Talk:Universities in the United Kingdom

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scottish Universities[edit]

Scottish universities should have their own article. I already see that the ancient universities do, but this still does not really reflect the different educational tradition in this country MacRusgail 22:58, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • You will find that they each (probably) already have their own articles. But you don't need to ask for permission to make a new article: be BOLD. Remember, though, that the article needs to have enough unique stuff to say that it isn't just a duplicate of what we already have. Take a look around and see what you can find. -Splash 23:06, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Overseas fees[edit]

I was under the impression that overseas people from europe can get state help (at least if they are from the EU). Is this correct? John 15:34, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

EU citizens must be treated the same as British citizens. They pay the same tuition fees (if applicable) and they are eligible for the same social welfare benefits as British citizens. I don't think they can take out student loans however. But then the student loans company is a for-profit company and not part of the government. - FrancisTyers 15:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The only exception being that (I think) EU students are not eligible for maintenance (as opposed to fees) remittance when awarded a research council sponsored postgraduate studentship. Badgerpatrol 02:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think this is the case. But thats research council, not state. I think thats where the difference lies... - FrancisTyers 11:06, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Multi-Ethnic Composition of Student and Staff[edit]

1)What is the ethnic composition of students and staff within UK Higher Education institutions?

2)Is there a difference between the ethnic composition of different universities (for example, the Russell Groups universities)?

3)Are students from one ethnic group more likely to apply for courses of a particular type in preference to students of a different ethnic groups?

4)Are students from one ethnic group more likely to attend different universities than are students from other ethnic groups?

5) What is the representation of different ethnic groups at different levels of student representation? (for example, within the Student Unions body, for example?)

I think that, in the interests of *truth*fulness, it is best to include information concerning the racial and ethnic composition of various universities. Patterns may emerge concerning differences in intake, differences in those students who are affected by Tuition fees, etc... And, also, differences in course uptake. For example, I imagine that Russell Groups Universities have a separate student intake composition when compared to other UK/British Universities.

MrASingh 21:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All this data is at HESA.ac.uk 137.222.37.6 (talk) 15:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

peculiarities[edit]

Hi, the comment about the UK being unusual in that most students go to uni far from home. Fair enough - but is there any reason for this that we can write about? --Timmywimmy 12:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it might be because the original English universities (Oxford and Cambridge) were far from the bigger cities so there was always a tradition of studying away from home. I’ve met many students from England who talked about student life as a rite of passage involving moving away and cutting the apron-strings. Growing up in Scotland I found the reverse; it was traditional there to pass from local school to local uni, and commute from your parents home; the Scottish universities were mostly in the cities and a 17-year old facing a four-year degree could financially cope better with family support. This might be more common to the rest of the world but I’ve no figures on this (although I have heard that English degrees are the shortest in the world). I now teach in London and find a huge proportion of sixth formers only applying to universities they can commute to for reasons of expense, so I wonder if its still such a rite of pasage as it was.

I'd presume the tradition grew, or was cemented by the fact that until the early 1990s, students got grants which more than covered their rent, plus in the case of Scottish students in England, they also got travel allowance. So why not go and have fun out of sight of the parents? I went from a Scottish city to an English University and had a great time. ;) – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 11:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Has it also anything to do with English students historically being used to studying far away from home by going to boarding schools, which might have fed a lot of students into English universities in past times? Whereas Scots originally couldn't attend University south of the border anyway unless they were Anglican, so they'd have to study locally?

I think it has more to do with the original comment being a load of cobblers. It's not my perception that British students are any more prone to studying far from home than students in other countries, but if supportive stats can be shown then fair enough. Badgerpatrol 22:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misc[edit]

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Who keeps putting Warwick in the elite group? What rubbish! They only got 6 x 5* in the last RAE. That's not top notch. Bristol, Manchester and Edinburgh way out-gun that. UCL's credentials are a class above again. Even Southampton got 8 x 5*! _________________________________________________________________________________________

I think that it is important that we don't disadvantage small or big universities. So a big universities with good research should be included with small universities with good research. It is very hard to come up with a definitive list. Thanks.

OK, I concede that Bristol, Edinburgh and Manchester all have greater RAE scores than either Lancaster or Southampton. I leant too much weight to the Sunday Times table. However, if the number of departments at grade 5 or 5* is the accepted criteria, then Southampton (8 x 5* and 16 x 5) and Nottingham (5 x 5* and 21 x 5) have much more right to be in this list than St. Andrews (2 x 5* and 15 x 5) or York (3 x 5* and 15 x 5), or, arguably even Warwick (6 x 5* and 20 x 5). And what about the LSE (7 x 5* and 5 x 5) which, in fairness, is a more specialised university than most?

152.78.18.145- The article should be NPOV and you have an obvious bias for certain universities. You are focussing too much on newspaper tables. The article should be based on the actual RAE results. Look at the link provided below for your attention. The newspaper league table rankings you point out are measured diferently compared to actual RAE results. Even in newspaper tables Bristol and Edinburgh always completely dominate lower-tier universities like Southampton or Lancaster.

