This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- NTU or University Of Greenwich
- KCL or UCL
- How would you rank these Universities, purely based off prestige (computer science)
- Choosing a Uni for Economics 2026 - Major difference between Leeds and Durham?
- I need some advice please help
- Leeds vs. Warwick (Computer Science)
- Best Russel Group/ Top 25
- Imperial vs UCL for postgrad in conservation field
- Help me choose between Bsc Economics at Durham Uni and the Uni of Bristol!!
- Bath vs NYU for Mech Eng
- uni of liverpool or uni of manchester?
- Can I get into top universities like Oxbridge, Imperial, Stanford, MIT, Princeton etc
- Urgent- uea or birmingham for env science
- Should I go to a less prestigious university?
- URGENT clearing choice by today 6pm and unsure
- ucl or bath
- ucl or Edinburgh for law
- Economics with placement at Manchester or Economics at UCL
- Would I be stupid for firming Bristol Law over KCL Law?
- Is the University of St Andrews considered one of the top universities in the UK?
Universities "Prestige" Ranking
Scroll to see replies
Reply 60
Adam TJ - i think bristol is one of those universities (along with oxbridge/london3) that hasnt been out of the top 10 since the league tables started in the late 90s. Durham has floated about alot and often was positioned near the 20 spot.
IR Postgrad - the tables will change in a massive way in 2008-9 because of the rae2008. Lots of universities that are usually well below the top10 have invested big money to increase research capacity and establish medical schools (e.g. Exeter is now up to £250million and Southampton has gone wild too). The RAE2008 will probably determine the general tables for the next 5 years until some other measure is invented. I suspect Manchester will dominate too given its recent history.
IR Postgrad - the tables will change in a massive way in 2008-9 because of the rae2008. Lots of universities that are usually well below the top10 have invested big money to increase research capacity and establish medical schools (e.g. Exeter is now up to £250million and Southampton has gone wild too). The RAE2008 will probably determine the general tables for the next 5 years until some other measure is invented. I suspect Manchester will dominate too given its recent history.
Reply 61
:dito: So will liverpool university. It is undergoing a 250 million facelift and other institutions lower down the table have done a heavy lot of investing too. So I am sure that by the time RAE 2008 is over the league tables will open with a bang
.There will be quite a few number of changes
.
.There will be quite a few number of changes.Reply 62
12
The Boosh
Adam TJ - i think bristol is one of those universities (along with oxbridge/london3) that hasnt been out of the top 10 since the league tables started in the late 90s. Durham has floated about alot and often was positioned near the 20 spot.
IR Postgrad - the tables will change in a massive way in 2008-9 because of the rae2008. Lots of universities that are usually well below the top10 have invested big money to increase research capacity and establish medical schools (e.g. Exeter is now up to £250million and Southampton has gone wild too). The RAE2008 will probably determine the general tables for the next 5 years until some other measure is invented. I suspect Manchester will dominate too given its recent history.
IR Postgrad - the tables will change in a massive way in 2008-9 because of the rae2008. Lots of universities that are usually well below the top10 have invested big money to increase research capacity and establish medical schools (e.g. Exeter is now up to £250million and Southampton has gone wild too). The RAE2008 will probably determine the general tables for the next 5 years until some other measure is invented. I suspect Manchester will dominate too given its recent history.
Boosh- this is tommy rot.
Show me evidence for Durham ever floating around that 20th place in the Times, which is generally regarded as being the much more reliable table. Admittedly the Guardian hates Durham, so if you followed that, a case may be heard.
If you look- UCL has been out of the top 10.
In any case regardless of tables, there are still universities which have prestige whether they post in 3 or 23rd. Durham is one of them. Don't ask me why. People seem to be confusing issues here.
Reply 63
I would've said this even if KCL was my firm...but how did the OP forget it but remember all other reputable UofL unis which KCL outranks.
Reply 64
going by prestige is a bit odd as places change dramatically. eg dad went to warwick was seen as at the bottom "level" of universitys now its v well respected, shouldnt you look at unis that will keep/gain rep or that your safe in going to and knowing its reputation wont change that means you would choose:
safety: oxbridge, durham, st andrews...other old unis
gaining:manchester,liverpool,nottingham, leeds? etc
ps:also need to look at how the london university might be breaking up v slowly(as certain colleges are asking for their own degree eg kings,ucl,imperial(left)etc)-how will its reputation look without this?
safety: oxbridge, durham, st andrews...other old unis
gaining:manchester,liverpool,nottingham, leeds? etc
ps:also need to look at how the london university might be breaking up v slowly(as certain colleges are asking for their own degree eg kings,ucl,imperial(left)etc)-how will its reputation look without this?
Reply 65
in my school St.Andrews has a v.negative reputation with everyone saying its only popular because of Prince William. Edinburgh on the other hand...well that is EXTREMLY popular. im probably one of the only few who didnt apply
Reply 66
The Boosh
Adam TJ - i think bristol is one of those universities (along with oxbridge/london3) that hasnt been out of the top 10 since the league tables started in the late 90s. Durham has floated about alot and often was positioned near the 20 spot.
