This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

A Dispute about LSE's teaching quality

Erik Ringmar, a senior lecturer in government [at LSE], went on to tell sixth formers thinking of applying to the London School of Economics (LSE) that the real teaching was done by PhD students. The in-class student experience was no better than they would get at the far less prestigious London Metropolitan University - in fact they might see more of the academic staff there.

For detail, see the report from the Guardian: http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,1766663,00.html

Reply 1

je ne sais quoi

I also read about this, and from what I have heard, this is true, although only some of the teaching is done by PhD students. However, lse graduates have also told me that about 1/2 the teaching at lse is brilliant, and the other 1/2 with much to be desired.

I'll have to see for myself later this year.

Reply 2

Mickael

THIS Apllies to undergraduate studies, and not postgraduate and research concentrations...especially regarding tutorials...

Reply 3

je ne sais quoi

THIS Apllies to undergraduate studies, and not postgraduate and research concentrations...especially regarding tutorials...

Of course. It'll be silly if your peers were teaching you.

Reply 4

alexwhite

pharmakos

Erik Ringmar, a senior lecturer in government [at LSE], went on to tell sixth formers thinking of applying to the London School of Economics (LSE) that the real teaching was done by PhD students. The in-class student experience was no better than they would get at the far less prestigious London Metropolitan University - in fact they might see more of the academic staff there.

For detail, see the report from the Guardian: http://education.guardian.co.uk/high...766663,00.html

Why does this matter? The top 100 liberal arts schools in the United States usually has 1:4-1:9 faculty-student ratios and are usually much better than Harvard at undergraduate education since many of the famous Harvard faculty only teach graduate students (btw, i know around 10-11 people attending Harvard undergrad right now and 4 of them transfered to Harvard from smaller liberal arts colleges). Yet I am sure most people will choose Harvard over these other small schools and I am sure companies will prefer students from Harvard anyday over students from these smaller colleges. Personally, I am glad that the LSE puts all the famous faculty in research labs since it really upholds the schools' reputation through published research. A school doesn't gain prestige through "good" undergraduate teaching(companies don't know the difference, they look at the schools general reputation when they do the hiring), a school gains prestige usually through impact in academia and LSE is usually placed pretty highly in publications. Also LSE stands as the third most difficult school to get into in the UK and that is good enough for most employers since most LSE graduates are viewed as higher caliber.

Reply 5

Mickael

......i thought you were implying that phd students teach to both masters and undergrad, which would be a shame.......I guess i just misunderstood what the thread was about, since the forum is supposed to be for postgraduates

Sorry, my mistake.

pharmakos

Erik Ringmar, a senior lecturer in government [at LSE], went on to tell sixth formers thinking of applying to the London School of Economics (LSE) that the real teaching was done by PhD students. The in-class student experience was no better than they would get at the far less prestigious London Metropolitan University - in fact they might see more of the academic staff there.

For detail, see the report from the Guardian: http://education.guardian.co.uk/high...766663,00.html

I am sure that if companies are willing to take Harvard graduates despite the parasitic grade inflation, reputation still trumps education (I personally don't like learning anyways). Half the grades handed out at Harvard by professors were As and the professors state this phenomenon is caused by their wonderful teaching. I mean I know the LSE should really teach the students but hey, if my employers are satisified, I can't complain. I can careless about how the LSE got its' reputation in the US but it actually seems much better than I expected after talking to people so I am happy. I don't think the teaching can be that bad anyways cause I emailed several Americans studying abroad at the LSE from Georgetown and they stated the teaching quality is about the same as the teaching quality at Georgetown.

Reply 8

je ne sais quoi

Well said. The differential between the teaching at the lse and ucl is probably minuscle, but the lse has the better reputation.

Reply 9

Londo

pharmakos

Erik Ringmar, a senior lecturer in government [at LSE], went on to tell sixth formers thinking of applying to the London School of Economics (LSE) that the real teaching was done by PhD students. The in-class student experience was no better than they would get at the far less prestigious London Metropolitan University - in fact they might see more of the academic staff there.

For detail, see the report from the Guardian: http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,1766663,00.html

I am not the best person to say this, but Why the hell is everybody assuming that PhD students at the LSE have the same quality that PhD students in London Metropolitan?

Reply 10

jimmydoerre3

Londo

I am not the best person to say this, but Why the hell is everybody assuming that PhD students at the LSE have the same quality that PhD students in London Metropolitan?

people are retarded and like to take passages out of context, this speech quoted by the guardian to bash the LSE is actually extremely well written and it actually further convinces me that I made the right choice. God I can't believe all those LSE faculty members criticizing this guy (what a bunch of facists) cause this speech to me actually tells me that I made the right choice and is far more superior in describing what an excellent institution the LSE is compared to the THES rankings that state that we are 2nd in the world for social sciences. http://ringmar.net/forgethefootnotes/?page_id=53

Reply 11

hongkongstudent

pharmakos

Erik Ringmar, a senior lecturer in government [at LSE], went on to tell sixth formers thinking of applying to the London School of Economics (LSE) that the real teaching was done by PhD students. The in-class student experience was no better than they would get at the far less prestigious London Metropolitan University - in fact they might see more of the academic staff there.

