Most overrated second-tier London uniWatch
But what about the “second-tier” London universities that are lower down in the pecking order? Do they tend to be overrated too? And which is the most overrated?
The bit about LSE and satisfaction appears to ring true though. Different from reputation.
I havent noticed anyone overrating the ones you had selected. I would say Kings has the higher rep especially internationally , whereas I doubt many foreign students have heard of the bottom two you selected.
What about City as well?
I do think London universities are perhaps more popular with EU/International students than unis elsewhere in the UK, but that's a location thing, not just a reputation thing.
Birkbeck is ranked in 90s to 100s it is the most overrated 2nd-tier University because its a 3rd or 4th tier University but with the " University of London " name
I'm a postgrad, not at any of the Londons, so I don't really care either way.
The reason I think London unis are rated highly internationally is (1) the city's name recognition, and (2) because many international students also plan to stay on to do postgraduate study. In my field, KCL in particular has a long reputation for excellence in the subject and has a very prestigious endowed chair.
Whenever people on TSR rank unis, they are using scores across unis, rather than particular departments or sub-departments. In my niche field, the University of Sussex (which I do not go too) is extremely good because of a certain professor. TSR often seems to think that going to a 'lower' uni for postgrad is actually bad - often slightly lower unis are hte ones with specialists in particular subjects (at postgrad, supervisors matter not unis as a whole).
NB: I am not trying to justify my own choices. I went to a RG uni for UG and then Oxford for PG.
Just to explain the choices for the poll, I see King’s as a second-tier London university because the first tier in London is so far ahead of the rest. Imperial and LSE are among the world leaders in their respective fields (at least in research) and UCL is better at doing most things that King’s does. King’s also tends to be the second choice for people who are rejected by the top-tier London institutions. That’s just my perception, though. It’d be interesting to see if people associated with Imperial, LSE or UCL consider King’s to be their equal.