Complete University Guide
#1 Cambridge (7th year in a row)
#2 Oxford
#3 St Andrews
#4 LSE
#5 Imperial
#6 Durham
#7 Lancaster
#8 Loughborough
#9 Bath
#10 UCL
Guardian
#1 Cambridge (7th year in a row)
#2 St Andrews
#3 Oxford
#4 Loughborough
#5 Durham
#6 Bath
#7 Imperial
#7 Lancaster
#9 Warwick
#10 Exeter
Cambridge ranked top in 27 out of 41 subjects, Oxford in 9/41, St Andrews in 4/41
UK friends, what is the deal with Loughborough in these rankings? A school with an offer rate of 80%, with no real faculty of international reputation, and with a rank in THE and others as like the 500th best university in the world (next to the likes of the University of Qatar and KwaZulu Natal.... Why would this rank so high?
We get the point, OP. Cambridge is clearly better overall these days BUT its econ faculty and PhD program are still LRM and this is an ECON FORUM so GTFO
UK rankings are student satisfaction rankings. In global ranings Ox dominates Cam in US News Global Universities, Times Higher Education and QS, while Cam dominates in ARWU. Not so clear overall.
Complete University Guide
#1 Cambridge (7th year in a row)
#2 Oxford
#3 St Andrews
#4 LSE
#5 Imperial
#6 Durham
#7 Lancaster
#8 Loughborough
#9 Bath
#10 UCL
Guardian
#1 Cambridge (7th year in a row)
#2 St Andrews
#3 Oxford
#4 Loughborough
#5 Durham
#6 Bath
#7 Imperial
#7 Lancaster
#9 Warwick
#10 Exeter
Cambridge ranked top in 27 out of 41 subjects, Oxford in 9/41, St Andrews in 4/41
EXETER STRONG
Guardian ranking includes things like (i) Value added = grades of those who graduate relative to grades when they entered, (ii) student satisfaction, (iii) teaching ratings. So, (ia) if you give high grades you do better in their ranking, (iia) if students have low expectations of the course, you do well, and (iiia) if you do fun courses where students don't learn much you do well.
It's a meaningless ranking.
Guardian ranking includes things like (i) Value added = grades of those who graduate relative to grades when they entered, (ii) student satisfaction, (iii) teaching ratings. So, (ia) if you give high grades you do better in their ranking, (iia) if students have low expectations of the course, you do well, and (iiia) if you do fun courses where students don't learn much you do well.
It's a meaningless ranking.
low ranked bro detected
UK bro here, I'd forgotten that Loughborough existed. Isn't it a sports science college?
And engineering, I think. But most people I know went there to pursue a "career" in athletics.
Same as st Mary's in London, which feels like it's a bunch of runners with a university and degrees in basket weaving attached.
for economics undergrad, both quality of teaching and reputation:
1. Oxford (think about PPE, most PMs are from Oxford, so you get the best from an economics degree
2. Cambridge (of course, no one will not go here)
3. LSE/UCL LSE has an edge, but not much
4. Durham/Warwick now it depends on your location preference: If you like a college life (read, posh) but fails Oxbridge, go to Durham. If you want a slightly better training (on Maths) go to Warwick.
5. Bristol/Nottingham. If you fail the top 4 (not including Durham) and cares about prestige (or born posh), go to Bristol (but teaching there is carried by teaching staff, not research staff, and no economics school there). If you're from lower-middle-class families, go to Nottingham. The quality of teaching/life/research is better at Nottingham. People are friendlier.
5. St Andrews/Edinburgh: Of course if you like living in Scotland, go there.
6. Bath/Imperial (they don't have Econ courses): if you're more interested in Accounting/Finance/Business joint programs.
7. Surrey/UEA/Loughborough/QMUL ... Putting Loughborough here is a stretch. Until recently, it's just a sports university and famous for that. Surrey/QMUL has been strong in the last 20 years. UEA is coming up, but too far away from everything and the faculty is only improving recently - being bundled also in a business doesn't help.
Rest: Then you have the likes of Leicester and others, can't even remember the names.
for economics undergrad, both quality of teaching and reputation:
1. Oxford (think about PPE, most PMs are from Oxford, so you get the best from an economics degree
2. Cambridge (of course, no one will not go here)
3. LSE/UCL LSE has an edge, but not much
4. Durham/Warwick now it depends on your location preference: If you like a college life (read, posh) but fails Oxbridge, go to Durham. If you want a slightly better training (on Maths) go to Warwick.