For detail, see the report from the Guardian: http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,1766663,00.html

Nice to know that you work overtime to keep track of our university in the news. Makes me proud to be an LSE student, after all how many universities can claim to have devote fanatics from other universities who regularly search for news regarding us *and* who make the additional effort of informing us of their findings? :smile:

Thank you for the effort mate, and keep up the hard work. :biggrin:

Now I've got another point to brag about the greatness of our university :rolleyes:

--------------------------------

On a more serious note, the article is partially correct from my perspective. (It could be totally correct/wrong depending on your experience here.)

The reason for choosing LSE rather than London Met was the students, said Dr Ringmar.

"We are able to recruit some of the smartest, most interesting, intelligent, rich, successful and all-round attractive people on the planet. That is, we are able to attract people just like you!"

Sums it up for me.

---------------------------------

One thing that made me laugh though was:

"We are able to recruit some of the smartest, most interesting, intelligent, RICH, successful and all-round attractive people on the planet. That is, we are able to attract people just like you!"

Absolutely true from a monetary interpretation...wouldn't be too sure about it with respect to character and personality though, just look at Londo. :p:

Reply 12

Knogle

16

pharmakos

Erik Ringmar, a senior lecturer in government [at LSE], went on to tell sixth formers thinking of applying to the London School of Economics (LSE) that the real teaching was done by PhD students. The in-class student experience was no better than they would get at the far less prestigious London Metropolitan University - in fact they might see more of the academic staff there.

For detail, see the report from the Guardian: http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,1766663,00.html

Well the important question is this. At which universities, other than Oxbridge, is the "real teaching not done by PhD students"?

Reply 13

shanika

4

At the LSE, PhD students don't teach. By teaching, I Mean they don't conduct LECTURES. What they do , is they act as tutors, and discuss case studies, and other material.
Seriously, why make such a hue and cry. Some if not all of the PhD students at LSE, publish research of repute.
You simply need to be there, to understand why it has been regarded, and is still regarded in awe, particularly in the social sciences.

It is awesome for a reason, and that reason is that is it well ahead of other universities, particularly in the social sciences.

It's a pity that Ringmar didn't mention that fact or emphasize it too much.

Reply 14

S1712

This is quite an old issue now, but, anyway... (I sent the follow message to Erik sometime back as a reply to someone comparing UK and US ed systems and within UK other univs with LSE. He replied quite sensibly to the post)

The educational system in the US is diff from UK. Except for very few univs like Yale and Brown, the reality of UG teaching is essentially the same though I feel the UK system of lectures and classes have a slight edge. I say this as someone who has been educated on either sided of the atlantic. If PhD students are brilliant then whats wrong in them teaching the classes. LSE attracts only top-notch research students and the majority of them are excellent class teachers. Not only are they quite knowledgeable on the subject but also helpful. Lectures are still handled by staffs and proper students will know how to use that opportunity (office hours, emails, etc.). Seeing Profs more often doesnt mean enlightment. UG life is like that not only at LSE but anywhere in the world but the diff is the quality of research and other students here. If Erik had put this in the proper perspective to the students and parents, no harm in that. But the way he delivered it makes one question his motive.

TBH, I think Erik though quite on the money became personal when he is repping the dept and LSE grossly and unfairly over-reacted.

Reply 15

Knogle

16

S1712

This is quite an old issue now, but, anyway... (I sent the follow message to Erik sometime back as a reply to someone comparing UK and US ed systems and within UK other univs with LSE. He replied quite sensibly to the post)

The educational system in the US is diff from UK. Except for very few univs like Yale and Brown, the reality of UG teaching is essentially the same though I feel the UK system of lectures and classes have a slight edge. I say this as someone who has been educated on either sided of the atlantic. If PhD students are brilliant then whats wrong in them teaching the classes. LSE attracts only top-notch research students and the majority of them are excellent class teachers. Not only are they quite knowledgeable on the subject but also helpful. Lectures are still handled by staffs and proper students will know how to use that opportunity (office hours, emails, etc.). Seeing Profs more often doesnt mean enlightment. UG life is like that not only at LSE but anywhere in the world but the diff is the quality of research and other students here. If Erik had put this in the proper perspective to the students and parents, no harm in that. But the way he delivered it makes one question his motive.

TBH, I think Erik though quite on the money became personal when he is repping the dept and LSE grossly and unfairly over-reacted.