"lower tier"??? Well that snide comment must come from a superior oxbridge ####! Probably a public school graduate to boot!

To anon 152.78.18.145 you have got it wrong here. Please look at RAE results as Bristol, Manchester and Edinburgh have far more right to claim to be post-graduate universities than Lancaster, St Andrews or Southampton. Look please don't delete again as you are simply incorrect.

Can we edit from a NPOV (neutral) perspective here. Read my comments as yours are wholly inaccurate, you obviously ignored my comments below. Read my comments and look at the RAE for yourself. How on earth can you say Bristol is not at the cutting edge of research is amazing? It got 15, 5* RAE ratings, the most behind Oxbridge and UCL. That means that only 3 other universities in the UK were conducting more cutting-edge research. You can't just select random newspaper league tables that favour the university you study at. Can you read my comments below. Every newspaper league table uses different methods of calculating their research statistics. To dispute your claim that Bristol is not at the cutting edge of research lets compare Bristol and Lancaster's RAE results. Bristol: 1,6* rating 15,5* ratings and 21,5 ratings. Lancaster: 4,5* grade ratings 10,5 ratings. On this evidence Bristol has 'far' more right to claim to be a research university as opposed to Lancaster. It has more than double the amount of postgraduate students, has far more departments conducting cutting-edge research ie: at 5* level and is generally perceived by everyone except you as being a top research university, It gets more than triple the research funding. Even if we use your Sunday Times league table the difference is minute, about 6 points and is an average calculated by individuals based on subjects etc- giving favour to 'arts' and small universirties. The Sunday Times and Times research statistics seriously favour smaller institutions as well. And even on those the differences are minute. Please lets comprimise here, and list some common choices although I and serious analysts would seriously disagree with you on this one. Remember these articles are meant to be neutral. I don't go to Bristol or Manchester I just want this article to be accurate. If you still don't agree with me at least answer the points I have made during my two posts. Thanks. Please discuss before you delete again. Follow this link for RAE results http://www.hero.ac.uk/rae/ . Once again based on the ST table, the differences a minute- so to say one university is cuttin-edge based on a difference of 5 statistical points is absurd.


The Sunday Times Top Ten for Research table is based on the RAE and on the amount of research funding received. Check out the following link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8405-1246315,00.html Whatever their past glories, Bristol and Edinburgh are simply not at the cutting edge of research today!


That is not true and is a ridiculous statement. Bristol gained 15, 5* top research grades in the latest research assesment and a further 21 departments were awarded the 5 grade. This means that 36 departments were conducting research at standards of international excellence. Only Oxford, Cambridge and UCL can match these figures. 78% of Bristol's departments were rated as intenationally excellent in the RAE. Bristol is only one of 4 British universities in the Coimbra Group of leading European reseach universities and is a member of the Russell Group, which is based on research funding. The university has also attained 5 Nobel prizes for the quality of its research and has more research students than half of the universities you mention. Bristol was also ranked in the top 100 in two recent league tables for top reseach universities in the world behind only Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial and Edinburgh in the UK on average. As far as newspaper league tables Bristol consistenly ranks in the top ten. The measures you were using were newspapers calculations of averages and vary massively depending on the newpaper you look at. A more serious list would take into account the types of departments, research reputation, citations, postgraduate students, research funding etc. The new list is not comprehensive but is far better than the one previously stated. How can you say that Lancaster, Southampton or Bath is a better research university than Bristol, this is a ridiculous statement. Look at the RAE results please. Also using the words 'clearly lead the field' is completely incorrect as even by the measures you were using Bristol, Edinburgh, Manchester and others were either very close or ahead in some newspaper league tables of the universities already listed. I refer you to The Times and Sunday Times league tables. Please don't change the list again- we are editing from a neutral perspective here. Everything I say also applies to Manchester- a university with 23 Nobel prizes. I think that makes it slightly more legitimate as a research university than Southampton or Lancaster.

While it is an undeniably popular undergraduate university, Bristol is not among the top group of research universities according to either the RAE or any of the newspaper league tables. Nor is Edinburgh.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

sorry to shunt this on again, but it should probably be at the singular form, "British university". I'll move it on later today unless someone else does the honours (no pun intended. haha) -- Tarquin 15:13 Sep 10, 2002 (UTC)

Recent academic analysis of published statistics has pointed to the existence of 4 groupings of universities in terms of academic performance: the elites, the top old universities, the other old universities, and the new universities (ex-polytechnics and others that have achieved university status since 1992) (WHAT IS THE SOURCE FOR THIS??? - It doesn't seem credible!) (NB, I'm moving the above from the main page, not expressing it myself.)

