Turn on thread page Beta

Which Is The Best Top-Tier University Outside G5? watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jammyd)
    Surely Kings doesn't have any clearing places? I thought it was highly regarded. My friend is starting comparative literature there next september, even though I tried to persuade her to aim higher. Its War Studies department is very highly regarded.
    Get the Independent once the A level results have come out. As I have nothing better to do with my time, I like to have a browse on this particular date. Kings is almost *everywhere* for almost everything.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J.S.)
    You can say what you like. At the end of the day Kings has very little respect even IN LONDON, let alone elsewhere. It does have a few reasonably good departments, but no more than that.

    It is seen as a 'has been' college at best, unfortunately. It doesn't even raise an eyebrow around London in the way that IC and LSE do. Also, if it is that hot, then why does it have sooo many places left during the clearing phase?

    Also, the opinions of A level students do matter, particularly if it's a representive sample (I'm not referring to this newsgroup here). Personally, I would say, rather than all this historical analysis that Hewins absolutely loves to go on about, I would just look at the A level grade average. This figure is much more than some volatile guide that randomly rises and falls. The a/v points score is THE figure derived from the laws of supply and demand, it reflects the opinions of students across the UK who've applied to university. This figure represents the progress or lack of progress made by the particular university/department in question over a number of years. Kings college on this statistic is a pretty reasonable university, and that's about it. If it were any better, then its grade average score wouldn't be significantly lower than other universities, just look at how much lower it is as compared with Cambridge, Oxford, LSE, Imperial, Bristol, Warwick and Edinburgh (these are actually listed in order-and are the most selective universities in the UK). Also, it has significantly greater number of places in clearing than each of those univ's.
    Well said.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by W.A.S Hewins)
    I agree the rep is not high, but I don't agree that it's justified, as for Warwick, what has Warwick ever done apart from become popular in the past 15 years? Bristol is a good university, but its popularity is or was heavily due to its public school appeal, and I don't think it's achieved as much as King's over the long run, which is what counts...

    You may not think it's justified. I don't think it's justified that they serve rice everyday for lunch at my school, I mean, I quite like it, but I do think it's rather excessive. It doesn't matter whether or not you think it's justified, what matters are the decisions that several thousand grade A students make every year. IF historical achievement actually meant ANYTHING, (obviously it does to you) then why does it not raise the profile of Kings college? Actually I would say that you're (as well as Gnostic) making Kings seem EVEN WORSE. Think about it has alllll this fantastic history, and STILL it cannot attract students! Goodness, what a terrible situation to be in.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J.S.)
    You can say what you like. At the end of the day Kings has very little respect even IN LONDON, let alone elsewhere. It does have a few reasonably good departments, but no more than that.

    It is seen as a 'has been' college at best, unfortunately. It doesn't even raise an eyebrow around London in the way that IC and LSE do. Also, if it is that hot, then why does it have sooo many places left during the clearing phase?

    Also, the opinions of A level students do matter, particularly if it's a representive sample (I'm not referring to this newsgroup here). Personally, I would say, rather than all this historical analysis that Hewins absolutely loves to go on about, I would just look at the A level grade average. This figure is much more than some volatile guide that randomly rises and falls. The a/v points score is THE figure derived from the laws of supply and demand, it reflects the opinions of students across the UK who've applied to university. This figure represents the progress or lack of progress made by the particular university/department in question over a number of years. Kings college on this statistic is a pretty reasonable university, and that's about it. If it were any better, then its grade average score wouldn't be significantly lower than other universities, just look at how much lower it is as compared with Cambridge, Oxford, LSE, Imperial, Bristol, Warwick and Edinburgh (these are actually listed in order-and are the most selective universities in the UK). Also, it has significantly greater number of places in clearing than each of those univ's.
    What about UCL? I was under the impression that a "G5" school would place it as one of the most selective schools in the UK...what is your opinion about that school?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ckwan16)
    What about UCL? I was under the impression that a "G5" school would place it as one of the most selective schools in the UK...what is your opinion about that school?

