Northumbria University

Cheers i may have to spend a year there if i dont get my grades

Its the science and technology institute for manchester university, it still exists, I was highlighting the my point.

I used the Times and the Telegraph, however for a different perspective you could use the Guardian, but not only are they the same results, but they use 'inclusiveness' as a measure, which is fairly unsuprising and hardly 'consistent' in demonstration academic excellence. The Times is the best indicator as it uses official teaching scores.

How are they inconsistent, based on the information they use to compile the tables?

I know what UMIST is. As far as I'm aware, UMIST as an institution was abolished when the universities merged in Manchester, and it's now simply Manchester University.

Newspaper rankings cannot be taken as gospel either, they are merely for guidance, not to be used as an application bible.

In the Times' rankings, universities are often in completely different positions from year to year, aside from those in the top five.

Why's that so implausible?

The university league tables in the Times and Telegraph are based on the official teaching and research gradings that departments and postgrad courses recieve when people say 'x university has been rated excellent' there is no other way of passing comment other than having first hand experience..

Like FW said, how is this so implausible? staff change, calibre of students change, funding changes, courses change... dare I say it, even facilities change

as for umist, it was only abolished in name, everything else remains, including its reputation..

I agree, obviously things change and the movement of a few places between years wouldn't cause me to question the integrity of the listings, but when you have reputable universities moving a large amount of places, both up and down, from year to year, you have to wonder.

I think the amalgamation of universities in Manchester was probably a bad thing. UMIST was an outstanding university, the met. wasn't. Having the two together makes it slightly less desireable, at least in my strangely-working little mind.

It was Manchester University & UMIST that amalgamated, not the Met..

why? oh why?

It isn't. Oxford Brookes is better than both.

Scruf - there goes the validity of my argument, then. Still, Manchester wasn't/isn't the best university...

Dont believe Renzo's said he's a journo

Maybe they ought to invest in a better website :evil: