Daily Mail University League table...

[DinkyDaisy]

In my scanning of news online I found it...
No subject tables.
Can only look at headlines on free version. Not seen a Daily Mail table before. Guessing new for them.
Obviously, as with all tables pinch of salt needed!

Graun table https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/sep/09/guardian-university-guide-2024-find-your-subject

CUG https://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings

DM https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/university-guide/article-12491201/University-rankings-league-table-Use-Daily-Mails-interactive-guide-right-uni-you.html

ST skulks behind its paywall, and with its latest effort due soon no point linking to the one from last autumn

with the Graun appearing to have upped the idiosyncrasy - presumably aiming to match the DM. St A first in the Graun - the irony of arguably the UK's least diverse uni being top of their table doubtlessly lost.

and an updated version of all 4 tables together; again based on the CUG top 40

Daily Mail and Guardian out on the same day. Coincidence of course!

Thanks @boys3!

I agree that SA is a little ironic for the Guardian. But it also makes it seem like they are sticking to their criteria and not “stacking the deck.” So all respect there.

I presume the DM is doing s league table because they are easy to do and get a lot of attention. Why miss out on the gravy train?

All those grandparents influencing grandchildren. It’s quite an unusual move for a red top.

Queen's Belfast does not even make it into the table at all! Presumably reflecting the DM's disapproval of the Windsor Agreement.

Did you not spot Ulster in there then

@titchy excluding both NI unis would have been too obvious even for the DM. 😄 they had to settle on 50%.

it’s hard to be serious with the DM but I do wonder how QUB got missed.

It was because they (and several others) didn't send the compiler their full profile. Nothing more sinister than that!

As far as I can see they all get data from the same sources. The difference is that others decide on the weighting to give each variable. (Ie the Guardian is very keen on student satisfaction, the QS on research.) The Mail is interactive so the student can adapt it according to what they are looking for.

I doubt there is anything sinister in this. The Mail has money and a huge readership so can afford to create this model and presumably they think it will be of interest to their demographic.

FWIW, the Mail is not a Red Top (Sun, Star and Mirror) but a tabloid like the Express. Since Paul Dacre left a few years ago, they seem to have be trying widen their appeal. The Guardian is losing readership and the Times is now shifting to the centre (perhaps in the expectation of a Labour Government) so the Mail may see some scope for repositioning. Innovations like this table may be about that rather than some sort of plot.

Nothing more sinister than that!

you're right of course @titchy I probably let my visceral dislike antipathy towards the DM get a bit carried away, and my somewhat snide comments took things a bit too far.

That along with some wonderful, although eye-opening given the Troubles, times visiting friends at QUB in the early 80s. Which probably meant its absence was more striking for me on a personal level.

The "slider" is quite fun I have to admit on the DM

As far as I can see they all get data from the same sources. The difference is that others decide on the weighting to give each variable. (Ie the Guardian is very keen on student satisfaction, the QS on research.) The Mail is interactive so the student can adapt it according to what they are looking for.

It's still risky to put too much faith in them. It's essential to read the details of methodology first (see https://www.mailplus.co.uk/info/316211/how-to-use-the-daily-mail-university-finder and https://www.mailplus.co.uk/university/314600 [pay wall]) so you know what the actual criteria are. The default setting is 25% based on National Student Survey data on student satisfaction, 30% on Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) progression data, 15% on research quality/funding and 30% on others (proportion of first-in-family, proportion getting 1st/2i honours, average entry UCAS tariff points [always significantly higher for Scottish universities] and student/staff ratio).

Please note that no measure of teaching quality exists: the "teaching excellence" slider is one of the student satisfaction measures.

I agree that you can't put too much faith in tables. However it is clear from reading this board that prospective students have very different priorities. A table that allows them to change weightings should help produce a sensible shortlist. A pity it is not by subject.

@Needmoresleep @NoNotHimTheOtherOne
What would the tables need to provide for you to have more faith in them?

Any table will be as good as the data it is based on.

So student satisfaction will depend on how many complete the survey and perhaps extraneous issues. Bournemouth U tends to bob up and down the Guardian table. My personal theory is that it depends on how good the weather was that summer.

London Universities tend to do less well on student satisfaction, yet some people love London and loved studying in London. (Me!)

So use the table, look at the data behind, and consider what you want. At the end of the day it is about course and fit.

An actual assessment of teaching carried out by subject experts rather than students - give them easy assignment they get good marks in = great teaching satisfaction. Really stretch their knowledge and give them something more taxing - poor teaching score!

Use benchmarked data rather than raw scores.

Don't use self-reported surveys (employment ones).

Would be my starter for ten.

Well the guardian's always was a bit out there but putting Portsmouth where they have had lost all credibility. They take anybody and it's easy compared to other universities, know people just graduated

@NoNotHimTheOtherOne can you access behind the DM paywall? the other tables, CUG etc, put in an adjustment to balance to a certain extent out the UCAS scores for Scotland. Presumably the DM one does too (?)

@boys3
I don't have access but I don't think DM do adjust - set all to zero apart from UCAS tariff points, and you get 6 Scottish in the top 10.

Edit - I like CUG for doing that. On DM I'm just setting UCAS tariff to 0%.

DM has Warwick (13) above Bristol (14) and Durham at (8) if you go only by ucas tariff points (and Nottingham no. 36)

Agree about the satisfaction metrics. Good thing about DM is that you can remove them, and UCAS tariff. Or anything you like!

Would prefer that they discount the Scottish UCAS tariff, like CUG do.

Totally useless without consideration by subject.

Does the DM table not allow you to sift by subject-specific criteria? If it doesn't then I agree with @PringleSpangle that it is a complete waste of space.

All sorts of post-1992 universities have a specialism in which their ranking might be way, way higher than their overall ranking, particularly in some of the more vocational subjects.

Does the DM table not allow you to sift by subject-specific criteria?

Having swallowed any principles I even registered on the DM site - and there seems to be nothing at subject level.

Given this previous front page the whole notion of the DM uni league table is all a bit.......odd