Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Are Oxford and Cambridge the only UK universities that matter? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone know about why did Manchester rank higher on the world university rank than Bristol? Especially in CompSci? When actually Bristol is better, hands down.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adaymuhajier)
    Does anyone know about why did Manchester rank higher on the world university rank than Bristol? Especially in CompSci? When actually Bristol is better, hands down.
    It depends how you define better though. I think international rankings take things into account like research power which Manchester is very strong on and ignore student satisfaction scores which some less good universities try to manipulate to climb the uk tables (not saying bristol is one of these) and Manchester scores less well on. I'd say look at which critera Manchester scores higher than Bristol on in the international league tables and you'll know specifically why Manchester is ranked higher.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by florencecheese)
    considering the amount of people in the world who CANT go to university or those who don't even TRY to get in to university- ANY university matters.

    The point is, no matter where you go - you will learn how to rationalize, argue, and present your ideas. You will learn new skills and earn a degree at the end. Don't put institutions down just because it doesn't live up to the insufferable standards of other universities. if someone wants to do furniture design as a degree you have no right to say it doesn't matter. They are working hard to do something they want to do. People who go to russell group universities obviously get an advantage in prospects, but when it comes to the temperaments and heart of the people there ALL universities are the same. Get a degree and work hard to get noticed and you will be successful. dont doubt yourself and don't listen to people who call your university crappy.

    on a world stage- yes- russell groups are more well known. HOWEVER, if Ettore Sottsass saw a furniture design students work and went WOW and employed them, youd realize it doesnt matter.

    people in the world fight for education (especially womens education)- the large amount of universities and opportunities for ALL (not just the elite) is a beautiful thing and shouldn't be put down.
    You are what we need more of in the world
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Queen Acajou)
    You are what we need more of in the world
    I agree
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adaymuhajier)
    Does anyone know about why did Manchester rank higher on the world university rank than Bristol? Especially in CompSci? When actually Bristol is better, hands down.

    This has been done to death.

    Global tables use different criteria: reasearch , international staff and so on but nothing about real entry grades, student surveys, student: size ratios money spent on dept.

    Research and foreign staff matter little to taught courses. They relate more to Phds.

    Whereas local tables relate more to taught courses and the criteria reflects this.

    You can still take an average percentile of the 2 tables if you like but that still leaves Manc way lower than Bristol
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Yoi haven't even been to uni yet , what do you know about research ? ...

    Research and foreign staff matter little to taught courses. They relate more to Phds.

    Whereas local tables relate more to taught courses and the criteria reflects this.

    All criteria can be manipulated not just student satisfaction scores. Your own university manipulates entry grades, they state AAA* to pull in rich internationals like you, then you see Manc in clearing for the same course. That should set off alarm bells.

    What's wrong with student satisfaction ? Are you saying that people paying 10s of thousands of pounds have no right to give an opinion of the course ? DO you have proof that this is " manipulated " ? And since you are not even in UK , how do you know ?

    Also it is untrue that Bristol has benefitted from high SS but our other criteria are strong and prevents us from slipping into 2nd tier status.

    You still haven't justified why you chose Manchester when you claim to have AAA*. Why are you paying exhorbitant fees for a 2nd tier Uni when you can get into a much better one ?

    I find that bizzare and I think you going have a lot of anger inside you and be a danger to society in future.



    (Original post by TheWaffle)
    It depends how you define better though. I think international rankings take things into account like research power which Manchester is very strong on and ignore student satisfaction scores which some less good universities try to manipulate to climb the uk tables (not saying bristol is one of these) and Manchester scores less well on. I'd say look at which critera Manchester scores higher than Bristol on in the international league tables and you'll know specifically why Manchester is ranked higher.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    From what I've heard, the UK (can't really speak for the US) is actually much more open-minded about this than many countries in Asia. Obviously this is a rather sweeping statement, but top employers in east Asia seem to place more emphasis on academic achievement - including the reputation of the alma mater - than top employers here.

