 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| UK Universities 2001 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Oxbridge shows that college system puts it in league of its own By Jim Kelly Published: April 5 2001 15:18GMT | Last Updated: April 9 2001 08:36GMT |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Oxbridge colleges have for the first time made public their own spending on computers, books and staff for this year's FT survey of top universities. If the spending of the mainstream colleges which took part - 39 in Oxford and the 31 in Cambridge - is added to that of their respective central university they pull clear of the field. Next year, these figures will become part of the main league table. What they clearly show in this year's pilot project is that Oxbridge is in a league of its own. Even without the college spending Cambridge came top of this year's table with 81.13 points - ahead of Oxford on 77.67 - matching last year's positions. Imperial College comes third this year on 75.58 points. But if the college spending is added in then Cambridge jumps to 82.34, ahead of Oxford on 78.43, and Imperial slips back to 75.23. While the effect on the table is restricted - because Oxford and Cambridge are at the top anyway - the figures do reveal the huge difference to students made by college support. The data show for the first time the extent of the resources which underpin the unique tutorial system - where students are taught in very small groups - at the two medieval foundations. The biggest impact on students will come from the extra staff that colleges are able to employ - 456 at Oxford and 363 at Cambridge - equivalent to the entire academic staff of some universities lower down the table. Spending on college libraries is also impressive - with £3.8m spent at Oxford and £3.2m at Cambridge. Colleges believe that on-site libraries - often open 24 hours a day - add to students' ability to research essays. And IT spending is £1.9m and £2m respectively. The Oxbridge system - which sees most students staying in colleges - is moving quickly online. The colleges even have a role to play in funding research - with Oxford recording £2m in research funding at colleges and Cambridge £855,000. Income from industry is £5.1m at Oxford - £4.3m of this going to just one college. The industry income figure for Cambridge is £560,000. Supporters of the collegiate system - jealously guarded by Oxford and Cambridge - believe it produces quality graduates with outstanding employment prospects. Critics of the league tables say they only measure inputs - and this favours the biggest. They fail to show, say the critics, how efficient universities are at using their resources to produce quality students and research. Professor Andrew Oswald, of Warwick University, a persistent critic of the league tables, said he welcomed the extra information on the Oxbridge collegiate system as helping to complete the input picture. "But in my view it is vital to think about these tables as an economist would. How well are universities doing relative to the resources going in ?" He suggested that in future such input figures should be compared to an indicative figure for output - such as the average A-level point score of those winning places. In future, the FT league table will include the collegiate data. Over the years this will show how well the colleges can adapt in a new funding system. This year's data - for 1998-99 - represent the last year of direct payments of the so-called "college fee" from public funds. The rest of the FT league table is this year remarkably stable - with the top five places remaining unchanged. This reflects the large number of criteria used. SOAS, the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, jumps seven places - an outstanding achievement at the top end of the table. This specialist institution has a worldwide reputation among governments and industry for excellence.
The school got into the top ten in nine out of the 16 criteria measured - and in first class degrees saw the percentage success rate rise from 11.1 to 14.2. The success of SOAS again ensures four London colleges in the top ten - with King's College dropping out to 15th from 10th. Imperial continues to lead the London colleges - and is still well within touch of the Oxbridge leaders even with collegiate income included. It saw 24.72 per cent of its graduates getting first class degrees - up from 20.99 per cent.
The biggest number of places jumped by any institution is the 22 by the University of Abertay Dundee - from 88th to 66th. The university - formerly the Dundee Institute of Technology and Art - was one of the "industrial universities" set up in Scotland in 1902 to meet the needs of the empire. "We are very industrially focused - and on meeting the needs of professionals," says Prof Bernard King, the principal. "We want to become the digital university of Scotland." In some respects Abertay's success mirrors that at other highly focused new universities - like the University of Robert Gordon at Aberdeen. Abertay has sought to lead Scotland in the creative media and runs, for example, an MA in software engineering for games.
It jumped up the table thanks to two inputs - a 69 per cent increase in spending on computers and a 31 per cent jump in spending on library services. But one output level - average A-level points - rose as well, from 10.0 to 12.9, the equivalent of a grade and a half. This reflects greater competition for places. Abertay is opening new research units in order to improve facilities for students - including one on "embryonics" - designed to back up diplomas in entrepreneurship as students learn how to start and nurture small companies. Prof King believes that universities, such as Abertay have a regional role and should not be focused solely on attracting excellent candidates but on getting the best out of an average intake. He says: "We are not talking about the brightest people but people like you and -me,". He says that in the modern knowledge economy the majority of the population needs to be taught high quality skills. NCR in Dundee has exports valued at $2bn - 2 per cent of Scottish gross domestic product. Half the graduate intake is from Abertay. "These are just normal people driving a global business. That is what Abertay is about," he says. he rejects the "polyversity" tag sometimes given to the successful new universities, saying it merely borrows two ideas from the past. But the onward march of the "new universities" - created in 1992 largely from the old polytechnic sector - continues this year south of the border, too. Leeds Metropolitan University rises 10 paces to 72nd. The losers in this year's table include Brighton (down ten places), Thames Valley (also down ten) and Leeds and Staffordshire (both down nine). Loughborough and Heriot-Watt drop eight and Sheffield seven. Now that the FT league table is in its fourth year we are also able to look at the long-term performance of some universities. Two steady climbers are Nottingham and Essex - the latter slowly shrugging off its poor image of 1970s student unrest. Nottingham - which increasingly benefits from its central geographical position and excellent student facilities - has risen from 23rd in 1998 to 11th this year, while Essex has risen steadily from 35th to 25th, 25th and finally 17th this year. In contrast, universities which might feel concerned about their performance include Southampton and Leeds. The former slipped from 14th in 1998 to 17th, then 19th, and this year to 24th. Leeds started at 19th, rose to 18th then 16th, but this year drops back to 25th. The bottom spot was taken by the University of Paisley. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
