Rank your personal ranking for uk Uni’s

[lightisnotwhite]

I’ve read the league tables but interested to know what MN prefers in a Uni. Bristol for example ranks outside the top ten but MN is keen.

I think (based on these threads) Durham, St Andrews, York, Bath, Bristol, Exeter, Manchester, one of the London ones LSE?

Oxford and Cambridge are givens. So what’s next.

It’s all about research

No it's not.

You missed off branding / marketing.

Now there's something that 18 year olds (and their mums) can get into and one can hardly say that it doesn't work - see the example above.

Weird that the company would exclude graduates of Bath, though - and St Andrews...

thing47 Not really. Original research is what defines a university. Without that, the institution would be a school or a college, where teachers teach already published knowledge. The purpose of a university is that original research informs teaching (and teaching informs original research - ideally).

I reckon there's quite a lot of 'spin' on MN as to some perceived 'best universities'. I think some of it's a form of competitive delusion!

Warwick is one of the few top unis where cost of living is reasonable in uni and private accommodation. Worth taking into account.

The purpose of a university is that original research informs teaching (and teaching informs original research - ideally).

That might well be the aim, but it isn't what happens in reality, by and large. A university certainly benefits from its staff carrying out original research, I don't doubt that (and in fact as I have mentioned on another thread the QS world rankings use publications emanating from a university as an important metric re. its ranking), but it's extremely debatable whether that filters down into benefiting individual students at under-graduate level.

Maybe it does, in some departments at some universities, but the evidence for it is scant. Post-graduate it is a different picture – my DD was doing original research for her MSc last year – but then the whole relationship with tutor/supervisor is different at that stage, and Masters and PhD students are often contributing work to the university in a way which under-graduates are not.

@Tree543

My ds is applying to Universities this autumn and is currently looking at all the options. The standard offer for Exeter for the course the wants to do (Computer Science) is a few grades lower than Warwick, York, Bath, Manchester, Durham etc. It does seem to have lower entries requirements than i would have expected.

The Exeter campuses and teaching facilities, libraries etc were prob the nicest we looked at. Sadly didn’t quite offer the right course for my dd.

@Crackedpepper1

While I don't want this to turn into a point specifically relating to Oxbridge and league tables, there is something that I have been thinking about since a recent visit with DC. I wonder if the 'Oxbridge prestige' will become diluted in the next few years while other universities' reputations will be enhanced so that we move to a US-style provision of having several, and not just two, 'top' universities?

Having visited Oxford recently with dc for a STEM subject, the whole outfit was shockingly poor. Dc's lecture was boring, facilities tired and grotty, disinterested academics, mouldy....Meanwhile, other unis have really upped their game in this respect. Also, while we don't know how serious the move to 'university-blind' job applications is at the moment, there is no doubt that this move is happening and is likely to gather pace. Given the vagaries of the application process, which takes a lot of investment on the part of the applicant, will many prospective students simply decide not to apply to Oxbridge in the first place meaning that other universities will change their relative rankings very quickly?

I think that will take a long time..,

I mentioned ages ago that the music facilities at Oxford was quite limited and traditional compared to other places and of course that went down badly. I did an English course at cam and it was definitely more traditional than other unis with only the lightest nod to more contemporary texts. The courses won’t suit all students.

@lightisnotwhite

Ah William and Kate. I wonder what their other choices were?

Royals usually go to Cambridge don’t they?

Charles and Edward went to Cambridge. Eugenie went to Newcastle. Others prob more military colleges - can’t remember any others

I think the days when even a royal could go to Cambridge are gone unless they happen to be very bright. Princess Diana had about 2 CSEs and just want on a nanny training course and Prince Harry did not even go to university and of course nor did the Queen who are educated at home.

Disclaimer - missing the point of the thread.
Wasn't there a (slight) scandal when Edward's bodyguard graduated with a higher degree classification that Edward ?

Depends what you’re judging on? Prestige? Various league tables? Cost? Safety? In my day parents didn’t get much say but I guess they are expected to contribute financially now! In terms of reputation to the general population it’s definitely the old established RG ones but for subject specialists it varies more according to current teaching

@thing47

The purpose of a university is that original research informs teaching (and teaching informs original research - ideally).

That might well be the aim, but it isn't what happens in reality, by and large. A university certainly benefits from its staff carrying out original research, I don't doubt that (and in fact as I have mentioned on another thread the QS world rankings use publications emanating from a university as an important metric re. its ranking), but it's extremely debatable whether that filters down into benefiting individual students at under-graduate level.

Maybe it does, in some departments at some universities, but the evidence for it is scant. Post-graduate it is a different picture – my DD was doing original research for her MSc last year – but then the whole relationship with tutor/supervisor is different at that stage, and Masters and PhD students are often contributing work to the university in a way which under-graduates are not.

