The Times & Sunday Times "Good University Guide" Official University Rankings 2017 Watch

DarkEnergy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
Link removed as it bypassed paywall.
1
reply
KardasDragon
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
Holy **** what's up with Cardiff being 46th?
0
reply
DarkEnergy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#3
(Original post by KardasDragon)
Holy **** what's up with Cardiff being 46th?
Joint 94th for Teaching Quality probably drags it down quite a bit
0
reply
Doones
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
(Original post by DarkEnergy)
jneill Did you quote me?

I'm seeing that^ but it's not coming up on the thread.
I did and then deleted it because I figured it out. Soz. Nothing to see...

BTW nice work for getting the table
1
reply
DarkEnergy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by jneill)
I did and then deleted it because I figured it out. Soz. Nothing to see...

BTW nice work for getting the table
Ah right no problem haha was just confused. And thanks!
0
reply
KardasDragon
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
Joint 94th for Teaching Quality probably drags it down quite a bit[/QUOTE]

I suppose, still higher than almost half of the universities above it. I think we might also slowly be seeing newer universities break into the ranks of the RGs and ex-1994 group.

Harper Adams, an ex-poly, is now above Edinburgh, and Coventry as well as Liverpool Hope have secured a place inside the top 50.

It is nice to see Aberystwyth picking itself back up. I remember when they dropped around 40 places a couple years back. They are almost back to where they used to be.

Biggest jump is West London, from 121 to 84. Seems to be the only London ex-poly that has put some effort into improving themselves. Great to see it be recognised.

Other significant changes are the two Bournemouth Unis, both up around 20 places, and St. George's, RGU, Bath Spa, and NUA dropping an equivalent amount.
There are quite a few unis here that are ranked lower than their World Rankings, such as Edinburgh.

Lastly, so happy that QUB is back from being outside of the top 30, instead nestled ahead of KCL with some good scores to boot. Bit worried about their funding cuts thought.
1
reply
S1939
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
Lancaster though
1
reply
Magic Streets
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by KardasDragon)
I suppose, still higher than almost half of the universities above it. I think we might also slowly be seeing newer universities break into the ranks of the RGs and ex-1994 group.

Harper Adams, an ex-poly, is now above Edinburgh, and Coventry as well as Liverpool Hope have secured a place inside the top 50.

It is nice to see Aberystwyth picking itself back up. I remember when they dropped around 40 places a couple years back. They are almost back to where they used to be.

Biggest jump is West London, from 121 to 84. Seems to be the only London ex-poly that has put some effort into improving themselves. Great to see it be recognised.

Other significant changes are the two Bournemouth Unis, both up around 20 places, and St. George's, RGU, Bath Spa, and NUA dropping an equivalent amount.
There are quite a few unis here that are ranked lower than their World Rankings, such as Edinburgh.

Lastly, so happy that QUB is back from being outside of the top 30, instead nestled ahead of KCL with some good scores to boot. Bit worried about their funding cuts thought.
These tables are stupid, and in no way tell us that some universities are better than others.
0
reply
Doones
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by Magic Streets)
These tables are stupid, and in no way tell us that some universities are better than others.
And yet you started a thread asking if they were published yet?
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...php?p=67728492
Twice
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=4333864

Posted from TSR Mobile
3
reply
_Fergo
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
I think I've seen it all now - St Andrews above Imperial and LSE, Sussex above Bristol and Edinburgh... And much more.

I wonder if the publishers actually evaluate the reputation of their tables before publishing all that (especially the Guardian).

Posted from TSR Mobile
3
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by *Stefan*)
I think I've seen it all now - St Andrews above Imperial and LSE, Sussex above Bristol and Edinburgh... And much more.

I wonder if the publishers actually evaluate the reputation of their tables before publishing all that (especially the Guardian).
Perhaps the publishers think that is about time Sussex regains its nickname of "Balliol by the Sea"
3
reply
KardasDragon
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
To be fair, if we went every year by reputation the league tables would be static and never change. There would be no point in universities trying to improve. The Sunday Times is probably the best league table out there as it uses very solid and balanced methodology. Edinburgh and Bristol have been struggling with student satisfaction for a while now and still have not adressed it. Props to Sussex for gaining ground.

It might be slightly surprising seeing Imperial lower than St. Andrews, but it is still within range of where it should be. The latter certainly deserves to be above LSE which is bottom in teaching and student experience for the 3rd year in a row. LSE really needs to have a look at how it treats undergrads. It is *******s when its flagship course (Econ) has sub 80% satisfaction rates.
1
reply
PQ
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
(Original post by KardasDragon)
Harper Adams, an ex-poly, is now above Edinburgh, and Coventry as well as Liverpool Hope have secured a place inside the top 50.
Harper Adams was never a polytechnic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyte...r_polytechnics
Nor was Liverpool Hope.

They're new universities - ie they got university status after 1992 - but they're not ex-polys but ex agricultural and teacher training colleges.
0
reply
Doones
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
(Original post by nulli tertius)
Perhaps the publishers think that is about time Sussex regains its nickname of "Balliol by the Sea"
Is actual Balliol still a hive of revolutionary activity?

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
_Fergo
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
(Original post by nulli tertius)
Perhaps the publishers think that is about time Sussex regains its nickname of "Balliol by the Sea"
Perhaps

(Original post by KardasDragon)
To be fair, if we went every year by reputation the league tables would be static and never change. There would be no point in universities trying to improve. The Sunday Times is probably the best league table out there as it uses very solid and balanced methodology. Edinburgh and Bristol have been struggling with student satisfaction for a while now and still have not adressed it. Props to Sussex for gaining ground.