5 Universities have never been out of the top 10 in the Uni league tables - Oxbridge, Imperial, LSE and Warwick. Bristol has and UCL has AFAIK
Reply 67
AdamTJ
Boosh- this is tommy rot.
Show me evidence for Durham ever floating around that 20th place in the Times, which is generally regarded as being the much more reliable table. Admittedly the Guardian hates Durham, so if you followed that, a case may be heard.
If you look- UCL has been out of the top 10.
In any case regardless of tables, there are still universities which have prestige whether they post in 3 or 23rd. Durham is one of them. Don't ask me why. People seem to be confusing issues here.
Show me evidence for Durham ever floating around that 20th place in the Times, which is generally regarded as being the much more reliable table. Admittedly the Guardian hates Durham, so if you followed that, a case may be heard.
If you look- UCL has been out of the top 10.
In any case regardless of tables, there are still universities which have prestige whether they post in 3 or 23rd. Durham is one of them. Don't ask me why. People seem to be confusing issues here.
Do you really think employers are going to bother with comparing league tables that much?
In 2003 Durham was 28th in the Guardian
In 2003 Durham was 18th in the Sunday Times
In 2002 Durham was 13 in the Times
In 2000 Durham was 24th in the Financial Times
In 2001 Durham was 18th in the Financial Times
Do you want me to go back further and trace how Durham slumped in the tables and rated with Southampton or Birmingham (which are very good universities)?
I've said it once and I'll say it again:
DURHAM IS A GREAT UNIVERSITY BUT DURHAM ISNT A CONSISTENT TOP 10 PERFORMER!!!
League tables are ****, full stop. But why is it that Durham students always get up themselves whenever somebody tells them that they are not strong performers in the table like Oxbridge? Chip on your shoulder hhhmmmmmmmm?
Durham is great, nobody doubts that. University league tables are aweful - people that understand how they are measured agree with this view. There is nothing in this equation to say that Durham is a bad university, so please, for GOD SAKE, stop seeing every comment as an attack.
Edit: I've just discovered that Durham is 23rd in the 2006-2007 Research Intensity Table. The table is pants, but it is another measure which shows Durham near that horrible 20 spot.
Reply 68
andyjim123
5 Universities have never been out of the top 10 in the Uni league tables - Oxbridge, Imperial, LSE and Warwick. Bristol has and UCL has AFAIK
thank you my man - rep going your way for talking sense. it must be that bristol has evaded exclusion from the top 10 in certain papers, not all then.
Edit: nope, you are right. It has come in 12th a couple of times. I've not checked the Guardian though, which I doubt would allow Bristol 10th or above given its wacky criteria.
Reply 69
Anannya
:dito: So will liverpool university. It is undergoing a 250 million facelift and other institutions lower down the table have done a heavy lot of investing too. So I am sure that by the time RAE 2008 is over the league tables will open with a bang.There will be quite a few number of changes.
.There will be quite a few number of changes.That's good to hear. Liverpool has always been one of those universities that hasn't been given the credit it deserves in the recent press tables. I studied English and History as an undergrad and I know it received 5* for its English RAE2001 and my neighbour has just finished his PhD in Irish History there and now lectures at Oxford - he speaks very highly of Liverpool Uni and its History department. You never know, it might leap 20 places and become 'prestigious' to the next batch of A-Level students (especially given how fickle opinions are)!!!
Reply 70
Adam TJ - i think bristol is one of those universities (along with oxbridge/london3) that hasnt been out of the top 10 since the league tables started in the late 90s. Durham has floated about alot and often was positioned near the 20 spot.
IR Postgrad - the tables will change in a massive way in 2008-9 because of the rae2008. Lots of universities that are usually well below the top10 have invested big money to increase research capacity and establish medical schools (e.g. Exeter is now up to £250million and Southampton has gone wild too). The RAE2008 will probably determine the general tables for the next 5 years until some other measure is invented. I suspect Manchester will dominate too given its recent history.
IR Postgrad - the tables will change in a massive way in 2008-9 because of the rae2008. Lots of universities that are usually well below the top10 have invested big money to increase research capacity and establish medical schools (e.g. Exeter is now up to £250million and Southampton has gone wild too). The RAE2008 will probably determine the general tables for the next 5 years until some other measure is invented. I suspect Manchester will dominate too given its recent history.
The 5 unis never to have been out of the top 10 in any league table are Oxbridge, LSE, Imperial and Warwick, not Bristol.
going by prestige is a bit odd as places change dramatically. eg dad went to warwick was seen as at the bottom "level" of universitys now its v well respected, shouldnt you look at unis that will keep/gain rep or that your safe in going to and
Warwick, as well as the other 'new' unis of the 60s were never really considered that worse than the older unis. Obviously they had to prove themselves somewhat in the first few years, but it's not like today where 'new' unis are considered weaker than thier older counterparts. These unis were establised as equals of the older unis, not as dodgy imitators if that makes sense.
Reply 71
^^^ i heard different from people that went to uni in the 60's, but you could be right
Reply 72
11
The Boosh
Do you really think employers are going to bother with comparing league tables that much?
