Imperial is making a huge mistake in leaving UoL

Is the University of London anything but a name? Perhaps this is merely a revealing of my ignorance, but it was only after I had already applied to LSE that I learned that it was part of a federal institution and not independent.

You offer no arguments why the University of London needs ICL or why ICL needs the University of London.

ridiculous thread

I agree with the above ^^^ I always knew the colleges as separate entities before I discovered the University of London. There is no real advantage to it for Imperial or the other well-known universities. They have prestige in their own right and their own resources (ie. well-stocked libraries so no need of Senate House, good accommodation so no real need for IC halls etc etc)

I think that assertion about international students rubbish. People don't go to Imperial because it's connected to LSE or UCL...they go to Imperial because of its OWN strength and reputation in science.

Reply 4

High Fist

OP

This is what I mean when I say no more community. The UoL as an institution has given a lot to its colleges in their founding days it gave them the structure and stability it allowed them to grow independently and for them to forge their own character. The UoL as an organisation bought the land the colleges sit on. Imperial does have its own resources but most of them where paid for by the government, splitting will just make allocation of resources even harder take the new London nanotech centre partly funded by Ucl, probably imperial (not sure about this) and the government both universities will benefit from using it, however imagine how wasteful it would be if only ucl engineers had exclusive rights to it. Quoting the above saying Imperial doesn’t need Ucl or other London colleges then why did it propose a merger with UCL only for it to get stopped when UCL students and staff decided they weren’t having none of it. ICL got hurt by this little episode so now like an angered child it has deciding to act rashly.

Reply 5

Dysdiadochokinesia

High Fist, go back to the hole you came from. Obviously you hold a grudge against Imperial for some reason, and so your silly and amusingly biased views cannot be taken seriously. And please, provide references for your (*cough* fabricated *cough*) facts - 'Imperial does have its own resources but most of them where paid for by the government'.

And to be honest, why even discuss this? Imperial is going to leave UoL this June (I think), and nothing is going to change that. I find it great, as I believe a university ranked top 10 in the world totally, and top 5 in the world for its flagship subjects, should be able to develop as an individual institution.

Reply 6

I think my dad (KCL student) said Imperial had always been different to other colleges in that it didn't get its funding from the UoL which allocates funding to say KCL and SOAS. Instead it got it directly from the education authority.

To be honest I couldn't really care if Imperial left. It may be a very good university but it isin't the only top university in the UoL. I'm not surpised because of the huge divide in overall standards and global reputation between the likes of KCL,SOAS, LBS, IC etc and the likes of QMUL, Goldsmith etc. Even the 3 other dominant colleges are distancing themselves away from the UoL by awarding their own degrees. I think the weaker colleges and the UoL should blame themselves for their own decline in standards compared to the top colleges.

Imperial practically gains nothing from UoL anyway unlike KCL and UCL whom uses SSEES and SOAS for their courses.

Reply 7

High Fist

OP

No one doubts ICL reputation and i aint biased i just think ICL and UoL are better together (unless someone knows better) if ICL is ranked in the worlds top 10 when its still in Uol then am sure it defies logic why its leaving. I guess this thread is a couple of years late seeing the decision has been made.

PS Swede, the hole i came from is twice the 'hole' you came from will ever be.

Reply 8

Dark and Lovely

15

Vincente

I think my dad (KCL student) said Imperial had always been different to other colleges in that it didn't get its funding from the UoL which allocates funding to say KCL and SOAS. Instead it got it directly from the education authority.

To be honest I couldn't really care if Imperial left. It may be a very good university but it isin't the only top university in the UoL. I'm not surpised because of the huge divide in overall standards and global reputation between the likes of KCL,SOAS, LBS, IC etc and the likes of QMUL, Goldsmith etc. Even the 3 other dominant colleges are distancing themselves away from the UoL by awarding their own degrees. I think the weaker colleges and the UoL should blame themselves for their own decline in standards compared to the top colleges.

Imperial practically gains nothing from UoL anyway unlike KCL and UCL whom uses SSEES and SOAS for their courses.

I know LSE students who entered from 06 have the option to choose what degree they want, but does anyone know when KCL's comes into action?

To the OP :LOL i think it's funny that you seem so "clued up" about the "huge mistake" ICL are making by leaving, surely they know what they are doing, who are you to question it?

Reply 9

LOL i think it's funny that you seem so "clued up" about the "huge mistake" ICL are making by leaving, surely they know what they are doing, who are you to question it?

Am I the only one whom doesn't really get this bit of the post? :confused:

Reply 10

Dark and Lovely

15

^ sorry i wasn't addressing you, i was addressing the OP. Will edit.

Reply 11

The London School of Economics, King's College and University College London confirmed this week that they planned to start awarding their own degrees, raising new doubts about the future of the federal University of London, writes Rebecca Attwood.

Students from the university's colleges have historically received a University of London certificate on their graduation day. But increasing numbers of colleges have been seeking the power to award their own degrees. King's, UCL and the LSE plan to exercise these powers from the next academic year.

Writing in the LSE's annual accounts, director Sir Howard Davies says: "Many of our students are now surprised to find themselves given a University of London certificate on their graduation day. We have therefore decided that it would be better for the LSE to issue degrees in its own name in future. We await approval from the University of London as a whole to that proposal."

In a more radical move, Imperial College London announced that it would secede from the federal university in December 2005. Sir Howard said that this "would not be the right course" for the LSE, but added that the school was looking for improvements in the governance of the University of London and in its cost control. "We keep our position under review," he said.

King's and UCL also told The Times Higher that they hoped to award their own degrees from 2007-08.

Reply 12

fblade

I saw on the imperial site that they have already made themselves separate from UoL already

Reply 13

username43584

High Fist

No one doubts ICL reputation and i aint biased i just think ICL and UoL are better together (unless someone knows better) if ICL is ranked in the worlds top 10 when its still in Uol then am sure it defies logic why its leaving. I guess this thread is a couple of years late seeing the decision has been made.

In or out of UoL Imperial will still be ranked in the world's top 10, no doubt about that. Plus, notice it isn't UoL that's in the rankings, it's Imperial. All of the UoL colleges are ranked as separate institutions...surely if UoL was such a great institution they'd be conjoined and ranked under its name?

Imperial and UoL are not better together. UoL is not greater than the sum of its parts. Whether it's separate or part of UoL, Imperial will still have the same great resources, research funding and prestige. So it may as well go independent. I know I would personally prefer a degree from Imperial than one from UoL.

Reply 14

Phoenix Wright

I really don't see the point of the University of London, to be honest.

Reply 15

surely if UoL was such a great institution they'd be conjoined and ranked under its name?

Please, read the history of the UoL first. Its a federal university not a collegiate university like Oxbirdge and Durham. The colleges only became proper separate entites again during the 1980s because it would be pretty hard to administrate properly 100,000+ students.

Reply 16

I really don't see the point of the University of London, to be honest.

Imperial students probably won't benefit much. However, there are quite significant beneifts for many UoL students. As a SSEES/UCL historian I can get the very best East Asian history modules and resources at SOAS, military and war studies at King's college or take a language in the UoL language centre and finally take a social science module in say geography and use UCL's department. I can use any UoL libaries and facilities as well including the UoL's Senate house.

It really depends on the subject you study and where you study.

Reply 17

username43584