Want more information about this university?
V1ct0r
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 weeks ago
#21
(Original post by Anonymous)
CUG 2021 Rankings for Business Management
Rank: UOB 22nd Aston 42nd
Average entry standards: UOB 152 (Need AAB) Aston 133 (Need BBB)
Research intensity Aston 3.07 UOB 2.84
Grad prospects Aston 77% UOB 87%

Maybe for PG and research quality. But for UG UOB has higher entry standards and calibre of students, and better connections with top employers making it better unfortunately. It's a shame, I feel like Aston's entry requirements could be a little higher imo, considering the business schools' prestige though.
Why would you rely on CUG anyway? That ranking literally suggests Loughborough is more prestigious than UCL and Warwick. Try looking at THE and QS. Aston is top 100 in the world for business management in QS.
Name:  QS.png
Views: 14
Size:  123.9 KB
0
reply
StDave
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 weeks ago
#22
(Original post by V1ct0r)
Why would you rely on CUG anyway? That ranking literally suggests Loughborough is more prestigious than UCL and Warwick. Try looking at THE and QS. Aston is top 100 in the world for business management in QS.
Name:  QS.png
Views: 14
Size:  123.9 KB
The CUG does not suggest that Loughborough is more 'prestigious' than Warwick or UCL.

Prestige means different things to different people, which is generally difficult to get an agreed data set to measure for quality undergraduate education.

What CUG does is use a methodology to rank universities, based on data sets, that tend to be more useful in grading quality of undergraduate education.

Whether you agree with their methodology or not, its rankings always place Oxbridge (two universities genuinely excellent for undergraduates and postgraduates) at the top, so it can't be completely disregarded as being wrong.

Good world rankings in the QS does not equal a good undergraduate education. It's predominantly measures research, which is pretty much irrelevant for undergrads. Top researchers tend not to be too involved with undergraduate teaching.
Last edited by StDave; 4 weeks ago
0
reply
V1ct0r
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 weeks ago
#23
(Original post by StDave)
The CUG does not suggest that Loughborough is more 'prestigious' than Warwick or UCL.

Prestige means different things to different people, which is generally difficult to get an agreed data set to measure for quality undergraduate education.

What CUG does is use a methodology to rank universities, based on data sets, that tend to be more useful in grading quality of undergraduate education.

Whether you agree with their methodology or not, its rankings always place Oxbridge (two universities genuinely excellent for undergraduates and postgraduates) at the top, so it can't be completely disregarded as being wrong.

Good world rankings in the QS does not equal a good undergraduate education. It's predominantly measures research, which is pretty much irrelevant for undergrads. Top researchers tend not to be too involved with undergraduate teaching.
I don't trust the CUG. Although it ranks Oxbridge, Durham, and Warwick at the top, it also has many mistakes like Loughborough being top 10, UAL being 61, St George being in the list, etc. It's like 50% right and 50% wrong, where for QS, it's like 70% is right, like the actual excellent institutions in their deserving positions.

It is also hard to determine if you will have 'good experience' or 'bad experience' based on the rankings anyway. I go to Brookes, which isn't even in top 50 but it has an excellent reputation for automotive engineering and I was given an opportunity to be part of the best UK Formula Student team. The lecturers are very engaging and the course is challenging as well and we also have amazing facilities for automotive engineering, for instance, we have full access to the auto lab, where we can inspect the previous race cars used by the team in the past years. There are also many clubs and societies, workshops, speeches, job fairs by subjects, and many more. Based on CUG, the university is supposed to be ****, but it isn't.

The way I see it, any uni which isn't notorious for offering bad student experience, will work and the rest just comes down to personal preference so people visit open days to decide which uni they like. Speaking of open days, I went to UCL postgraduate open day this January and it was total ****. It was going very well during the online registration since they kept sending reminder emails but then on the actual open day, a lecturer from CS department did not even know that they offer a computer science conversion MSc! Like its a postgrad open day for god's sake! Then, I listened to a presentation about postgrad admissions and the lady talking, who is the admission officer, literally said 'many international students apply to us every year, we have a lot of chinese students for example, so if you think you're not good enough or if you can't wait for the decision, then don't bother applying because we are already stressed by a huge number of applications so having one less application really helps us'. Now, UCL is ranked 10th in CUG. Talk about reliability...
0
reply
StDave
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 weeks ago
#24
(Original post by V1ct0r)
I don't trust the CUG. Although it ranks Oxbridge, Durham, and Warwick at the top, it also has many mistakes like Loughborough being top 10, UAL being 61, St George being in the list, etc. It's like 50% right and 50% wrong, where for QS, it's like 70% is right, like the actual excellent institutions in their deserving positions.

It is also hard to determine if you will have 'good experience' or 'bad experience' based on the rankings anyway. I go to Brookes, which isn't even in top 50 but it has an excellent reputation for automotive engineering and I was given an opportunity to be part of the best UK Formula Student team. The lecturers are very engaging and the course is challenging as well and we also have amazing facilities for automotive engineering, for instance, we have full access to the auto lab, where we can inspect the previous race cars used by the team in the past years. There are also many clubs and societies, workshops, speeches, job fairs by subjects, and many more. Based on CUG, the university is supposed to be ****, but it isn't.

The way I see it, any uni which isn't notorious for offering bad student experience, will work and the rest just comes down to personal preference so people visit open days to decide which uni they like. Speaking of open days, I went to UCL postgraduate open day this January and it was total ****. It was going very well during the online registration since they kept sending reminder emails but then on the actual open day, a lecturer from CS department did not even know that they offer a computer science conversion MSc! Like its a postgrad open day for god's sake! Then, I listened to a presentation about postgrad admissions and the lady talking, who is the admission officer, literally said 'many international students apply to us every year, we have a lot of chinese students for example, so if you think you're not good enough or if you can't wait for the decision, then don't bother applying because we are already stressed by a huge number of applications so having one less application really helps us'. Now, UCL is ranked 10th in CUG. Talk about reliability...
I think people should take all rankings with as very big pinch of salt. However, if the CUG measures exactly what you want, then fine. If QS measures what you want, then fine. But if you like their methodology and they compare like-for-like data, then you have to accept their findings, even if you don't personally agree with every position in the ranking.

The fact that UCL is poorly organised, uncaring sausage factory that openly targets international students (and their fees), relying on their location and 'prestige' over providing a good student experience, somewhat explains why their ranking is below Loughborough in the CUG - as I said, CUG don't measure nonsense like prestige.
Last edited by StDave; 4 weeks ago
0
reply
V1ct0r
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 weeks ago
#25
(Original post by StDave)
I think people should take all rankings with as very big pinch of salt. However, if the CUG measures exactly what you want, then fine. If QS measures what you want, then fine. But if you like their methodology and they compare like-for-like data, then you have to accept their findings, even if you don't personally agree with every position in the ranking.

The fact that UCL is poorly organised, uncaring sausage factory that openly targets international students (and their fees), relying on their location and 'prestige' over providing a good student experience, somewhat explains why their ranking is below Loughborough in the CUG - as I said, CUG don't measure nonsense like prestige.
UCL is ranked 10th. I had a better experience at Brookes than at UCL so shouldn't Brookes rank higher than UCL if what CUG measures is student experience?
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

What are you most likely to do if you don't get the grades you were expecting?

Go through Clearing (130)
37.25%
Take autumn exams (107)
30.66%
Look for a job (11)
3.15%
Consider an apprenticeship (13)
3.72%
Take a year out (66)
18.91%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (22)
6.3%

Watched Threads

View All