Publications such as The Guardian and The Times release university league tables each year, ranking universities in the UK based on factors such as student satisfaction, research quality, and graduate prospects. These can be effective tools for applicants, creating comparisons between top universities in order to inform decisions on where to apply. However, the focus on academics and employment means that they may not provide all the information students desire when considering which university to apply for; course quality is relatively comparable among top universities, leaving some to think that factors such as location and social life are far more important than academic rankings. I spoke to students to see how useful they considered league tables to be.
Almost every student I spoke to said that they had considered league tables when applying for university. Although, few said that this was the most important factor in their decisions. Location and social life took precedence for most, with multiple saying that they only looked at rankings after already deciding that Edinburgh would be their first choice. The sole student I spoke to that hadn’t looked said this was because, as a Scottish student, she knew she was going to be staying in Scotland, and with a smaller pool of universities to choose from, rankings didn’t matter as much to her.
While league table positions may not have been the main consideration of the students I spoke to, they certainly did inform the decisions of most. One student described having to rely on them to decide where to apply after not being able to attend any university open days. A different student commented that league tables are important, as they inform how the average person ranks universities. He believed that employers pay more attention to the name of the university you attended than details like the quality of individual courses.
However, another student said that rankings didn’t matter to her, as she thought there was little difference between top universities. She continued that scores on graduate employability prospects can be affected by the size of universities and the social connections of those that attend them, rendering rankings quite arbitrary.
This raises the issue of how useful league tables are — the top ten in most rankings are generally predictable, with prestigious institutions like Oxford and Cambridge reliably coming in near the summit. If differences outside the top ten are mostly minimal, what is the use of these rankings at all?
The accuracy of league tables is also questionable, given how many different rankings are available. For instance, the University of Edinburgh ranks 18th overall in the Complete University Guide’s rankings, 13th in The Guardian’s, and 25th in The Times’. With a difference of more than ten places between The Guardian and The Times, how can applicants know which one to trust?
Universities can also fluctuate significantly in position year to year, with Heriot-Watt University having risen 25 places in the Complete University Guide’s table since last year. If positions can oscillate between years this significantly, applicants may be left in doubt as to whether to believe an institution’s ranking each year.
These rankings can also create a distorted picture of how universities compare to each other, with there often being only slight differences in overall percentage scores outside of the top ten in any given table. In the Complete University Guide’s table, for example, there is only a ten per cent difference in overall score between 11th and 37th place.
League tables can affect how applicants perceive different universities. It is a common assumption that “Russell Group” is synonymous with “best”, but looking at the league tables, this is not necessarily the case. While Russel group universities do dominate the top end of the majority of rankings, it is not exclusive, with non-Russell Group Bath University being in the top ten in most tables. Other non-Russell Group universities like Loughborough and Lancaster also consistently hover around the top ten. In this case, league tables may be useful for highlighting that Russell Group universities are not necessarily the only options for applicants desiring a top-tier university.
It is worth noting that the Russell Group is self-selected, and that its perception of making up the UK’s best universities has been disputed. It has been said that the prestige of the Russell Group is based on marketing, rather than academic excellence. Empirical rankings are a useful tool in challenging the idea that exclusively Russel Group universities constitute the premier educational institutions in the UK.
While league tables certainly have their uses, it seems telling that the majority of the students I spoke to said that they weren’t the main factor in their university applications. They can highlight how non-Russell Group institutions can compete at the top level of education, but the extent to which rankings can vary year-to-year and publication to publication leaves their accuracy in question. Using league tables to inform research but ultimately prioritising more social aspects seems to be a common pattern among students.
Image by Leah Collins for The Student