The Sunday Times University Guide 2010 - Discussion thread Watch

oo_Lucinda_oo
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#61
Report 9 years ago
#61
(Original post by CasinoBrawl)
Aw, yay. I'm sick of people knocking Queen Mary on TSR, it really doesn't deserve it.
I agree, I've got some friends at QMUL and visited a few times. I've always been really impressed :yep:
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#62
Report 9 years ago
#62
(Original post by acwright)
Because of the National Student Survey results. Take them out and it's a solid fifth (2 points behind UCL).
Ah! So we take the tables as gospel truth to the minutest detail, unless they don't give us the result we want or expect, in which case it is all right to ignore the bits we don't like? :toofunny:
0
reply
T. Hereford
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#63
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#63
(Original post by CasinoBrawl)
Aw, yay. I'm sick of people knocking Queen Mary on TSR, it really doesn't deserve it.
Exactly, QM is a decent uni with top rate academics and alumni. As I mentioned it did extremely well in the 2008 RAE (it went from 48th in 2001 to 13th last year). Plus Prof Peter Hennessey is a lecturer at QM who is one of the most respected academics in the country. I heard QM is aiming to be top 20 but I'm not sure if this is true. However, judging by its position in the league table and it's latest RAE I won't be surprised if it does break into the top 20 in a few years.
0
reply
.ACS.
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#64
Report 9 years ago
#64
I must say I do find it funny how so many on TSR take league tables to be gospel. :laugh:

The only vague 'rankings' I have a mild interest in are the ones which list most state school intake, most middle class, least middle class, etc. because they make for interesting reading and thought. Apart from that, the tables are useless.
0
reply
Slumpy
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#65
Report 9 years ago
#65
(Original post by Good bloke)
Ah! So we take the tables as gospel truth to the minutest detail, unless they don't give us the result we want or expect, in which case it is all right to ignore the bits we don't like? :toofunny:
I think trying to inflict sensibility on league table discussions is a bit of a vain hope.

Anyways, this seems to suggest Oxford is better than Cambridge, so it's clearly madness
0
reply
.ACS.
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#66
Report 9 years ago
#66
(Original post by River85)
The ABC1 etc classification is the NRS classification. It was used in market research but has become increasingly criticised.

I know that in the 2001 Census the government/National Statistics used a different system (NS-SEC).

http://www.ons.gov.uk/about-statisti...ons/index.html

I think this is becoming the standard classification. I've seen it used more often than the old NRS anyway.
Ah, thanks for that. Yeah, that seems to be the one the STUG is using.
0
reply
T. Hereford
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#67
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#67
(Original post by .ACS.)
I must say I do find it funny how so many on TSR take league tables to be gospel. :laugh:

Although, I love league tables I certainly don't take them as gospel. However, I do believe The Sunday Times University Guide league table is the most credible.
0
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#68
Report 9 years ago
#68
(Original post by acwright)
Because of the National Student Survey results. Take them out and it's a solid fifth (2 points behind UCL).
You can't just take out what you don't like. If it's 9th, it's 9th.

It's absurd to discount the NSS.

No, I'm not just saying this because Leicester's position is partly down to it's 211/250 score.

/cough
0
reply
Isherwood
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#69
Report 9 years ago
#69
It's really not about how well your university is doing, especially with undergraduates. It's about how well your doing.

If you can get a first and do a masters at one of top unis, it'll show to any prospective employer that you are a very credible candidate for the job.
0
reply
01jacks
Badges: 0
#70
Report 9 years ago
#70
i don;t like the disparties in the tables....its politics....the right wing ******* (times and sunday times) don't like soas!!!...check guardian and independent they love soas...:rolleyes: :p:
0
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#71
Report 9 years ago
#71
(Original post by 01jacks)
i don;t like the disparties in the tables....its politics....the right wing ******* (times and sunday times) don't like soas!!!...check guardian and independent they love soas...:rolleyes: :p:
Everyone likes SOAS.