    Well perhaps you're right, but I think at the very least students here, maybe not employers, are far too concerned about what uni they go to.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dr Alcoholic)
    Well perhaps you're right, but I think at the very least students here, maybe not employers, are far too concerned about what uni they go to.
    I think that that's true, but given how little real information school students have it's what's to be expected when newspapers bring out university rankings every year. The concept obviously isn't entirely mythological - all else being roughly equal, you will have greater success in your early career if you graduate from Oxford than if you graduate from Bolton. That said, I think people buy too much into the hierarchy of universities which appear in the 7-20 sort of range on these rankings.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Most aspiring business students are prestige conscious, and when they're looking for British universities with highly respected business programs outside of Oxford, Cambridge and LBS, they'd look at Warwick, Imperial, Manchester and Cranfield. With the exception of Cranfield, which doesn't offer undergraduate programs, all three are considered highly respected universities/institutions to the sight of elite MBA aspirants.

    Overall, I think the British universities that are highly respected outside of the UK for business degrees are:

    London Business School (LBS)
    Oxford, Cambridge
    Warwick, Imperial
    Manchester, Cranfield


    For undergraduate degrees, in general:

    Oxford, Cambridge
    LSE
    Imperial
    UCL
    Warwick, St Andrews, Edinburgh, Bristol, Durham, Manchester, King's (and the other London Unis)

    and then you have the large universities with bigger alumni network, such as:
    Nottingham, Birmingham, Leeds, Newcastle, Glasgow and Shefield.

    I'd say Exeter, Bath and York are somewhat respected universities outside of the UK, too.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Yes Oxbridge are the only universities that matter.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    We also need to differentiate between UK universities that are well regraded in other 1st world countries and those that are in 3rd world places.

    Quite obviously fame in 1st world countries counts for much more than in 3rd worlders.

    That's why St Andrews has a big following in the USA and places like Manchester are well known in China, India, Malaysia.

    Big difference.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mrkl)
    As for what job I'm doing, well I don't feel the need to broadcast it to the whole world thank you very much
    Well whatever you’re doing can’t be that exciting if you feel the need to come of TSR and put down other people’s universities. Do you honestly think that if you had gone to Manchester rather than Bristol, you wouldn’t have been able to do what you’re doing now?


    (Original post by mrkl)
    Yoi haven't even been to uni yet , what do you know about research ? ...

    Research and foreign staff matter little to taught courses. They relate more to Phds.

    Whereas local tables relate more to taught courses and the criteria reflects this.

    All criteria can be manipulated not just student satisfaction scores. Your own university manipulates entry grades, they state AAA* to pull in rich internationals like you, then you see Manc in clearing for the same course. That should set off alarm bells.

    What's wrong with student satisfaction ? Are you saying that people paying 10s of thousands of pounds have no right to give an opinion of the course ? DO you have proof that this is " manipulated " ? And since you are not even in UK , how do you know ?

    Also it is untrue that Bristol has benefitted from high SS but our other criteria are strong and prevents us from slipping into 2nd tier status.

    You still haven't justified why you chose Manchester when you claim to have AAA*. Why are you paying exhorbitant fees for a 2nd tier Uni when you can get into a much better one ?

    I find that bizzare and I think you going have a lot of anger inside you and be a danger to society in future.
    To answer your questions...


    Yes of course people should be able to give feedback on their courses. In terms of manipulation what I mean is that I’ve read of some universities who allegedly try and bribe students into giving them high scores, or by telling them that if they do so the universities ranking will increase. Here at Manchester, we get emails etc just to fill them in (good or bad) because nobody can be bothered. From experience this is normally as people are having too much fun or studying. Thus the people that fill them in are more likely to have something less positive to say. Manchester doesn’t seem to really mind if we fill them in tbh.
    I just feel there is too much weight placed on these in league tables. For example, in the Complete University Guide rankings for 2014-15, Manchester (ranked 28th) beats Leister and East Anglia, who are ranked 15th and 19th in every single category except on student satisfaction.

    Yes there are some people with lower grades than me at Manchester. There would also be at places like Durham or Bristol. But employers can clearly see that I myself am not a B grade student from my CV and a degree from Manchester in Latin and French is still considered academically rigorous.

    The Times World Rankings also use Teaching as a measure of success btw

    (Original post by mrkl)
    We also need to differentiate between UK universities that are well regraded in other 1st world countries and those that are in 3rd world places.

    Quite obviously fame in 1st world countries counts for much more than in 3rd worlders.

    That's why St Andrews has a big following in the USA and places like Manchester are well known in China, India, Malaysia.

