Durham is an up and coming dept...we seem to be atrracting all the big names. It doesnt do so well in rankings because they don't do a huge amount of research and are comparatively small but the teaching is excellent.
What is your justification for ranking these places?
Hello, just seen your post. Trying to justify your belief is certainly a big problem. However, I think that modest justification is possible within the context of certain reasoning. [I'm currently writing my PhD thesis on the ancient problem of justification and I am well aware of the impossibility of absolute justification!] So, when one asks which uni is the best for classics, the members of this forum certainly do their best to give an as objective response as possible. But of course, as i've already said, there are limitations which stem from the subjective character of everyone's experience and/or thought.
I take subject leagues as the basis of my judgement. The top seven universities for classics in the Guardian are: (1) KCL (2) Cambridge (3) Oxford (4) UCL (5) St Andrews (6) Warwick (7) Nottingham. For the Times: (1) Oxford (2) Cambridge (3) KCL (4) Birmingham (5) UCL (6) St Andrews (7) Warwick.
Now, I did my BA at King's, my MA at UCL and now my PhD at Warwick. My judgement of the quality of the departments at King's and Warwick is that they are both excellent, with King's being clearly better (but with Warwick uni overall being the best uni in the UK right now). On the contrary, during the two years I spent at UCL I experienced a totally disorganised, uninteresting and unfriendly department. Hence I eliminate UCL from the list. While being at Warwick I often attend conferences at Birmingham and converse with fellow-students there; there seems to be a consensus among them that Birmingham is nowhere near the opportunities offered to an undergraduate by all the rest top departments. Hence I eliminate Birmingham as well. The overwhelming majority of the teaching staff in all top Classics departments graduated from Oxbridge. That's a decisive factor for me regarding the superiority of the Oxbridge departments. Hence I place them at the top of my list.
To sum up, then, I justify my ranking based on these factors: (1) subject league tables, (2) personal experience, (3) uni where the majority of Classics scholars got their PhD degree.
Hello, just seen your post. Trying to justify your belief is certainly a big problem. However, I think that modest justification is possible within the context of certain reasoning. [I'm currently writing my PhD thesis on the ancient problem of justification and I am well aware of the impossibility of absolute justification!] So, when one asks which uni is the best for classics, the members of this forum certainly do their best to give an as objective response as possible. But of course, as i've already said, there are limitations which stem from the subjective character of everyone's experience and/or thought.
I take subject leagues as the basis of my judgement. The top seven universities for classics in the Guardian are: (1) KCL (2) Cambridge (3) Oxford (4) UCL (5) St Andrews (6) Warwick (7) Nottingham. For the Times: (1) Oxford (2) Cambridge (3) KCL (4) Birmingham (5) UCL (6) St Andrews (7) Warwick.
Now, I did my BA at King's, my MA at UCL and now my PhD at Warwick. My judgement of the quality of the departments at King's and Warwick is that they are both excellent, with King's being clearly better (but with Warwick uni overall being the best uni in the UK right now). On the contrary, during the two years I spent at UCL I experienced a totally disorganised, uninteresting and unfriendly department. Hence I eliminate UCL from the list. While being at Warwick I often attend conferences at Birmingham and converse with fellow-students there; there seems to be a consensus among them that Birmingham is nowhere near the opportunities offered to an undergraduate by all the rest top departments. Hence I eliminate Birmingham as well. The overwhelming majority of the teaching staff in all top Classics departments graduated from Oxbridge. That's a decisive factor for me regarding the superiority of the Oxbridge departments. Hence I place them at the top of my list.
To sum up, then, I justify my ranking based on these factors: (1) subject league tables, (2) personal experience, (3) uni where the majority of Classics scholars got their PhD degree.
Boring. League tables are a stupid way of ranking universities - they're compiled by the media and we all know how impartial they are