It might be slightly surprising seeing Imperial lower than St. Andrews, but it is still within range of where it should be. The latter certainly deserves to be above LSE which is bottom in teaching and student experience for the 3rd year in a row. LSE really needs to have a look at how it treats undergrads. It is *******s when its flagship course (Econ) has sub 80% satisfaction rates.
Not - just no. Student satisfaction is the most volatile and manipulable criteria by far. Firstly, the flaws inherent to it apply to all surveys - methodology, people surveyed and whatnot are not objective as they should be - they cannot be. It just depends on the situation at hand. But further than that, the NSS does not quite fit the criteria of a respectable survey - you literally have 20 or so question, all ranging from definitely agree to definitely disagree, which is done in under five minutes. It is impossible for anything sensible to come out of a 5 minute survey when it asks you to define three whole years of your life. It can be equated to a company asking you to describe your previous job in 3 lines. You will be able to do it, but will you say everything that defined that career for you?

Added to that, the sphere of the survey is very limited - it does not concern YOUR enjoyment of the course, as in, whether you felt engaged or if your department actively tried to make you interested in their subjects. Instead, it concerns mostly administrative matters which, while important, do not quite make or unmake how satisfied you were. Sure, it does talk about teaching, but it is so, so limited and generic in doing so that it attains a fully superficial approach, which cannot in any way characterise departments which are usually massive and involve limitless aspects of organisation and administration.

Until the survey becomes much more elaborate and on point, it will certainly not be - or at least should not be - a good factor on whether said uni can provide a meaningful education.
0
reply
Joinedup
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by *Stefan*)
Perhaps



Added to that, the sphere of the survey is very limited - it does not concern YOUR enjoyment of the course, as in, whether you felt engaged or if your department actively tried to make you interested in their subjects. Instead, it concerns mostly administrative matters which, while important, do not quite make or unmake how satisfied you were.
Well they want a high survey completion rate which unfortunately does mean keeping it snappy... only the really disgruntled students would want to spend hours on it.

There was question concerning whether the lecturers made the subject interesting or not - has that been removed?

Certainly it's not perfect - but neither is using the REF or any of the other stuff league table compilers rely on.
1
reply
Doones
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#17
Report 3 years ago
#17
(Original post by *Stefan*)
It is impossible for anything sensible to come out of a 5 minute survey .
Hmm, is there a "survey" that takes seconds but is important and (generally) viewed as sensible... oh, like a vote in a General Election.
0
reply
PQ
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by *Stefan*)
Not - just no. Student satisfaction is the most volatile and manipulable criteria by far.

If it's so easy to manipulate then why are so many "good" universities still performing badly?

Speaking as someone who is employed in part to improve the performance of my employer in the rankings - NSS is by far the most difficult thing to influence or improve, the only way to create lasting improvements in NSS performance is to substantially review the course content, teaching (and performance reviews for those teaching), the delivery of assessment and feedback across every course offered and the central organisation and timetabling for the entire university....you can't bury poor results in foundation years or boost spending by recategorising or change marking guidelines to increase good degrees or offer discounted postgrad courses to improve graduate prospects or any of the other many tactics available to improve quickly.
.
1
reply
_Fergo
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 years ago
#19
(Original post by Joinedup)
Well they want a high survey completion rate which unfortunately does mean keeping it snappy... only the really disgruntled students would want to spend hours on it.

There was question concerning whether the lecturers made the subject interesting or not - has that been removed?

Certainly it's not perfect - but neither is using the REF or any of the other stuff league table compilers rely on.
Totally - it's just that ALL rankings use the survey disproportionately. The weight attached to it far outpaces its significance. Just as an example, without wanting to be condescending, East Anglia has a 92.2% teaching satisfaction and 94.6% student satisfaction on the Sunday Times rankings, whereas Oxford has 83.3% and 86.3% respectively. To say that East Anglia has a better teaching system than Oxford (and Cambridge for that matter), which employ(s) the tutorial system, doesn't make much sense to me.

(Original post by jneill)
Hmm, is there a "survey" that takes seconds but is important and (generally) viewed as sensible... oh, like a vote in a General Election.
A vote and a survey are not comparable. In a General Election, only specific options are available. Nothing more nothing less. In a survey, the questions asked may vary significantly, since it's up to the researcher/operator to specify the questions THEY think should be asked.

Not saying the voting system is perfect - it is not. It's just in no way comparable.

(Original post by PQ)
If it's so easy to manipulate then why are so many "good" universities still performing badly?

Speaking as someone who is employed in part to improve the performance of my employer in the rankings - NSS is by far the most difficult thing to influence or improve, the only way to create lasting improvements in NSS performance is to substantially review the course content, teaching (and performance reviews for those teaching), the delivery of assessment and feedback across every course offered and the central organisation and timetabling for the entire university....you can't bury poor results in foundation years or boost spending by recategorising or change marking guidelines to increase good degrees or offer discounted postgrad courses to improve graduate prospects or any of the other many tactics available to improve quickly.
.
Partly because they may not particularly care. In all seriousness, they did ask us to vote on the survey, but the turnout was so low it's statistically nonsensical. In essence, only those who have had a negative experience are likely to vote - unless the university employs some kind of system where students HAVE to vote (as in, not mandatory but given in such a way that students eventually vote) - just saying here of course, as I can't know what happens at other unis.

Point being, while I agree that the survey is a good way to see which improvements can be made, it does not de facto indicate the quality of said course.
0
reply
Doones
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#20
Report 3 years ago
#20
(Original post by *Stefan*)
In essence, only those who have had a negative experience are likely to vote -
On the contrary, if anything it is in the interests of leaving students to upvote their university so future employers think they went to a "good uni". (Yes I know employers don't pay attention to rankings but many students don't realise that.)
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (172)
66.67%
No (86)
33.33%

Watched Threads

View All