Why are there so few really good universities in the south east?

Watch
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#1
So you’d think the South East of England with the largest population and second largest economy of the regions after London with a high average earning and a large middle class population would have the best universities in the U.K., right? Apart from Southampton and Oxford, none of the universities in the south east are in the top 20 or part of the Russel Group.

Sussex, Surrey, Kent and Reading should be really good universities since they’re very near London and their local economies are very good, compare that to Coventry with the University of Warwick or Nottingham with the University of Nottingham (both RG and top 20). Even Newcastle University and University of Liverpool (both RG) are considered better than these universities. Weirdly enough, Sussex and Surrey (both out of top 30) has better graduate prospects for CS than University of Nottingham, Manchester and Liverpool even though they’re RG and I think it’s due to being in the south east and near London.

Why aren’t the universities in the South East the best universities (apart from Southampton and Oxford, but these universities are too small for a region with such a large population and economy) despite having a large, rich population and a strong economy and being near London as well as many of the best private schools and grammar schools in the country and arguably the most educated parents (which does help their children get much better A Levels) outside of London?

Look at the West Midlands, it has Birmingham, Warwick, Loughborough and University of Nottingham, amazing universities in a region with a small economy and a population that is slightly more than half the population of the South East.


BTW, I go to Sussex, so I can say this
Last edited by jh61; 2 months ago
1
reply
mizzsnazzter
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 months ago
#2
What about LSE, Imperial, Kings, UCL?

And you can’t say ignore London because London accounts for the majority of universities in the south east!
Last edited by mizzsnazzter; 2 months ago
2
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#3
(Original post by mizzsnazzter)
What about LSE, Imperial, Kings, UCL?
They’re in London
0
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#4
(Original post by mizzsnazzter)
What about LSE, Imperial, Kings, UCL?

And you can’t say ignore London because London accounts for the majority of universities in the south east!
But London is not in the south east. Almost no Londoners would consider themselves from the South East
0
reply
mizzsnazzter
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 months ago
#5
(Original post by jh61)
They’re in London
But London universities account for the majority of unis in the south east!

That’s like saying why are all Scottish unis bad but ignore all the city ones! It just so happens a lot of the universities in the south east are London, and most of the good ones at that!
0
reply
mizzsnazzter
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 months ago
#6
(Original post by jh61)
But London is not in the south east. Almost no Londoners would consider themselves from the South East
I mean it literally is in the south east - are you just drawing a ring around London as an exclusion zone? How are you defining the south east then because it sounds like a small area! As London is so close by majority of unis are based there - and so are the good ones
0
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#7
Also, the population of London and South East combined is almost double the whole of West Midlands and North West England combined, and there’s Birmingham, Warwick, Loughborough, Nottingham, Manchester, Lancaster and Liverpool included. If you wanted to include London in the south east, then you have Southampton, Oxford, UCL, KCL, Imperial and LSE, there should still be way more good universities and more RGs. Still, London is not the South East
0
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#8
(Original post by mizzsnazzter)
I mean it literally is in the south east - are you just drawing a ring around London as an exclusion zone? How are you defining the south east then because it sounds like a small area! As London is so close by majority of unis are based there - and so are the good ones

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_England
0
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#9
(Original post by mizzsnazzter)
But London universities account for the majority of unis in the south east!

That’s like saying why are all Scottish unis bad but ignore all the city ones! It just so happens a lot of the universities in the south east are London, and most of the good ones at that!
Scotland has a population of 5.5 million compared to London’s 8.9 million and the South East’s 9.1 million
0
reply
JGoosey2002
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 months ago
#10
(Original post by mizzsnazzter)
I mean it literally is in the south east - are you just drawing a ring around London as an exclusion zone? How are you defining the south east then because it sounds like a small area! As London is so close by majority of unis are based there - and so are the good ones
No the south east is a specific region of the England. London is it’s own region in between the south east and east England
Last edited by JGoosey2002; 2 months ago
1
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#11
(Original post by JGoosey2002)
No the south east is a specific region of the England. London is it’s own region in between the south east and east anglia
Exactly, this is what I meant

Do you feel surprised that the South East has barely any good universities apart from Southampton and Oxford? Compared to the West Midlands or the North East or North West?
0
reply
JGoosey2002
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 months ago
#12
(Original post by jh61)
Exactly, this is what I meant

Do you feel surprised that the South East has barely any good universities apart from Southampton and Oxford? Compared to the West Midlands or the North East or North West?
well it’s not a very big area tbf. East England probably has it worse. Literally just Cambridge in the top 25ish and UEA in the top 40ish. It’s mostly because big unis are usually in big cities I think
0
reply
owlknightdragon
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 months ago
#13
(Original post by mizzsnazzter)
I mean it literally is in the south east - are you just drawing a ring around London as an exclusion zone? How are you defining the south east then because it sounds like a small area! As London is so close by majority of unis are based there - and so are the good ones
i agree London is in the Southeast just like devon is in the south west
0
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#14
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#14
(Original post by JGoosey2002)
well it’s not a very big area tbf. East England probably has it worse. Literally just Cambridge in the top 25ish and UEA in the top 40ish. It’s mostly because big unis are usually in big cities I think
Do you consider UEA to be a good university? Likewise, do you consider Sussex to be a good university? They’re kinda comparable.

