Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    Maybe 20 years ago it would have been fine to go London met, as the number of people who went university was low in comparison today, so degrees back then were worht it.
    20 years ago, London Met wasn't a University, and couldn't award degrees.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lechaton-x)
    Taking BTECs doesn't mean that you're an academic failure.

    Oh, and fyi- London Met didn't exist 20 years ago.
    Well not from your viewpoint, but from the viewpoint of many universities it is, due the fact that a-levels in comparison are more highly regarded.

    And o well, makes it even worse as nobody likes to go universities who have been recently established, no presitge.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Lmao London Met is ****
    Offline

    14
    I don't like London Met because it touched me in a funny place one night, and I never quite got over the trauma.

    Seriously, though... see point 3 in my sig.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    I understand that, but the OP implied that her mother was being paid to do a "normal" undergraduate degree,
    Really?

    (Original post by Carnivores)
    Okay I didn't go to London Met but one of my parents got paid to go there.
    Nope. You just assumed. Can be undergrad, postgrad degree, professional short course...Besides, it is possible that an employer will sponsor an employee doing an undergraduate degree.

    Take someone working as a planning technician, who wants to become a fully qualified town planner. Can do a undergrad degree or postgrad degree.

    which I for one do not approve of.
    Well, that's your opinion :hat2:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    And o well, makes it even worse as nobody likes to go universities who have been recently established, no presitge.
    Erm...I'm sure plenty of people don't care.

    Besides, it's not quite true that London Met didn't exist 20 years ago (as the other poster stated). As with all former polytechnics they did exist as educational institutions before 1992. Otherwise they wouldn't be known as former polytechnics.

    Warwick and York were only recently established, in comparison to the Ancients...not sure that really means anything.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by River85)
    Really?
    Yes - "she got paid to go there" as opposed to "she got paid to do a professional qualification at London Met".
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    Besides, it's not quite true that London Met didn't exist 20 years ago (as the other poster stated). As with all former polytechnics they did exist as educational institutions before 1992. Otherwise they wouldn't be known as former polytechnics.
    .
    The rider to that comment was that "degrees were worth more back then", which is also nonsense as London Met was a Poly, and could not award degrees.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clip)
    The rider to that comment was that "degrees were worth more back then", which is also nonsense as London Met was a Poly, and could not award degrees.
    Actually, London Met's history is a little more complex, being an amalgamation of numerous colleges and institutes (few of them polytechnics from what I know).

    But, as a general point, polytechnics did not have independent degree awarding powers, no, but I don't so how that is relevant? Students still went to the polytechnics of the time and were still able to study degrees. These degrees were awarded by a central body.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    A lot of unis probably don't deserve their bad reputation. London Met is not one of these unis. It has been plagued by absurd financial and organisational problems. There's nothing wrong with people going to London Met, but they may not be getting their money's worth.

    Remember that a university degree is a good/service like any other.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Probably because it is ex-poly, number 103 in the league tables and in a dodgy part of london
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    Erm...I'm sure plenty of people don't care.

    Besides, it's not quite true that London Met didn't exist 20 years ago (as the other poster stated). As with all former polytechnics they did exist as educational institutions before 1992. Otherwise they wouldn't be known as former polytechnics.

    Warwick and York were only recently established, in comparison to the Ancients...not sure that really means anything.
    But both Warwick and York have done well, producing disciplined graduates as well the quality of teaching being also very high these days. I guess its probbly because London met couldn't compete with other local London uni's like LSE and UCL.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by innerhollow)
    A lot of unis probably don't deserve their bad reputation. London Met is not one of these unis. It has been plagued by absurd financial and organisational problems. There's nothing wrong with people going to London Met, but they may not be getting their money's worth.

    Remember that a university degree is a good/service like any other.
    If anything it deserves its bad reputation DUE to that?

    Would you want to go to a university "plagued by financial and organisational problems"?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iqbal007)
    Maybe 20 years ago it would have been fine to go London met, as the number of people who went university was low in comparison today, so degrees back then were worht it.
    However, today where students aspire to get a degree, London met hasn't exactly performed well, it has done terrible which as a result attracts the less bright students who get D's at A-level and accept Btecs as a result a very small amount students wanna go there and firms look at this university in a bad way its like not having degree once you graduate there.
    But your Mum went a long time ago and has years worth of work experience, so she can be successful comapred to others who graduate today.
    Thanks.



    (Original post by im so academic)
    I understand that, but the OP implied that her mother was being paid to do a "normal" undergraduate degree, which I for one do not approve of.

    (Bursaries/grants do not count).
    I don't know tbh but last time I asked her she said there was a shortage of teachers at the time and I think the government were willing to pay anyone who was willing to take the course and all.
    I think.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    If anything it deserves its bad reputation DUE to that?

    Would you want to go to a university "plagued by financial and organisational problems"?
    Yep exactly.

    This is also reflected in its 'campus' if you could call it that. It's a 60s tower block with a purple sign on the outside. Inside is no better either. You're plagued with advertisements and despite it being 2010 last year (when I went), they still had a vending machine the sold floppy disks and many computers they had did not even have a CD drive.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ch0llima)
    I don't like London Met because it touched me in a funny place one night, and I never quite got over the trauma.

    Seriously, though... see point 3 in my sig.
    LOL!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I've gotten the point now thanks everyone
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The fact you felt the need to point out twice that you're not a student there leads me to believe you know exactly why people "diss" it.
    Offline

    13
    [QUOTE=innerhollow;30656036]Re-read my post carefully /QUOTE]

    Oh my bad. :p:

    But yes, you are right. Fair enough, not all ex-polys are bad, but London Met is in a league of its own.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi guys, i applied to London Met and got an unconditional offer which i accept.

    I applied there because i want to study in Part Time and i found this university to be one of the few that actually offers this educational option. After a quick research through the universities that offered this part time studies i found alot of videos (youtube) about London Met that actually pleased me, it seemed to be a university who cared for the student condition in terms of been close to the student course development, financial problems, finding a place to live, financial help ... since my first email to the university i was always treated with courtesy and attention. Since my knowledge about the London universities is not wide and deep i thought i got a real good deal for me.
    This was the only university i applied.

    Only later on, precisely when i found TSR i start reading all this dark reviews and i must say i am bit concerned.

    I am not a U.K. national, i am from Portugal, i got into Psychology and probably it's not too late to apply for other universities.

    Could, please, someone indicate me a "better" university offering this same course in Part - Time ?

    Thanks !
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
London Metropolitan University resources

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.