How much store do you set by league tables?

[Thepleasureofyourcompany]

As the 2024 tables are now on The Complete Uni guide. Looking at what dd wants to study and some unis have moved up 30 or 40 places! That seems like a huge jump and could be complete anomalies.

She's looking at sports science and UEA is now in the top five despite not actually offering actual Sports Science (purely education based degrees).

Just wondered generally how seriously people take them?

If you say so. I think I would trust some universities above others! Computer Science is a lot more competitive than Sports Science so who goes where is probably believable. I didn’t say the tables as a whole were useless. I said a sports science table that included a uni that didn’t offer sports science was questionable. It’s obviously not accurate. Hey ho!

Computer Science is a lot more competitive than Sports Science so who goes where is probably believable.

I fail to see the link between competitiveness and believability, I'm afraid. You'll have to explain that one to me. Natural Sciences is a highly competitive course to get onto but neither CUG nor The Guardian list it as a course in its own right, they both wrap it into other areas. It's therefore quite difficult to compare Natural Sciences across universities per se, without digging a bit deeper, but it remains a highly desirable and ultra-competitive subject to study, no?

I said a sports science table that included a uni that didn’t offer sports science was questionable. It’s obviously not accurate.

Totally agree, it's poor. But the fact that a league table incorrectly lists a university as offering a subject which it does not is a failure on the part of the league table. It tells you absolutely zero about the subject or the table in general.

Yes it's silly to have UEA in there really as a sports science degree can qualify you to do some health care Masters but only if it's trad Sports Science with plenty of biology in it. You wouldn't qualify for, say, a physio conversion msc with the PE degree from UEA. Low entry standards as well which will attract people.

Computer Science is a lot more competitive than Sports Science so who goes where is probably believable

I think comp science is similar to most degrees including sports science- the most prestigious universities want As and A stars and yet there are lots that want Bs and Cs.

I think comp science is similar to most degrees including sports science- the most prestigious universities want As and A stars and yet there are lots that want Bs and Cs.

Computer Science is particularly competitive. Students with predicted grades of A star A star A star A star and impressive super-curriculars receive rejections. Some universities issue conditional offers at A star A star A star.

Well that's interesting but irrelevant when it comes to deciphering league tables. Plenty of unis on that list with lower offers than 3 x A stars.

That's not what the data shows,@NoraBattysCurlers. According to CUG the average grades across all universities for Computer Science is BBC so while I have no doubt some applicants score a lot higher than that, and some universities ask for much higher grades, the league table data does not support the contention that Computer Science is much more competitive than Sports Science.

Sorry quoting didn't work fully. But I'm agreeing with @Thepleasureofyourcompany in case it wasn't obvious.

I wouldn’t rely overmuch on league tables. As PP say, they are not terribly robust except at the very top.

QS is particularly vulnerable ad it solicits a huge number of random academics’ opinions every year, in a rather unfocussed manner: it can be gamed and occasionally shows weird results. QS is also not transparent. If you care about this sort of thing, the Shanghai Rankings are more careful.

The Guardian relies heavily on the NSS. I am no fan of NSS but it had its place. The Value Added component is useful.

For those who care about research rankings, probably the most useful metric is discipline-specific REF 2021 results. These are very careful, UK wide research rankings. No system is perfect but this is miles better and more comprehensive than any other one I know of.

The reason LSE comes out badly as mentioned by PP is that it is so small. The REF results or indeed discipline level research rankings correct this.

Another is that they all take into account UCAS points on entry.

So a uni with a lot of mature students goes down as the mature students often have Access courses, OU credits or even nothing.

My sister in law obtained a degree a couple of years ago, she trained as a nurse before it was a degree subject, I don't know if she has any UCAS points.

That's the same for many health care courses.

I think the same will happen now the police are becoming a graduate profession.

@Thepleasureofyourcompany So do you not think that the destinations of grads with the A stars and attending a top 10 uni for computer science are getting jobs with linked employers or other high calibre employers? I actually believe they probably do. Therefore I would accept destinations listed by top flight unis such as LSE for example.

Obviously this depends on what the student wants as a career. Would I expect such a high proportion of grads getting the same level of work from universities lower in the tables? No. I would not. The IFS looked at the earnings of the same degree from different universities. There are big differences. This must be down to who the grad works for. So if you are looking at this as a measure, league tables have some relevance. As well as uni information.

@sashh The police are recruiting grads. So if they are 21/22 years old I don’t see how it affects anything. If they are mature students, they are the same as all other mature students. They attend all universities. Including Oxbridge.