    Of course it's a very good and highly reputable school. However, there are departmental variations. Overall it is not the most selective, nor even 5th (10th actually). Although some of its faculties are particualrly well regarded, notably the ones I know of are Law, Economics and English.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J.S.)
    Kings College is a joke...simple as that. No serious academic should ever study there. We call it Kings College of Clearing, or Strand Poly, I'd say either name is appropriate.
    That doesn't make it a bad institution. I'm not sure how many lectures in how many subjects you have attended here at King's, but I can assure you that it's far from "a joke".
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J.S.)
    You may not think it's justified. I don't think it's justified that they serve rice everyday for lunch at my school, I mean, I quite like it, but I do think it's rather excessive. It doesn't matter whether or not you think it's justified, what matters are the decisions that several thousand grade A students make every year. IF historical achievement actually meant ANYTHING, (obviously it does to you) then why does it not raise the profile of Kings college? Actually I would say that you're (as well as Gnostic) making Kings seem EVEN WORSE. Think about it has alllll this fantastic history, and STILL it cannot attract students! Goodness, what a terrible situation to be in.
    What this illustrates is the role of PR in university life. You can do nothing much that's special, ever, and people think you're wonderful and you get loads of applications, despite having only good-to average performance indicators (witness Durham): you can do loads of great things, have massive research income, have a consistent history of achievement and yet nobody thinks you're up to much, and you'll have trouble getting applicants-simply because they don't hear about you, you don't cultivate journalists, you don't wine and dine careers advisors from ever so naice private schools...


    Reputation and achievement are not synonymous- for instance everybody seems to think of Sussex as a trendy liberal arts university, and it has trouble attracting science students, yet it's got 5-6 science Nobels to its name after only 40 odd years of existence...

    Feminism: by hypocrites for hypocrites
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by W.A.S Hewins)
    What this illustrates is the role of PR in university life. You can do nothing much that's special, ever, and people think you're wonderful and you get loads of applications, despite having only good-to average performance indicators (witness Durham): you can do loads of great things, have massive research income, have a consistent history of achievement and yet nobody thinks you're up to much, and you'll have trouble getting applicants-simply because they don't hear about you, you don't cultivate journalists, you don't wine and dine careers advisors from ever so naice private schools...


    Reputation and achievement are not synonymous- for instance everybody seems to think of Sussex as a trendy liberal arts university, and it has trouble attracting science students, yet it's got 5-6 science Nobels to its name after only 40 odd years of existence...

    Feminism: by hypocrites for hypocrites

    Firstly, I don't see you using performance indicators, what you do is cite historical examples. These are not performance indicators, it's rather like me saying Liverpool FC are currently the team to play for, and the team to support as they won the Champions Cup at some point in the 80's. This is pretty much what you've been doing, frankly I think it's pointless.
    I suggest what we must do, for Liverpool FC is look at the number of games they've played over a period of time, say from 2000 onwards, to figure how well they're performed. The way to do this with a university is to look at its a/v A level points score. This after all is the measure of supply and demand.

    You have to elaborate on your point, because at present it's not adding up. I asked you why certain other universities are far more popular and receive applications from far better qualified people? You're basically saying that's down to a few cultivated journalists and careers advisers. Now, I'm just wondering, again you didn't seem to address my point, why, with all its fantastic history, can Kings College not do the same??

    Also, I'd like to point out that PR does actually matter, I find it amusing that you dismiss it so readily despite being at a university that is probably the don of PR in the UK. Just take a look at Harvard Business School, or even closer to home the London Business School. Now, if universities are not going to promote themselves, then they're going to suffer; have the fantastic intellectuals at Kings College somehow missed the point here? I think that's very naive, maybe it's not only PR that Kings College have overlooked, maybe it's also the RAE exercise too, and who knows what else?