Does it depend on subject? When I was there world class research facilities meant that there was more specialised equipment and facilities available and the post grad research students were expected to teach and assist undergrad.

@Chisquared

Disclaimer - missing the point of the thread. Wasn't there a (slight) scandal when Edward's bodyguard graduated with a higher degree classification that Edward ?

Also off thread … apparently an eton teacher resigned on principal when asked to fix coursework for a royal - can’t remember which one

Didn’t William manage a place in St Andrew’s without the required qualifications?

I don’t think it would happen anymore that a royal would get into Oxbridge - or anywhere - without his resuited grades. Those days are gone, I think? Probably the reason they were able to wangle St As for William is that they could argue he needed a remote location to prevent paparazzi intrusion. St As has no train station and is in a remote location, so they probably argued it on privacy / security grounds. I suspect though, if Prince George etc want to go, they will need the grades!

• required grades - not resulted.

@anotherotherone

I don’t think it would happen anymore that a royal would get into Oxbridge - or anywhere - without his resuited grades. Those days are gone, I think? Probably the reason they were able to wangle St As for William is that they could argue he needed a remote location to prevent paparazzi intrusion. St As has no train station and is in a remote location, so they probably argued it on privacy / security grounds. I suspect though, if Prince George etc want to go, they will need the grades!

Plenty of unis let students in with dropped grades. In the experience of youngsters I know, Cardiff abs Exeter are frequent offenders. It's about bums on seats. If they've planned for certain student numbers abs income they let them in. Lin the case of Cardiff I know three DC who subsequently dropped out. They were let in on their reduced grades and couldn't hack it. University doesn't care tho because they still get the fees for that year.

It's very individual. I went to a smaller university which was mid-ranked for my subject. I probably could have got into one with a higher ranking, but actually I had an excellent experience where I was - small enough department that I actually knew the lecturers and was able to do things like dabble in some of the fourth year MSc content in my third year. I suspect I'd have been less happy, and possibly not learnt any more, at a higher ranking institution.

I also had a scholarship, so that was very helpful financially. Again, I'd have been less likely to have that somewhere more "prestigious".

Newgirls
I think that will take a long time

Given the numbers applying for graduate schemes and the ease of administering online testing these days, I can't help but think that university name will become diluted in the whole process. University name only really works when the process of getting a job is done on a more or less personal basis. However, if you line people up, get them to sit a test and take the highest scoring through to the second round, university name does not really come into play.

However, if you line people up, get them to sit a test and take the highest scoring through to the second round, university name does not really come into play. Well that's how it should be really! Not every young person has their head turned by RG and the most prestigious universities 'status'. Some may actually follow the course content they like the most, or want to be a student in smaller town/city that they'd feel more comfortable in.

It's subject dependant and to be honest, the lists here are more based on what was good 30 years ago! Most the universities you list op are the posher ones, not necessarily the good ones. The popular choices often are in the smaller more gentile cities parents want their kids to go to

Warwick for instance that many rate had terrible mental health support from personal experience, really bad drop out rates due to mh as in I know 5 young people, 3 from physics who got little or no support and dropped out.

My DD's course is ranked 1 in the world, yes in the world and none of you have mentioned it. And you won't because it's not a pretty city

@Piggywaspushed

Location snobbery, really good way of putting it!

I have 2 DD's and a dsd at university currently, you haven't mentioned them (actually one was mentioned in passing as good for some subjects) and I can assure you that all universities offer a good education but some are more suitable for different personalities and if there's sen think carefully ... smaller less prestigious are often better for offering an individual package to those who need it

Most the universities you list op are the posher ones Yes, I'd always assumed that because Newcastle is one of the favoured few amongst MN parents and their DC (seemingly), that it was a top one. Whereas it's further down the league tables than UEA where DS goes, a university that many parents don't even seem to have heard of (someone upthread on here clearly hadn't!). And Nottingham is another one that seems to get a lot more positive press than it potentially deserves, or that other less highly thought of ones equally deserve (but don't get on here).

www.theguardian.com/education/ng-interactive/2020/sep/05/best-uk-universities-for-history-of-art-league-table
A subject league table for DS2"s subject. He chose to firm the course / university ranked 17, with no.8 as his insurance, having also applied to and been offered a place at numbers 2, 4 and 9.

Courses are ranked down to no.20. Oxford and Cambridge only appear as 'other places which offer this subject'.

'Ah, but this is a Guardian league table', comes the cry - 'it will include rubbish items like student satisfaction; thickos needing their hands held at every turn, and getting it, so of course they think their crap university is the bee's knees'.

The university ranked at no.1 is St Andrews.