In 2003 Durham was 28th in the Guardian
In 2003 Durham was 18th in the Sunday Times
In 2002 Durham was 13 in the Times
In 2000 Durham was 24th in the Financial Times
In 2001 Durham was 18th in the Financial Times
In 2003 Durham was 28th in the Guardian
In 2003 Durham was 18th in the Sunday Times
In 2002 Durham was 13 in the Times
In 2000 Durham was 24th in the Financial Times
In 2001 Durham was 18th in the Financial Times
Yeah, an employer won't even be looking a league tables.
League Tables are largely completely and totally pointless.
Reply 73
The Boosh
Reply 74
]^^^ i heard different from people that went to uni in the 60's, but you could be right
These were the days before rankings, when going to uni was going to uni pretty much (other than the obvious dominance of Oxbridge). If you read into the rationale behind the establishment of institutions like York, Warwick etc you will see that they were established with strong academic credentials (these were the days when there was still a polytechnic/university divide) whereas now that distinction has become blurred which is why the new unis of today get so much flack.
This is why the 60s unis enjoy such a prominent position in rankings today, because they were never meant to be weaker than the other unis, and this is also why I don't think most of the new new unis will ever really rival the oler ones (with some possible exceptions) because many of them are viewed as glorified polytechnics. This is not saying that many of them won't make a lot of headway, it's just that they will have a much more difficult job in overcoming public perceptions, whereas the 60s unis never really had a huge amount of stigma attached to them from an academic viewpoint (other than being seen as politically volatile). God I'm rambling...Reply 75
you are probably right. my understanding is that the newer (60s) universities served a particular purpose and brought education to a group of people who traditionally wouldnt have gone to university and, given the perceptions at the time, these universities were believed to be offer a sub-standard education compared to the ivory towers and perhaps (slightly) older universities. the issue was one of snobbery perhaps, but the perception still seemed to exist (according to those who ive spoken to anyway,but that sample is very small).
what people tend to forget is that the expolys offered higher education degrees way before they were given university status in 1992 so it's not as though they didnt have a history of offering HE provision.
what people tend to forget is that the expolys offered higher education degrees way before they were given university status in 1992 so it's not as though they didnt have a history of offering HE provision.
Reply 76
talking about when unis came into existence, i just realized that a whole load are less than one hundred years old..or close to it, i know thats a long time but so is 40years calling places like warwick york etc newer isnt really right b/c id say after 30 years your probably around as prestigus(i cant spell) as your gona get
ps which unis are older?i heard there was argument between unis lol
ps which unis are older?i heard there was argument between unis lol
Reply 77
15
Who. Cares.
Reply 78
just wondering why manchester was classified in tier 3? provided that it has 23 nobel price winners (cam bout60, ox 47, manchester 23, ucl 19, ic 14, lse 14), moreover, the nuclear nature of the atom being discovered at Manchester, and the world's first programmable electronic computer came of age from manchester. those r enormous contribution to the human civilization, aren't they? when referring to prestige, why this univs was displace by such as Durham, Bristol, Edinburgh, Warwick and St Andrew's???
Reply 79
jackdanniel
just wondering why manchester was classified in tier 3? when referring to prestige, why this univs was displace by such as Durham, Bristol, Edinburgh, Warwick and St Andrew's???
They rested on their past glories while the other universities improved continously. Manchester dropped the ball.
Related discussions
- NTU or University Of Greenwich
- KCL or UCL
- How would you rank these Universities, purely based off prestige (computer science)
- Choosing a Uni for Economics 2026 - Major difference between Leeds and Durham?
- I need some advice please help
- Leeds vs. Warwick (Computer Science)
- Best Russel Group/ Top 25
- Imperial vs UCL for postgrad in conservation field
- Help me choose between Bsc Economics at Durham Uni and the Uni of Bristol!!
- Bath vs NYU for Mech Eng
- uni of liverpool or uni of manchester?
- Can I get into top universities like Oxbridge, Imperial, Stanford, MIT, Princeton etc
- Urgent- uea or birmingham for env science
- Should I go to a less prestigious university?
- URGENT clearing choice by today 6pm and unsure
- ucl or bath
- ucl or Edinburgh for law
- Economics with placement at Manchester or Economics at UCL
- Would I be stupid for firming Bristol Law over KCL Law?
- Is the University of St Andrews considered one of the top universities in the UK?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 months ago
Would you be in favour of university admissions being purely based on exams?Last reply 6 months ago
If a teacher uses ChatGPT to write an assignment, can students use ChatGPT to answer?Last reply 8 months ago
Urban planning graduates - what went right and wrong?Last reply 9 months ago
A.I,chatgpt and people using it for their education and tests.Last reply 9 months ago
Are humanities / arts / social sciences degrees worthless apart from being a hobbyLast reply 9 months ago
How can I report an institution for poor academic practiceLast reply 10 months ago
'Not all state schools are made equal': do grammars dominate top uni admissions?
How The Student Room is moderated
To keep The Student Room safe for everyone, we moderate posts that are added to the site.
