The Student Room Group
Voting for TSRs Ultimate Study Playlist is NOW OPEN >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Voting for TSRs Ultimate Study Playlist is NOW OPEN >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Top 25 Universities in the last 11 Years

These are the 25 Universities that consistently appear in the top 25 in the UK in the last 12 years.

-Based solely on THE World Ranking '10 - '22
-In order of the number of appearances out of 12.
-These are not ranked in 'usual' order, i.e Sussex is not above LSE or Durham. (EDIT)

12 - Cambridge
12 - Oxford
12 - Imperial
12 - UCL
12 - Edinburgh
12 - Bristol
12 - KCL
12 - Sussex
12 - York
12 - Durham
12 - LSE
12 - Manchester
12 - Southampton
12 - St. Andrews
12 - QMUL
12 - Lancaster
12 - Glasgow
12 - Sheffield
12 - Birmingham
11 - Leeds
10 - Warwick
10 - Exeter
8 - Nottingham
7 - Liverpool
6 = Aberdeen;
6 = RHUL



Runner ups:

4 - Leicester
3 - Newcastle
3 - UEA
2 - Birkbeck
1 - Cardiff


Edit: Title 12 Years*
Edit 2: These are also the usual suspects mirrored in Domestic Rankings
Edit 3: 'Are only in order of appearances. Appearances are only counted when a Uni breaks the top 25.
Edit 4: "THE" = TIMES HIGHER EDUCATION '
(edited 1 year ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Avatar for rebelw
rebelw
12
well done, you were correct to put cambridge first
oxf*rd clearly paid off THE to get on the list
Farming TSR karma so ima spam arbitrary numbers
Is this supposed to be surprising?
Do world rankings really matter as much when you intend to remain in the UK? There are some subtle differences between world rankings and domestic ones. World rankings also mainly focus on academic output, which isn't relevant for every student. Just my 2 cents.
Original post by gtty123
Is this supposed to be surprising?


I guess not, and maybe a decade isn't enough of a sample size but it does show the bottom 15 usually shift in places, changing in waves every 3 years or so. Like Exeter and Warwick's meteoric rise globally towards the latter end of the previous decade and Scottish Unis like Aberdeen and Dundee being washed away at the early half of the decade curving back into place. Sussex and Durham was within the 70s-90s for a few years before getting slumped back to the 150s (Not to say Sussex or Durham are on par)
What happened with Warwick? Why aren't they 12 like the others?

Original post by Pegasus25
Do world rankings really matter as much when you intend to remain in the UK? There are some subtle differences between world rankings and domestic ones. World rankings also mainly focus on academic output, which isn't relevant for every student. Just my 2 cents.


I think they do. World rankings are important for international prestige and tbh show where you'd get a good education at. A university with poor research is unlikely one which would provide the best teaching, in my opinion. A much better metric than the domestic rankings which uses ucas tariff points as a measure of how good an institution is. It's pretty laughable, really! It would have you believe that Kings, for example, was a good university for Economics, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Original post by Pegasus25
Do world rankings really matter as much when you intend to remain in the UK? There are some subtle differences between world rankings and domestic ones. World rankings also mainly focus on academic output, which isn't relevant for every student. Just my 2 cents.


Yea great point to add to be sure. The Rankings above are not necessarily in order aside from the number of appearances. The Top 25 in the list above are the consistent regulars in domestic rankings also.
Original post by wiseowlz72
What happened with Warwick? Why aren't they 12 like the others?



I think they do. World rankings are important for international prestige and tbh show where you'd get a good education at. A university with poor research is unlikely one which would provide the best teaching, in my opinion. A much better metric than the domestic rankings which uses ucas tariff points as a measure of how good an institution is. It's pretty laughable, really! It would have you believe that Kings, for example, was a good university for Economics, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Warwick came in quite late into the top 100 globally relative to the top 5 of that list.
I guess a lot of it is just positive association and branding. The RG has displayed a masterclass in marketing leading many to skip a question or two when it comes to due diligence.
Original post by wiseowlz72
What happened with Warwick? Why aren't they 12 like the others?