    Big difference.
    In terms of you saying that the university is only popular with what you deem “3rd World countries” (this is a fairly outdated view of defining most of the countries you cited), this is not true. Nor is it true that they get by on some kind of “football fame”. The QS “Best Universities According to Employers” put Manchester at 9th in the world. This was there view on which produced the best graduates, whom as employers they will obviously have some experience of. As this survey was Global, if Manchester’s reputation didn’t also apply in places like Europe and the US, I hardly think they would have beaten so many other excellent universities to 9th place. Thus, to answer the original question posed in the thread- yes other universities do have a standing in the world apart from Oxbridge, including Manchester.
    Finally, on your insistence that I will regret my decision that I didn’t go to a “better” or more “highly regarded” university- I really don’t think I will. I didn’t pick Manchester based on its reputation at all. I picked it based on where I could develop my confidence, people skills and personality the most. These three things are essential to a happy and successful life and mean way more than the difference on a CV between somewhere like Manchester and somewhere like Bristol. Plus I had the chance to do more interesting and useful work experience than most in my chosen field due to the location of the uni. BTW St Andews has massively increased in popularity with the US due to Wills and Kate going there.

    (Original post by mrkl)
    Yoi haven't even been to uni yet...

    to pull in rich internationals like you...

    And since you are not even in UK...

    [/B]
    I am British, from a state school and already at university.

    I’ve just done my third year abroad in France where I not only did more work experience and academic research into the fields I’m considering; I did so in a foreign language (French) often beating the locals in terms of grades. That is what I meant when I said people held the university in high regard- I was talking of Europe.

    If we were both to apply for a job, I quite sure the employer (and I include top employers in this) would base their decision on our work experience, degree classification and the fit of our personality in the company, rather than who went to Manchester and who went to Bristol. Whichever one is "best" both are good enough as a basis for a top career.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Why does every thread on this forum have to turn into a students' battlefield?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    It's all your fault :eek:
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheWaffle)
    In terms of manipulation what I mean is that I’ve read of some universities who allegedly try and bribe students into giving them high scores,
    If you are aware of an instance of this since Kingston did it in 2008, please give chapter and verse.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheWaffle)
    Well whatever you’re doing can’t be that exciting if you feel the need to come of TSR and put down other people’s universities. Do you honestly think that if you had gone to Manchester rather than Bristol, you wouldn’t have been able to do what you’re doing now?




    To answer your questions...


    Yes of course people should be able to give feedback on their courses. In terms of manipulation what I mean is that I’ve read of some universities who allegedly try and bribe students into giving them high scores, or by telling them that if they do so the universities ranking will increase. Here at Manchester, we get emails etc just to fill them in (good or bad) because nobody can be bothered. From experience this is normally as people are having too much fun or studying. Thus the people that fill them in are more likely to have something less positive to say. Manchester doesn’t seem to really mind if we fill them in tbh.
    I just feel there is too much weight placed on these in league tables. For example, in the Complete University Guide rankings for 2014-15, Manchester (ranked 28th) beats Leister and East Anglia, who are ranked 15th and 19th in every single category except on student satisfaction.

    Yes there are some people with lower grades than me at Manchester. There would also be at places like Durham or Bristol. But employers can clearly see that I myself am not a B grade student from my CV and a degree from Manchester in Latin and French is still considered academically rigorous.

    The Times World Rankings also use Teaching as a measure of success btw



    In terms of you saying that the university is only popular with what you deem “3rd World countries” (this is a fairly outdated view of defining most of the countries you cited), this is not true. Nor is it true that they get by on some kind of “football fame”. The QS “Best Universities According to Employers” put Manchester at 9th in the world. This was there view on which produced the best graduates, whom as employers they will obviously have some experience of. As this survey was Global, if Manchester’s reputation didn’t also apply in places like Europe and the US, I hardly think they would have beaten so many other excellent universities to 9th place. Thus, to answer the original question posed in the thread- yes other universities do have a standing in the world apart from Oxbridge, including Manchester.
    Finally, on your insistence that I will regret my decision that I didn’t go to a “better” or more “highly regarded” university- I really don’t think I will. I didn’t pick Manchester based on its reputation at all. I picked it based on where I could develop my confidence, people skills and personality the most. These three things are essential to a happy and successful life and mean way more than the difference on a CV between somewhere like Manchester and somewhere like Bristol. Plus I had the chance to do more interesting and useful work experience than most in my chosen field due to the location of the uni. BTW St Andews has massively increased in popularity with the US due to Wills and Kate going there.



