actually experienced a decline in standards. But I can't be bothered going into that right now.

    I will put this as a simple question, how do you think it's fair to compare universities of such differing sizes and universities who can teach such different things? The general table does not show LSE is declining. It does show how flawed the table is.



    Apologies for the grammar. I'm tired, having had little sleep, and distracted by an essay (on the Cartesian Circle if you're interested).

    My point was that in the THES rankings UCL has been in the late 20s and now it's in the top ten. Universities often fluctuate and often to a greater degree. Let's put it down to hyperbole on your part.

    As for the part in bold, it is only a league table. Once again, I can show you league tables which place UCL lower. Even using the exact same statistic used in the THES ranking, but applying a different weighting, UCL will be in a completely different position.

    o

    You did not. However, when you assumed I'm at LSE you attacked me for defending my own university. The inclusion of the "rolleyes" smiley indicated that you were mocking my post or that it was certainly not worth taking seriously purely on the basis of my alleged bias. It certainly came across that way.

    Unfortunately, you were incorrect in your assumption.
    lol i am very tempted to just put TLDR and leave it as that.

    many of your points are as unjustified or even more unjustified as mine, and consist of mere nitpicking and opinionated (but disguised as fact), not to mention extremely convoluted yet again, so much so that i wont even bother replying to you since i have better things to do than argue with someone who is so narrow minded he is never going to admit that he is wrong even on something that is so blatantly obvious.

    3 points:

    1. 1-20 was an arbitrary point. i intended it to be so.
    2. cambridge does have its own test for law to replace the lnat.
    3. yes im not taking you seriously. this is further justified by the fact that youre willing to go along the lines of "you are incorrect" yes-no arguing online that, with your post count, you are no doubt familiar with on here and which will inevitably lead nowhere.

    your self-important attitude is evident and i would definitely not like to work with someone like you who thinks he knows-it-all. (thanks for telling me you are working on the Cartesian circle btw, i really needed to know that :rolleyes:)

    all that youve said in your post ive heard before and this argument on league tables is subjective, especially on this forum, and theres nothing you can do to change that. no matter how much time you spend arguing with people who disagree, or how long and nonsensical your posts are. (nonsensical because you lack many substantiations via facts) next time i would just love to put TLDR and leave it as that.

    seeing the time you spend on here via your post count, im not a little surprised. im not attacking you, just stating facts.:rolleyes:

    no need to be so sensitive.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubbles*de*Milo)
    Christ, OP needs to get a life. Who gives a ****? :nothing:
    The OP does.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This looks like a great dissertation topic!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    League tables are such ********. It is very funny watching everyone on TSR kill themselves over them though.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    You will never get an apology from me, because you are quite clearly the same person. One may argue that spending a great amount of time on an Internet forum is quite sad (you've mocked another member for the amount of posts he makes a day, suggesting that he needs to get a life).

    It's even sadder making duplicate accounts to back up your own arguments. At least when you're caught out have the balls to admit it. An IP check isn't even needed, it's quite clear. Just like with Broadsword, your posting style is exactly the same, you say exactly the same things, you're pretty much always online at the same time (often logging out of one account, straight into another) and appear on the same threads.

    For so long, right up until your Broadsword account was banned, you claimed when you and he were not the same when there was clear evidence you were. I thought that after that you'd have the balls to admit it, or at least not be sad enough to try it again, but clearly not.

    Now stop trying to deceive people.
    All you are saying with that reply is that you cannot check people's IP addresses, because if you could then you would see that i am not possibly the same person because how can i person log out of a computer in one place and then log into another a hundred miles away a few minutes later?

    This also suggests that you had no right to ban broadsword because you had no evidence that he'she was the same person as me, just a perception and unjustified belief that they were. That is wrong on every level and shows that you take the law in your own hands without proof.

    Bearing in mind that you have again unjustifiably accused me of being someone else, you were blatently wrong there too.

    For all you know Pantry leader may be Broadsword again, and is it to hard to believe that to people could think the same things?

    So i say again, if you an check IP's (your justification for apparantly banning Broadsword as you said before), then do the check. If no why not? and if you do then we can clear this up once and for all. Surely it is best for the whole site if people are not duplicating accounts and for you to get to the bottom of it.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smack)
    Biggest winners = people that take league tables for what they are: a pile of pish

    Biggest losers = people that furiously masturbate over the positioning of universities in the tables and base all their decisions on their standing
    this.

    league tables are ********. all you can get from them is when comparing universities, and one is say, 6th, and one is say 57th. then you could safely say the first is better than the second.

    other than that, its utter crap.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ncsjohn02)
    lol i am very tempted to just put TLDR and leave it as that.
    I find people who do that particularly pathetic (and it would probably be classed as spam). Either reply to the post and make a constructive contribution or ignore it. Thankfully you've replied to it.

    (Original post by ncsjohn02)
    many of your points are as unjustified or even more unjustified as mine, and consist of mere nitpicking and opinionated (but disguised as fact).
    Well, I know many people will strongly disagree with you there. A wide range of people including PhD students and graduates who have a lot more knowledge and experience than both of us.

    There's a long list of people who will defend me and have offered similar arguments, many, many times in the past. But, like me, they are growing rather tired and fatigued of this forum. Instead they offer support by PM or rep.