I think they do. World rankings are important for international prestige and tbh show where you'd get a good education at. A university with poor research is unlikely one which would provide the best teaching, in my opinion. A much better metric than the domestic rankings which uses ucas tariff points as a measure of how good an institution is. It's pretty laughable, really! It would have you believe that Kings, for example, was a good university for Economics, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Fair enough. We can agree to disagree. It is nearly midnight in the UK and I really can't be bothered to enter a TSR debate and get more glitchy notifications that I forget to respond to. I think however good research =! good teaching. Some of the most engrossed academics can be terrible teachers! Domestic rankings give graduate employability a greater weight than world rankings, which give a much heavier weight to research output. I guess it depends on what you want a university to be for you, I guess.
Based on what standards, is the real question. Each ranking system will prioritise different aspects (e.g., quality of research, entry requirements, student welfare) so they're biased at best, and incredibly misleading at worst. Obviously there's a general consensus about who the "top" UK unis are, but it's important to keep this in mind.
Original post by Indililam1
Based on what standards, is the real question. Each ranking system will prioritise different aspects (e.g., quality of research, entry requirements, student welfare) so they're biased at best, and incredibly misleading at worst. Obviously there's a general consensus about who the "top" UK unis are, but it's important to keep this in mind.

This is based SOLELY on THE World Rankings '10 - '22 as I've mentioned.
Original post by Pegasus25
Fair enough. We can agree to disagree. It is nearly midnight in the UK and I really can't be bothered to enter a TSR debate and get more glitchy notifications that I forget to respond to. I think however good research =! good teaching. Some of the most engrossed academics can be terrible teachers! Domestic rankings give graduate employability a greater weight than world rankings, which give a much heavier weight to research output. I guess it depends on what you want a university to be for you, I guess.


Don't worry about debates my man. Your .02 are appreciated!
Original post by turbobaithead
This is based SOLELY on THE World Rankings '10 - '22 as I've mentioned.

Yes, I read that bit. Read my comment again - "based on what standards"? Student welfare? Research output? Research quality? Funding?
Are you asking if people agree with the ranking or just stating it? As I wrote previously, rankings are arbitrary so it doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Original post by Indililam1
Yes, I read that bit. Read my comment again - "based on what standards"? Student welfare? Research output? Research quality? Funding?
Are you asking if people agree with the ranking or just stating it? As I wrote previously, rankings are arbitrary so it doesn't necessarily mean anything.


Oh Nah brah, I'm just posting it for the sake of posting it. At least for this post anyways just to see peoples .02. I meant that based on THE's standards which should be an amalgamation of those you've listed.
Original post by turbobaithead
Oh Nah brah, I'm just posting it for the sake of posting it. At least for this post anyways just to see peoples .02. I meant that based on THE's standards which should be an amalgamation of those you've listed.

Fair enough. York being ranked above Durham and LSE is bound to trigger a few people so should be entertaining, lmao.
Original post by Indililam1
Fair enough. York being ranked above Durham and LSE is bound to trigger a few people so should be entertaining, lmao.


York's better than Durham anyway.
Original post by Indililam1
Fair enough. York being ranked above Durham and LSE is bound to trigger a few people so should be entertaining, lmao.


None of that is ranked in proper order aside from appearances AHAHAHAHA. Sussex is ahead of all those too LOL.
Strange and meaningless.

If it's based on the number of appearances, surely there are many universities with the same number. How do you rank them? From my impression of world rankings, Sussex and York never rank high in world rankings. It was the domestic ranking that placed them higher ten years ago. It seems quite far from a proper reflection of world rankings.

Next, world rankings are meaningless. They focus on research output, which is important but not that important. Researchers don't care about universities. They only care about good research. Students and employers care about universities, but they normally use how hard to get in and how good the grade is to measure students' capacity, not research (most students don't do research anyway and research has little correlation with teaching). Unfortunately, world rankings don't and can't rank entrance and grades. Dartmouth is certainly better than NYU, UT and many others for students, but it's ranked much lower. The same is true for Sciences Po, ENS in France and RUC in China.

Not just world rankings. Most rankings are stupid though.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you