    Look, if a university is going to make big claims, it *HAS* to be selective. Simple as that, if a university if not so selective, people do not take it seriously. You just have to accept this basic point. Some of thise is done via PR, which is fantastic-good for whomever utilises this best. However, it's not as straightforward as a few journalists, and brainwashed careers advisers, there needs to be some substance too. I

    You can come up with more excuses if you wish, but serious academic students want to study alongside other serious academic students, Kings college on that criterion does not fair as well as other universities. You haven't given any real reason as to why, however, EVEN the attempt to give reasons to justify this are just missing the point.
    Fact is, it doesn't matter what the reasons are, it's the end result that matters, the end result is that Kings College is not as selective in its student intake as other universities. Now amount of historical analysis is going to change this.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Just to say..

    I believe that UCL and LSE are very similar in standards.. especially when it comes to doing law. Both are very prestigious.. LSE is ranked higher.. but bear in mind rankings arent everything.. and UCL has an incredible law society and invest alot into each student.. the teaching is excellent in both, however.. although this is just hearsay.. albeit from a heck of alot of ppl... kings in london seems a bit of a joke around there.
    Where LSe and UCl lead.. KCL trails slowly behind.. it just isnt as highly regarded. This is my opinion.. it was even my first impression and dispute it as u mite.. if i share this view and so do many others.. its hard to say that this isnt the common perception.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J.S.)
    Firstly, I don't see you using performance indicators, what you do is cite historical examples. These are not performance indicators, it's rather like me saying Liverpool FC are currently the team to play for, and the team to support as they won the Champions Cup at some point in the 80's. This is pretty much what you've been doing, frankly I think it's pointless.
    I suggest what we must do, for Liverpool FC is look at the number of games they've played over a period of time, say from 2000 onwards, to figure how well they're performed. The way to do this with a university is to look at its a/v A level points score. This after all is the measure of supply and demand.

    You have to elaborate on your point, because at present it's not adding up. I asked you why certain other universities are far more popular and receive applications from far better qualified people? You're basically saying that's down to a few cultivated journalists and careers advisers. Now, I'm just wondering, again you didn't seem to address my point, why, with all its fantastic history, can Kings College not do the same??

    Also, I'd like to point out that PR does actually matter, I find it amusing that you dismiss it so readily despite being at a university that is probably the don of PR in the UK. Just take a look at Harvard Business School, or even closer to home the London Business School. Now, if universities are not going to promote themselves, then they're going to suffer; have the fantastic intellectuals at Kings College somehow missed the point here? I think that's very naive, maybe it's not only PR that Kings College have overlooked, maybe it's also the RAE exercise too, and who knows what else?

    Look, if a university is going to make big claims, it *HAS* to be selective. Simple as that, if a university if not so selective, people do not take it seriously. You just have to accept this basic point. Some of thise is done via PR, which is fantastic-good for whomever utilises this best. However, it's not as straightforward as a few journalists, and brainwashed careers advisers, there needs to be some substance too. I

    You can come up with more excuses if you wish, but serious academic students want to study alongside other serious academic students, Kings college on that criterion does not fair as well as other universities. You haven't given any real reason as to why, however, EVEN the attempt to give reasons to justify this are just missing the point.
    Fact is, it doesn't matter what the reasons are, it's the end result that matters, the end result is that Kings College is not as selective in its student intake as other universities. Now amount of historical analysis is going to change this.
    All I'm saying is that PR plays a bigger part than people suspect: the extraordinary rep of Durham ,despite the absence of any particularly outstanding performance, at any stage, is one example (we love you really Durham). Willy goes to St A and suddenly a respectable but unspectacular uni starts to move up the league tables: coincidence? Sussex picks up yet more Nobel Prizes and yet nobody knows or gives a damn because Sussex is crap at PR and can't see how this affects its standing, recruitment, and funding: it's a mess, the whole concept of PR, with no clearly defined borders, but it has to be looked at in considering real quality, not just recent arithmetical 'performance' and fashionability etc etc

    University quality should be judged on long and short term factors. At present there is a tunnel vision obsession with crude, short-term indicators. It takes universities a long time to achieve things, and a long time to change significantly, just as with people: if you're assessing someone's quality and contribution to the world you look at the widest, longest range of factors. The same should go for universities.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
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.