Always look at where the graduates go after. It is a very competitive world out there and if you are taking on £50k of debt you might want to ensure it means you earn more than working in a supermarket. Look at the LinkedIn profiles of newly hired graduates in good graduate jobs and see where they went to university.

Another is that they all take into account UCAS points on entry.

So a uni with a lot of mature students goes down as the mature students often have Access courses, OU credits or even nothing.

The average UCAS tariff points on entry is calculated from the points held by entrants under 21. UCAS tariff points for mature entrants (i.e. anyone old enough to be a graduate) don't go into the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) tables from which the league tables draw their data. Where the students on a course are predominantly mature, though, one or two school-leavers with particularly high or low A-Level grades can have a disproportionate effect on the average.

Access diplomas do carry UCAS tariff points anyway: have done since 2017. An Access to HE diploma with all graded units at distinction carries the same number of UCAS tariff points as 3 A-Levels at grade A.

The main issue with tariff points on entry - as someone else has pointed out - is that they are automatically much higher for Scottish students who complete Advanced Highers as well as Highers, so courses for which Scottish universities recruit predominantly Scottish students will have a high average UCAS tariff, which makes comparisons difficult.

@NoNotHimTheOtherOne with regard to your final point the CUG’s methodology statement indicates that an adjustment is made to account for the Scottish issue. I’d imagine the ST and Graun likely take a similar approach. The results are also adjusted in the CUG table to take account of the subject mix at each university.

As a teacher. I don't even look at ratings. They are meaningless. Gi and get a feel and see if it's the right fit

Most Scottish students go to uni from
Sixth year now with advanced highers or additional highers.

I know admissions don't double
count highers and advanced highers in the same subject taken in fifth and sixth year (yrs 12 & 13).

The main issue could be that advanced highers attract more UCAS points then the equivalent grade at A level. An A at advanced higher is worth 56 pts which is the same as an A star at A level.

In addition, an A at higher is worth 33 UCAS pts which is a lot more than an A at AS level. Students typically take five highers at the same time as well. Five As at higher in fifth year is the gold standard for university entrance in Scotland. This equates to 165 UCAS points in year 12. This is almost comparable to UCAS points of 3 A stars at A level.

@Maddy70 So how does that help social mobility? Or DC getting into the best uni they can? Is that advice aspirational? I’m amazed any teacher is saying this.

@Xenia I agree. I’m amazed people are so blaze about jobs.

I went to Cambridge and have a a very lowly paid creative job. Just because my mates are MPs and human rights lawyers doesn't mean everyone who goes to Cambridge ends up doing that!

It really is quite something how @TizerorFizz turns every single higher education post into a rant about working for top firms and the superiority of some courses and universities. Take a day off.

Meaningless ?

So you'd recommend someone predicted 3 As or above to go to Sunderland, say, over Durham if they liked Sunderland as a campus/town better @Maddy70 ?

Yep, the job stats were important for my son and probably the main stat he used from the league tables. Employment was important for him - he regarded it as the main reason for going to Uni. As it turned out, right decision. His Uni provided a lot of support re helping students to find jobs via sessions on how to find graduate scheme jobs (lists of websites etc), sessions giving hints and tips on online job applications, explaining all the different types of interviews (Ie in person, group, online, etc), and even doing "mock" interviews for each type. When the time came to apply for jobs, DS was very well prepared and got several offers, finally settling on a decent job with an International Blue Chip insurance company (the first that his University have had at that firm!). The Uni didn't actually "help" him apply and didn't have any "contacts" or "links", but they certainly went above and beyond to put him in the best position to seek out job adverts, to apply for them, and to confidently get through the interview stages.

I hope you don't give advice like that to your students! My son had a sixth form tutor who told them to ignore job stats and just choose a subject they thought they might like to study. There is some ridiculously bad advice given by teachers these days. Even my son knew his teacher was bonkers for telling them to choose a subject they liked, above all else. When decent graduate jobs are in such high demand, students need to do whatever they can to get the "best fit", unless of course they want to end up working in academia or a call centre.

Academia or a call centre? Huh? Anyway, I would - and do - one hundred percent tell my children and my students to study what they love. It is absurd to do anything else given the shifting labour needs and market, unless perhaps you are someone dead set on one of the professions, like law (hopefully to be replaced by AI soon) or medicine. But you can't do the best part of a decade for those without some love. Anyhow, to get back on topic, as a prof, let me tell you, ranking tables are nonsense.

Bear in mind that once you have a degree no one - bar law firms and some investment banks apparently - will give a monkeys what you got in your A levels. Most employers are only interested in your most recent qualifications.

Universities themselves definitely dont care.