Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    To be honest, dont cut me down for this, i tend to think that prestigious = posh, at least thats what it seems like at my school where all the teachers and parents are mega university snobs. Therefore, i tend to see the prestigious universities as the 'socially respectable ones of the middle class - or as my head teacher calls 'dinner table conversation' universities.

    ie your Oxbridge, LSE, Imperial, Durham, Bristol, Nottingham and Edinburgh's.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nicholas Urfe)
    I don't really agree with this. Firstly, the phrase 'most exceptional students' is a problematic one. On what terms is a student 'exceptional'? Are you talking about a student's academic record? Because, if so, we all know that As at A level are becoming more and more common. In terms of entry standards, whether you're going to Durham, Oxbridge, Leeds, Manchester or Liverpool, you'll need AAA/AAB for the traditional subjects (English, History, Geogaphy, Maths, Physics, Medicine, etc). So any student doing one of these subjects at a RG university is going to have an 'exceptional' academic record. Therefore, the less vocational and 'newer' courses a university offers, the higher overall entry standards it will have. Manchester and Leeds, being as big as they are, offer more courses--and more diverse courses--than other universities. So obviously, their entry standards slip overall, in comparison to universities which offer less of these 'different' courses. What about courses, for example, where an applicant's academic record isn't the best sign of their potential? Think about Photography -- admissions tutors will be looking for more than a sound academic performance. They'll want to see a passion for photography, and a portfolio compiled by the applicant.

    And I don't know why you think that Bristol is very competitive in all areas. Like Manchester and Leeds, it has less demanding entry requirements in some areas. Admittedly, Manchester and Leeds have more of these areas, but that's a result of size as much as anything else, and the other points I made above:

    Bristol:

    Theology and Religous Studies (ABB-BBC)
    Russian and Portuguese (ABB-BBC)
    Audiology (BBB)
    Childhood Studies (ABB-BBC)
    Social Policy (ABC-BBB)
    Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. (BBB-BCC)
    Music (AAB-BBC)
    Thats the whole point, to get in to the really top universities you need a combination of amazing academics (usually well more than 3 A's) and very impressive extra curriculars. Just being smart is rarely enough. And of course all universities have certain subjects where it is much easier to get into, but by and large the best of any peer group get into Bristol for the core, popular subjects..

    It boils down to competition, at the top 10-12 universities they can afford to reject scores of straight A students, and pick the really interesting ones. manc and Leeds dont have that luxury, evidenced by the fact that Manchester have tried to bribe straight A students into going there by offering them bursaries. You dont see Warwick, Bristol, Nottingham, Durham, Edinburgh etc doing that
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broadsword)
    You dont see Warwick, Bristol, Nottingham, Durham, Edinburgh etc doing that
    I know for a fact that Nottingham offer bursaries to Straight A students in certain subjects. The physics department even offers bursaries to those achieving AAB.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChemistBoy)
    I know for a fact that Nottingham offer bursaries to Straight A students in certain subjects. The physics department even offers bursaries to those achieving AAB.
    Thats no doubt only in the sciences, and that is common at quite a few top universities in unpopular subjects. The point was that in the popular ones like Law, Economics, History, Politics etc Manc offer bursaries, places like Nottingham just dont need to in order to attract the best
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broadsword)
    Thats no doubt only in the sciences, and that is common at quite a few top universities in unpopular subjects. The point was that in the popular ones like Law, Economics, History, Politics etc Manc offer bursaries, places like Nottingham just dont need to in order to attract the best
    That isn't really how bursaries work though. For example, the Nottingham Physics ones are due to the kind donation of some of the prize money awarded to Peter Mansfield upon winning the Nobel Prize - without this money Nottingham wouldn't have been offering these bursaries. Many of the departments mentioned in the arts and social sciences use their money to set up postgraduate bursaries due to the shortage of funding for postgraduate studies in these areas (unlike in science where postgraduate degrees are well funded) - hence their funds go to that area and bursaries at postgraduate level are far more common than at undergraduate level. The fact that Manchester can offer undergradaute bursaries in these subjects tells us more about their financial clout than it does about their desperation for students.