    All this really comes down to is that you're soon to be a UCL student. Therefore the THES rankings must be gospel because they place. You also use it to form some attack against LSE, possible as part of some London rivalry...I don't care. I'm sure if UCL starts slipping down the THES rankings you'll soon stop taking them so seriously.

    I also know that many people value my posts and the advice I give. Evidence for this is in the form of rep comments and the sheer amount of PMs I get asking for help, or thanking me. I don't mean to sound arrogant here, because I honestly don't feel that my posts are anything special, but I gets the compliments.

    All I'm saying is that if you find me opinionated, self-important or arrogant then you're certainly in the minority. But you have every right to feel that way. But I'm not like that at all. Especially not in person. I just like a good argument.

    (Original post by ncsjohn02)
    your self-important attitude is evident and i would definitely not like to work with someone like you who thinks he knows-it-all
    What you probably pick up as being self-important is just my style of arguing. Part of it comes from being a philosopher, the other part probably from my writing style in general (which I think is strongly influenced by being on the Autistic spectrum).

    (thanks for telling me you are working on the Cartesian circle btw, i really needed to know that :rolleyes:)
    You're welcome :hat2: Although I wish I hadn't mentioned it now. It comes across as rather pretentious. That wasn't my point. After all, I don't understand a word of it. Seriously. I do have a habit of being overly detailed in my speech and posts, and giving irrelevant details, maybe that's the possible Asperger's. Who cares though tbh.

    (nonsensical because you lack many substantiations via facts)
    I admit I can provide more evidence and facts, and have done in the past, but I'm getting to the point of not caring now. You attack me for not providing any facts or evidence yet you haven't provided any yourself. You make claims like "the top twenty universities undeniable offer better teaching" (possibly true, possibly not) yet don't provide evidence. Your claims are actual more spurious than mine.

    (Original post by ncsjohn02)
    seeing the time you spend on here via your post count, im not a little surprised. im not attacking you, just stating facts.:rolleyes: .
    That you suggested I was a "douche" before (that's always been a particularly immature insult) would suggest otherwise. But nevermind. All I know is that once someone starts making ad hom attacks, as well as attacking someone for the amount of time they spend on a forum (which, given that I was a moderator, I needed to do and TSR was particularly valuable during a time of illness when I wasn't attending university or had a job) then that means they know they've lost the argument.

    no need to be so sensitive.
    Believe me, I honestly don't give a damn, despite what my posts suggest. I just like a debate. It was nice :hat2:

    Meanwhile speaking of ad hom attacks

    (Original post by AfghanistanBananistan)
    x
    As I've just informed you by PM, using a dupe to back up your own arguments is very sad. Using a dupe to give other people negative rep, and continually denying using a dupe, is even sadder.

    I am stating this in the open forum just so that everyone knows how deceptive you're being. I imagine most won't care. Those that do care are already aware.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ncsjohn02)
    lol i am very tempted to just put TLDR and leave it as that.

    many of your points are as unjustified or even more unjustified as mine, and consist of mere nitpicking and opinionated (but disguised as fact), not to mention extremely convoluted yet again, so much so that i wont even bother replying to you since i have better things to do than argue with someone who is so narrow minded he is never going to admit that he is wrong even on something that is so blatantly obvious.

    3 points:

    1. 1-20 was an arbitrary point. i intended it to be so.
    2. cambridge does have its own test for law to replace the lnat.
    3. yes im not taking you seriously. this is further justified by the fact that youre willing to go along the lines of "you are incorrect" yes-no arguing online that, with your post count, you are no doubt familiar with on here and which will inevitably lead nowhere.

    your self-important attitude is evident and i would definitely not like to work with someone like you who thinks he knows-it-all. (thanks for telling me you are working on the Cartesian circle btw, i really needed to know that :rolleyes:)

    all that youve said in your post ive heard before and this argument on league tables is subjective, especially on this forum, and theres nothing you can do to change that. no matter how much time you spend arguing with people who disagree, or how long and nonsensical your posts are. (nonsensical because you lack many substantiations via facts) next time i would just love to put TLDR and leave it as that.

    seeing the time you spend on here via your post count, im not a little surprised. im not attacking you, just stating facts.:rolleyes:

    no need to be so sensitive.
    Easy tiger! There's no need to insult River. He's one of the very few people in GUD that speaks from an informed position. If you can't keep up with his tenaciousness then back away. Throwing insults in his direction whilst sidestepping his arguments isn't the way forward.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Boosh)
    Easy tiger! There's no need to insult River. He's one of the very few people in GUD that speaks from an informed position. If you can't keep up with his tenaciousness then back away. Throwing insults in his direction whilst sidestepping his arguments isn't the way forward.
    THIS

    Oh, and what Smack said too, that's worth a mention.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    x

    why is it pathetic if i put TLDR? its true aint it? some people come here for entertainment, some for debate. theres no law against people posting as such and what you think wont prevent me from posting TLDR in the future if indeed i dont feel its worth my time to reply to.

    but kudos to your response. i was expecting a flame war to begin. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Boosh)
    Easy tiger! There's no need to insult River. He's one of the very few people in GUD that speaks from an informed position. If you can't keep up with his tenaciousness then back away. Throwing insults in his direction whilst sidestepping his arguments isn't the way forward.
    i didnt insult him. if you thought that was insult, you are too sensitive. and i couldnt care less of who he is. oh, and mind your own business. :rolleyes:
 
 
 
Poll
Are you chained to your phone?
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

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

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