5. Bristol/Nottingham. If you fail the top 4 (not including Durham) and cares about prestige (or born posh), go to Bristol (but teaching there is carried by teaching staff, not research staff, and no economics school there). If you're from lower-middle-class families, go to Nottingham. The quality of teaching/life/research is better at Nottingham. People are friendlier.
5. St Andrews/Edinburgh: Of course if you like living in Scotland, go there.
6. Bath/Imperial (they don't have Econ courses): if you're more interested in Accounting/Finance/Business joint programs.
7. Surrey/UEA/Loughborough/QMUL ... Putting Loughborough here is a stretch. Until recently, it's just a sports university and famous for that. Surrey/QMUL has been strong in the last 20 years. UEA is coming up, but too far away from everything and the faculty is only improving recently - being bundled also in a business doesn't help.
Rest: Then you have the likes of Leicester and others, can't even remember the names.
This bro knows his shizzle
for economics undergrad, both quality of teaching and reputation:
1. Oxford (think about PPE, most PMs are from Oxford, so you get the best from an economics degree
2. Cambridge (of course, no one will not go here)
3. LSE/UCL LSE has an edge, but not much
4. Durham/Warwick now it depends on your location preference: If you like a college life (read, posh) but fails Oxbridge, go to Durham. If you want a slightly better training (on Maths) go to Warwick.
5. Bristol/Nottingham. If you fail the top 4 (not including Durham) and cares about prestige (or born posh), go to Bristol (but teaching there is carried by teaching staff, not research staff, and no economics school there). If you're from lower-middle-class families, go to Nottingham. The quality of teaching/life/research is better at Nottingham. People are friendlier.
5. St Andrews/Edinburgh: Of course if you like living in Scotland, go there.
6. Bath/Imperial (they don't have Econ courses): if you're more interested in Accounting/Finance/Business joint programs.
7. Surrey/UEA/Loughborough/QMUL ... Putting Loughborough here is a stretch. Until recently, it's just a sports university and famous for that. Surrey/QMUL has been strong in the last 20 years. UEA is coming up, but too far away from everything and the faculty is only improving recently - being bundled also in a business doesn't help.
Rest: Then you have the likes of Leicester and others, can't even remember the names.This bro knows his shizzle
Agree for the most part except for oxford. PPE is prestigious but doesn't train you at all for phd. And Oxford doesn't have a non-PPE econ major. I'd rank cambridge first and lse second.
At the MSc level, a similar ranking would be:
1. LSE (EME).
2. UCL, Warwick.
3. LSE (econ), Cambridge, Oxford.
4. Essex, Bristol, Nottingham, Edinburgh, QMUL.
5. The rest.
PhD
1. LSE.
2. UCL.
3. LBS/Warwick/Cambridge.
4. The rest.
for economics undergrad, both quality of teaching and reputation:
1. Oxford (think about PPE, most PMs are from Oxford, so you get the best from an economics degree
2. Cambridge (of course, no one will not go here)
3. LSE/UCL LSE has an edge, but not much
4. Durham/Warwick now it depends on your location preference: If you like a college life (read, posh) but fails Oxbridge, go to Durham. If you want a slightly better training (on Maths) go to Warwick.
5. Bristol/Nottingham. If you fail the top 4 (not including Durham) and cares about prestige (or born posh), go to Bristol (but teaching there is carried by teaching staff, not research staff, and no economics school there). If you're from lower-middle-class families, go to Nottingham. The quality of teaching/life/research is better at Nottingham. People are friendlier.
5. St Andrews/Edinburgh: Of course if you like living in Scotland, go there.
6. Bath/Imperial (they don't have Econ courses): if you're more interested in Accounting/Finance/Business joint programs.
7. Surrey/UEA/Loughborough/QMUL ... Putting Loughborough here is a stretch. Until recently, it's just a sports university and famous for that. Surrey/QMUL has been strong in the last 20 years. UEA is coming up, but too far away from everything and the faculty is only improving recently - being bundled also in a business doesn't help.
Rest: Then you have the likes of Leicester and others, can't even remember the names.
We get the point, OP. Cambridge is clearly better overall these days BUT its econ faculty and PhD program are still LRM and this is an ECON FORUM so GTFOUK rankings are student satisfaction rankings. In global ranings Ox dominates Cam in US News Global Universities, Times Higher Education and QS, while Cam dominates in ARWU. Not so clear overall.
Everyone at my school gets a blow jerb but still we don't rank near the top because student satisfaction rankings get a dman in the US.
-Florida State University bro.