Also, I understand the area isn’t large, but the population is ridiculous in size. There should be more RGs and top tens in the south east, as well as the East of England with the third largest economy after South East and London.

Also, do you think it is definitely due to having large cities? Because Brighton (University of Sussex) has a similar population to Southampton (University of Southampton), Coventry (University of Warwick) and Newcastle (Newcastle University) but Sussex is comparable to UEA, and Southampton, Newcastle and Warwick are RG and Loughborough and Lancaster are top ten universities. It must be more than just city size.

What are Sussex, Surrey, Reading and Kent doing wrong that Warwick, Loughborough and Lancaster doing right?
0
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#15
(Original post by owlknightdragon)
i agree London is in the Southeast just like devon is in the south west
But the regions, according to the U.K. government, do not include London in the south east because London has a massive population only slightly smaller than the South East, and South West has slightly more than half the population of the South East. Also, almost no Londoners consider themselves as South East, but people from Southampton to Canterbury consider themselves southern.
0
reply
owlknightdragon
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 months ago
#16
(Original post by jh61)
But the regions, according to the U.K. government, do not include London in the south east because London has a massive population only slightly smaller than the South East, and South West has slightly more than half the population of the South East. Also, almost no Londoners consider themselves as South East, but people from Southampton to Canterbury consider themselves southern.
ok
0
reply
owlknightdragon
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 months ago
#17
so let me get this straight
Northwest- Liverpool,Manchester etc
Northeast-Newcastle upon Tyne,Durham etc
East Yorkshire- Hull
West Yorkshire- Bradford,Leeds etc
West Midlands-Birmingham, Wolverhampton etc
East Midlands-Nottingham, Leicester Derby
Southwest-Exeter,Cornwall
Southeast-Southampton, Kent
London-"all by myself"
0
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#18
(Original post by owlknightdragon)
so let me get this straight
Northwest- Liverpool,Manchester etc
Northeast-Newcastle upon Tyne,Durham etc
East Yorkshire- Hull
West Yorkshire- Bradford,Leeds etc
West Midlands-Birmingham, Wolverhampton etc
East Midlands-Nottingham, Leicester Derby
Southwest-Exeter,Cornwall
Southeast-Southampton, Kent
London-"all by myself"
Those are not the regions of England and you’re mixing up counties and cities. London is a region in and of itself. Its population is 8.9 million, the whole of the East Midlands is half that population. The economy of London is £500 billion, South East of England is £300 billion and £124 billion for the East Midlands. The South East of England has nearly twice the population and economy of the whole of Scotland which has a third of the U.K. land area


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_England

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gross...try-and-region


Name:  5BF52F7F-D5A3-48C4-941D-D46232DACA8F.jpg.jpeg
Views: 26
Size:  23.5 KB
0
reply
owlknightdragon
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 months ago
#19
(Original post by jh61)
Those are not the regions of England and you’re mixing up counties and cities. London is a region in and of itself. Its population is 8.9 million, the whole of the East Midlands is half that population. The economy of London is £500 billion, South East of England is £300 billion and £124 billion for the East Midlands. The South East of England has nearly twice the population and economy of the whole of Scotland which has a third of the U.K. land area


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_England

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gross...try-and-region


Name:  5BF52F7F-D5A3-48C4-941D-D46232DACA8F.jpg.jpeg
Views: 26
Size:  23.5 KB
give me a break i spent ages on that
also i included lots of different parts of england and included cities/towns that were in that specific part of england
0
reply
jh61
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#20
(Original post by owlknightdragon)
give me a break i spent ages on that
also i included lots of different parts of england and included cities/towns that were in that specific part of england
I understand, I’m trying to show you how London is a region by itself and large in population and economy than all the other regions. The South East is the largest region in population and a massive economy, too. If you put together the population and economy of the whole of the Midlands, it would be a bit bigger than the South East in population but a smaller economy. However, if you put South East of England and London together, it would be nearly double the population but it would be nearly three times the economy. Also, the U.K. government itself separates London as a different region and has for decades.

They separated the North East from Yorkshire because it’s a different region, people from Newcastle see themselves as different from Leeds as they do from Manchester because they’re very different, you can hear it in the dialects and accents of the regions.

As you can see, London is not part of the South East and most Londoners don’t consider themselves as being from the South East, but I go to Sussex and most people from Hampshire and Kent I’ve met consider themselves southern, but no Londoners have considered themselves southern, tbh most Londoners barely relate to people from the South East as many southerners come from rural areas or cities the size of Brighton or Southampton which is tiny compared to London
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

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (643)
33.47%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (814)
42.37%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (378)
19.68%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (86)
4.48%

Watched Threads

View All