Ignore the league tables
0
reply
The Magnificent KoloToure
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#72
Report 9 years ago
#72
Why is Manchester so low?
0
reply
miranda13
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#73
Report 9 years ago
#73
where is newcastle!?
0
reply
.ACS.
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#74
Report 9 years ago
#74
(Original post by T. Hereford)
Although, I love league tables I certainly don't take them as gospel. However, I do believe The Sunday Times University Guide league table is the most credible.
Credible for what, though? The placing of a university doesn't make a difference in terms of the quality of graduates that are produced or graduate recruitment at said university. People who go to top universities are recruited by the Big 4, as equally are people who go to former polytechnics; the same is true for pretty much every profession.
0
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#75
Report 9 years ago
#75
(Original post by The Magnificent KoloToure)
Why is Manchester so low?
Fairly low student satisfaction of just 129.
0
reply
AfghanistanBananistan
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#76
Report 9 years ago
#76
(Original post by River85)
Even this is fairly recent as, pre-NSS, it was as low as the 40s in some of the rankings. Note that the St Andrews wikipedia article only lists its position since 2005 and ignores the previous twelve years.

This is not my slating St Andrews more than it is slating the tables. It's just fact.
St Andrews is proof though that alot of people subconsciously take league tables seriously. Many people on here now automatically say St Andrews is in the very top group purely because it has ranked well becuae of the NSS. 5 Years ago no one on here even put St Anderew's in a list of their top 10 (i looked at an old thread on that). No doubt half the reason St Andrew's appliations have risen nearly 20% in 2 years is because of their ranking.

It just shows how ranking plays on us. Who knows, if LSE has five 12th place rankings in the next 5 years because of the NSS, people will no doubt say how it has 'lost it' which would be utter rubbish academically.

It is just like Edinburgh, Notitngham and Manchester. Edinburgh used to be held in higher regard than St Andrews on here, but no more purely due to rankings. Also Nottingham and Manchester have apparantly 'fallen back' purely due to a drop in rankings. It has nothing to do with academics.

It is all stupid if you ask me and league tables should be scrapped.
0
reply
.ACS.
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#77
Report 9 years ago
#77
(Original post by AfghanistanBananistan)
It is all stupid if you ask me and league tables should be scrapped.
:ditto:


(And I can't believe I'm agreeing with AfghanistanBananistan!! :eek: )
0
reply
natty_d
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#78
Report 9 years ago
#78
(Original post by .ACS.)
The only vague 'rankings' I have a mild interest in are the ones which list most state school intake, most middle class, least middle class, etc. because they make for interesting reading and thought. Apart from that, the tables are useless.
Are these on the internet? :teeth:
0
reply
Favourite Worst Nightmare
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#79
Report 9 years ago
#79
(Original post by AfghanistanBananistan)
St Andrews is proof though that alot of people subconsciously take league tables seriously. Many people on here now automatically say St Andrews is in the very top group purely because it has ranked well becuae of the NSS. 5 Years ago no one on here even put St Anderew's in a list of their top 10 (i looked at an old thread on that). No doubt half the reason St Andrew's appliations have risen nearly 20% in 2 years is because of their ranking.

It just shows how ranking plays on us. Who knows, if LSE has five 12th place rankings in the next 5 years because of the NSS, people will no doubt say how it has 'lost it' which would be utter rubbish academically.

It is just like Edinburgh, Notitngham and Manchester. Edinburgh used to be held in higher regard than St Andrews on here, but no more purely due to rankings. Also Nottingham and Manchester have apparantly 'fallen back' purely due to a drop in rankings. It has nothing to do with academics.

It is all stupid if you ask me and league tables should be scrapped.
I don't understand how students can be more 'satisfied' at St. Andrews than Edinburgh or Manchester. I always found it a bit of aa boring place. Is there nothing unis like Edinburgh and Manc can do about the student satisfaction? They are both research intensive universities so they are more recognised globally, than places like Durham and St. Andrews and and hence come behind Oxbridge/ Imperial/UCL in the world rankings. However, they are underrated right here in the UK...
0
reply
.ACS.
  • Forum Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#80
Report 9 years ago
#80
(Original post by natty_d)
Are these on the internet? :teeth:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...versity_guide/

Check the little drop-down boxes which say league table measures and search by comparisons.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
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! (535)
37.81%
No - but I will (111)
7.84%
No - I don't want to (96)
6.78%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (673)
47.56%

Watched Threads

View All
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