Live!
Fri 15 Dec 2017
- The award-winning student news website of Imperial College

Know something you shouldn't? Tell us, using our quick, 100% anonymous tip-off form!

Discussion

Concerning League Tables: Paddy Jackman

The comments below are unmoderated submissions by Live! readers. The Editor accepts no liability for their content, nor for any offence caused by them. Any complaints should be directed to the Editor.
May 29 2009 19:08
 

What's in a table? In the first of a series of interviews, Live! speaks to Head of Commercial Services, Paddy Jackman to get his opinion on whether falling League Table Results are a real concern.

Click Here for the Full Article

May 29 2009 19:56
 

Live! gremlins (which have an uncanny resemblance to Ashley Brown) have stolen the video and eaten it. It will (hopefully) reappear tomorrow morning when the Live! Editor and Live! Gremlin come in to do their IC Radio Show.

(Listen to VPT from 11am-13pm every Saturday.)

May 29 2009 23:17
 

Hadn't thought of this before, but now I think of it, this is a very good point:

"Imperial is completely unique if that is such an expression. The fact of the matter is that we train our students to be incredibly critical of everything that they are doing and the outcome is that they are analysing their experience subconsciously or consciously in minute detail, perhaps far more than we would expect at other universities. "

May 30 2009 10:15
 

Video is back...

May 30 2009 21:54
 

The guardian tables were particularily badly weighted this year. Thus the huge rise in position for St Andrews. A proportion of the score came from "Value Added" a score which encourages taking people with low grades (who would not be expected to do particularily well accademically) and then giving them firsts. as Imperial takes only the best rated students, then gives them a wide variety of marks we scored badly in this category.

Looking at the other items in the table we should have been in the top 5, perhaps even in the top 3 depending on the exact formulae used. But this final column dropped us down.

Which is why you should never believe newspapers run by progressive socialist hippies I guess...

May 31 2009 00:49
 

Yes, I totally agree, James. And this is one of the questions that we will be pointing towards the head of academic studies on Wednesday!! :-)

HOWEVER, the "Value Added" score was also in last year's tables and has actually RISEN this year... so we can't entirely blame that on us dropping by two places...

May 31 2009 22:22
 

Ah, but value added made sense in relation to entry tarrifs when the Scottish Universities were being compared under a different system. Now that Scottish Highers are comparable (through statistical wizardry) to English A levels the entry tarriff looks higher. However, most universities do not request Advanced Highers, meaning that St Andrews often accepts students with fails, Cs and other lower grades into first year.

These people come in with a low 'absolute' UCAS tarriff, and a high 'weighted' UCAS Tariff. As such, top Scottish Universities can benfit from higher marks in each column.

Add your comment:

If you can see this, something is broken (either with your browser, or with our system). Please leave the box below empty, or your comment will be considered to be spam.
Live!
Live!