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

  • Splash's changes just now:
  • I added the new tuition fees system to the funding sections and left what was already there with minor corrections.
  • I removed the silly list about 'popular' postgrad places. There was no cited basis for any of those, popular as they may appear to be. To revert that, would, I think need some ratio of oversubscription for PG places. HESA have simple numbers here for 2003/4, but that is not necessarily a 'popularity' indicator since using that table in rank order would be nothing other than a measure of raw size. I couldn't quickly find a ratio statistic anywhere.
  • Oxbridge not being in the top-20 for engineering is one of the most often abused statistics in these tables, for the reasons I have given here. It is fair to say that the other engineering faculties are to blame for the misuse in no small part. Still, it had no place on Wikipedia, and providing the explanation ought to help dissuade reverts on that. I'm not at Oxbridge, for the record.
-Splash 00:07, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

king's college london[edit]

there is not enough info. hereon king's college london. it is oneofvery few british unis to have a world-renowned reputation and is also the fourth oldest institution to have been awarded its charter. it has numerous faous alumni and is generally a very prestigious uni, please see the KCL page and alter this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.100.170 (talk)

This is an overview of the UK system. No one university is disproportionately mentioned and nor should they be. Badgerpatrol 12:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Londiniensis[edit]

why has someone excluded university of london from the post nominal section (londin.) is commonly used. king's and the uni oflondon has also been excluded from academic heraldry section, both institutions have shields just look for them —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.100.170 (talk)

Distance (again)[edit]

In the United Kingdom the vast majority of university students attend universities situated a long distance from their family homes

This really needs to be sourced. My hunch is that this is not (or at least no longer) the case, but experiences can differ wildly. (For the record I'm currently based at Queen Mary, University of London, which has a majority of local students.) The problem is that the "traditional student" - the stereotype is a middle class aged 18-21 undergraduate studying full time - is actually a minority. These stats from HESA show that only 61% of higher education students are full-time. Generally part-time students do not "go away" to university.

"Family home" is not a terribly useful term given the number of mature students - I've often heard "over 50%" cited (but can't immediately think of a source) - where is their family home? For that matter many postgraduates are equally heavily detached from the parental home, often considering their current dwelling to be their "permanent" home. Often those applying to continue straight after undergraduate study use their university address for applying (making a lot of statistics about PG applications distorted).

And with the introduction of tuition fees in the last decade there have been noticable shifts as more and more students apply to local universities or part-time/distance learning - the Open University has noticed a significant increase in the number of 18-21 year olds applying. Universities themselves are altering the pattern of provision of higher education to make it more locally available - look for instance at the article Combined Universities in Cornwall or at other universities that are expanding provision across the county/region, rather than creating more provision on a single site for people to go away to (e.g. the University of Kent, with expansion in the past decade in Medway, rather than around the existing Canterbury campus). Timrollpickering 17:37, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The claim is still there, I'm adding a citation needed tag for now. --Physics is all gnomes (talk) 19:07, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fees[edit]

I believe fee's have been raised to £3175 for 08/09. Not sure though, so didn't want to edit the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.233.89 (talk) 13:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They have, but it'd be a thankless task to keep updating the figures each year - I'd suggest removing all current figures and perhaps just leaving the historical jumps.147.188.213.178 (talk) 11:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding prospective students with a double nationality[edit]

It has been my experience that students with dual EU/non-EU nationalities run the risk of being charged important overseas rates. A student who presents an official document, passport, etc. originating from a country not part of the EEA is exposed to the risk of being charged overseas rates, despite his possible European origins. For some Universities, that means multiplying the admission fees by ten. For example, a student presenting a double nationality, be it Canadian-French, or Ukrainian-English, will most likely be charged overseas rates, despite possible agreements between these countries (Commonwealth, etc.). The solution to this problem is to present only one citizenship to the University applied to: the European one.

--Achiappa (talk) 10:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The rate charged depends on where the student is resident as well as their nationality. Someone with dual nationality will be charged home student fees if they have been resident in the EU for the previous three years, but overseas fees if they have not.

Post-nominals[edit]

I have never encountered anyone who has used the name of their university within a post-nominal. I think this is confusing CV's, where locations are listed, with parenthesis such as (Hons) that are used post-nominal and indicate that the degree was awarded with Honours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjmtlewy (talk • contribs) 22:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have, many times. It's particularly common in school and university prospectuses where the recruitment department are keen to show off the staff's qualifications. It also comes up a bit on email signatures and business cards. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:58, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

redirections[edit]

I don't myself know how to do redirections, but if someone could fix it so that "Higher Education in Britain" was enought o get you to this page, I would like that ! Johncmullen1960 (talk) 12:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Physics is all gnomes (talk) 19:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate influence[edit]

The article says: "As universities in the United Kingdom have been publicly funded institutions, there is less corporate influence,[citation needed] with United Kingdom universities receiving much smaller financial endowments in comparison to what many of the larger universities in the United States of America receive."

That there is less corporate influence seems a pretty vague claim, what does it actually mean? I think it needs a citation and/or the wording tightening up.--Physics is all gnomes (talk) 19:11, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Universities in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:10, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Universities in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Universities in the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:42, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Universities_in_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1205843982"