    Edit: Oh yeah, and sciences aren't that unpopular anymore. When I went to my RSC committee meeting recently many of the academics in the East Midlands were saying that they were getting more applicants from suitable candidates than they had real places for. Of course central university administrations keep jacking up quotas in these subjects without realising that you need to build more facilities to make these realisable - but that's another debate.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nicholas Urfe)
    and the other points I made above:

    Bristol:

    Theology and Religous Studies (ABB-BBC)
    Russian and Portuguese (ABB-BBC)
    Audiology (BBB)
    Childhood Studies (ABB-BBC)
    Social Policy (ABC-BBB)
    Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. (BBB-BCC)
    Music (AAB-BBC)
    UCL and LSE have some courses with BBB offers.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broadsword)
    It boils down to competition, at the top 10-12 universities they can afford to reject scores of straight A students, and pick the really interesting ones. manc and Leeds dont have that luxury, evidenced by the fact that Manchester have tried to bribe straight A students into going there by offering them bursaries. You dont see Warwick, Bristol, Nottingham, Durham, Edinburgh etc doing that
    Leeds and Manchester don't have that luxury? It's obviously subject-specific, but for many courses they do have that luxury. I mean, even basic statistics suggest that Manchester get nine applicants per place and Leeds seven -- Durham get eight.

    And if you want a specific example, I'll use English at Leeds, because that's my course. There's a document--which I can give you a link for, if you want to see it--which states that Leeds recieves over 2000 applicants for around 225 places. The same document states that students without a prediction of at least AAB should basically forget it. The English department has the luxury of turning away many straight A students, and students with more than three As. That's a fact. I can tell you that there's people on my course who have the very best academic records combined with amazing experiences and achievements outside of education. I used to speak to guy who went to Eton, who had perfect grades, and had explored most of the planet on a gap year. That's not to mention the things he didn't tell me.

    You can't generalise like you are. If you make your arguments in reference to specific courses at specific universities, then fair enough. But to say that a university is better because--overall--it's 'harder' to get into is a pretty shallow conclusion. I'm sure most people who have been/are at university will also agree that the students who enter university as the strongest candidates--5 As, brilliant school, amazing experiences--are rarely the ones who actually perform most impressively on their course.

    If the 'perfect' student is as easily identifiable as you think, then the same bunch of students would get offers from everywhere. When, in fact, quite the opposite happens. Students get offers for Oxford, but get rejected from Durham. Students get into Bristol, but get rejected by Leeds. They get offers from Nottingham, but get rejected by Edinburgh. Why is this? If there's a bunch of obviously amazing students out there, then why doesn't every university give them an offer?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    gooo notts!!!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    "Prestigious" is a subjective label interpreted by TSR to mean "whatever criteria could possibly make my excellent university or firm choice very fractionally better than your excellent university or firm choice." Online bragging rights are of course essential, and therefore prestige is an important means of deciding how to spend three or four years of your life, far more so than attempting to actually visit the universities in question / taking the standards of the respective courses into account / generally trying to work out what is right for you.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nicholas Urfe)
    They get offers from Nottingham, but get rejected by Edinburgh. Why is this? If there's a bunch of obviously amazing students out there, then why doesn't every university give them an offer?
    There's quite a few students who get rejected by 'inferior' universities to 'superior' ones. I got rejected Leeds and I'm at Durham. Some guy on here got rejected by LSE and accepted by Oxford or something.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    There's quite a few students who get rejected by 'inferior' universities to 'superior' ones. I got rejected Leeds and I'm at Durham. Some guy on here got rejected by LSE and accepted by Oxford or something.
    Exactly. Proven examples of the point I'm trying to make. :yep:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nicholas Urfe)
    Exactly. Proven examples of the point I'm trying to make.
    I hate lotteries.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I would say oxford and cambridge since they are the only university that have AAA+ for every course they offer.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lnwn)
    cos would you say liverpool or manchester are prestigious?
    manchester is prestigious.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    A prestigious university in any country is one that is highly respected and recognized by others. The most prestigious universities universities in the uk are obviously oxford and cambridge. But when we're talking about prestigious universities, we could include Imperial, LSE, UCL, Warwick, Bristol, Durham, King's, Edinburgh, Nottingham, York, Bath, Manchester, St.Andrews and so on. Unless it's oxford or cambridge, it all depends on courses as well. An economics degree from LSE is just about as prestigious as one from Cambridge. In other words, there are several prestigious universities. But the most prestigious ones are oxbridge.
 
 
 
Poll
Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?
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.