    I am British, from a state school and already at university.

    I’ve just done my third year abroad in France where I not only did more work experience and academic research into the fields I’m considering; I did so in a foreign language (French) often beating the locals in terms of grades. That is what I meant when I said people held the university in high regard- I was talking of Europe.

    If we were both to apply for a job, I quite sure the employer (and I include top employers in this) would base their decision on our work experience, degree classification and the fit of our personality in the company, rather than who went to Manchester and who went to Bristol. Whichever one is "best" both are good enough as a basis for a top career.
    Mmmm yes I like you. This is a general response to you and to this thread in general.

    This idea that Oxbridge is all that matters is not the OP's fault. They will not be the first going person to ask this question. Whilst I feel that Oxbridge of course is incredible, it is not all there is. Over the past 50 years or so university education in Britain has changed. 'New' universities have established themselves and have created a bigger market. Back in the day when university was something for the precious, privileged few, an Oxbridge monopoly was of course bound to happen. University education was not for all and the 'best' were most likely to be found there. However, as society has developed and more people from all backgrounds are going to university this opens up the playing field. To put it quite simply, education is no longer something that only a minority within society can attain, and success is no longer limited to a small demographic.

    With this, to match the growing number of students entering higher education there a growing number of institutions to house them. If in 1950 the education system allowed for 5% of the country to be A* worthy, by 2000 this number has certainly grown.

    Are they all to go Oxbridge to have success? Are thousands upon thousands of future business people, executives, doctors, surgeons, scientists, barristers, solicitors etc only
    Supposed to go to only Oxbridge? News flash: they won't. Cambridge and Oxford have an ancient tradition of success. And Warwick, Manchester, Bath, Bristol, LSE etc are universities that have a more modern history but will still produce students with clout who will do great things.

    It's like saying that because trains have been producing successful transportation for longer than planes we shouldn't consider planes a proper form of transport because the train has been doing it for longer.

    I will say it again, success is not limited to Oxbridge. Oxbridge are FANTASTIC! Nobody can deny that. But, they are no longer alone. When I was at interview, my tutors were happy to discuss with me the pros and cons of me going to Oxford and even though I didn't get in, I was able to gain a lot of perspective. I thought that if I was to become a successful barrister I just HAD to go there, but as they and many others have consistently told me: it's not where you graduate that will get you the success, it's what's inside your head.

    Look, unless we expand the Oxbridge campuses to be able to include every top, able student, other universities will exist who will produce the same and in some cases better quality students. The best all need to go somewhere! Thank goodness that in 2014 they can have their pickings and go to a university that truly suits them and not just have to look to Oxbridge for success!

    The 'Oxbridge is the only one that matters' view is stuffy and outdated. It should be put on the shelf with other things we look back on with better judgement in 2014, like class prejudice and the private school bias.




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mrkl)
    We also need to differentiate between UK universities that are well regraded in other 1st world countries and those that are in 3rd world places.

    Quite obviously fame in 1st world countries counts for much more than in 3rd worlders.

    That's why St Andrews has a big following in the USA and places like Manchester are well known in China, India, Malaysia.

    Big difference.
    Singapore sends a much higher number of undergraduate students to Manchester than India. Are you suggesting that Singapore is a third world country?
    And tbh, Manchester really doesn't have that good a reputation in Asia-I mean it's considered a good uni but nowhere near the level some people here are making it out to be. Warwick is very well known though. It's universities like Durham and Bristol that no one has heard of.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Quite obviously fame in 1st world countries counts for much more than in 3rd worlders.

    (Original post by sellerofdreams)
    Singapore sends a much higher number of undergraduate students to Manchester than India. Are you suggesting that Singapore is a third world country?
    And tbh, Manchester really doesn't have that good a reputation in Asia-I mean it's considered a good uni but nowhere near the level some people here are making it out to be. Warwick is very well known though. It's universities like Durham and Bristol that no one has heard of.
    More to the point why is the opinion of a Belgian more important than that of an Indian?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I do find it amusing that a thread ostensibly about Oxbridge vs non-Oxbridge has the majority of its posts arguing rabidly about whether Bristol is superior to Manchester, or Durham is better known abroad than Imperial, and variations on those themes.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    No, and I'd actually go as far to say that some of their graduates are less employable than those from other universities.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
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.