Reg mashup rates CompSci unis for books, booze and boogie

The Complete University Guide has released its annual ratings of the best UK universities for computer science studies. Cambridge, Imperial College London, Oxford, St Andrews and Bristol universities take the first five slots. The latter is the big mover among the elite, having shot up from eighth spot to fifth since the 2016 …

[Anonymous Coward]

Fewest Tokens

They should also be ranked by the number of token wimmin they are forced to admit, so potential students cursed with a willy know where not to bother applying.

[caffeine addict]

Re: Fewest Tokens

I was trying to decide if you are a troll, a bad humourist, or an arse. So I looked at your other posts. The use of "feminazi" answered that one for me.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Fewest Tokens

Nobody uses networks based on token women anymore.

Having all the men and women rush around together with collision detection was much more efficient - and more fun.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Re: Fewest Tokens

I never got the multiple access working, though.

[Michael Wojcik]

Re: Fewest Tokens

I never got the multiple access working, though.

Modern approaches rely on MIMO for that.

[Chris Miller]

I can't resist quoting the great Liverpudlian

Computer science is to science as plumbing is to hydraulics.

The Devil's DP Dictionary (1981) Stan Kelly-Bootle

[Efros]

Strathclyde

The Students Union at Strathclyde used to be the largest licensed premises in Scotland, and they still managed to make a loss.

[Anonymous Coward]

My son is at Leicester University and they take every possible opportunity to inform you that they are top of the table of Universities that have discovered Richard III.

[EddieD]

Time to do a Basil Fawlty

Glad we're not on the list...we don't want any riff-raff

[Omgwtfbbqtime]

Manchester and shooting up

Must resist drug joke....

[Trainee grumpy old ****]

I, for one, welcome our Precog masters etc.

"...having shot up from eighth spot to fifth since the 2016 survey."

In the real world it is still 2015 yet not only is the 2016 survey out but there has been another one out after that from which this progress is being reported?

<fx> whistles softly and backs away very slowly, </fx>

[damworker]

Too late!

Bit late if you were thinking of applying to Cambridge for 2016 as the deadline was 3 weeks ago.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Too late!

I don't understand the ratings; what has admission difficulty got to do with it? If St. Andrews and Imperial offer equivalent prospects and are easier to get into, why apply to Cambridge?

And yes, I am a Cambridge graduate. Though in my day Comp Sci wasn't even a subject.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: what has admission difficulty got to do with it?

I dunno, but one top London uni upped it's physics admission criteria ... and got more physics applications. It's an interesting exercise to assume there is a causal relationship, and try to work out why that might be.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: what has admission difficulty got to do with it?

It's an interesting exercise to assume there is a causal relationship, and try to work out why that might be."

Presumably the same logic as selling an iPhone for £750, which also seems to work.

[Michael Wojcik]

Re: what has admission difficulty got to do with it?

Presumably the same logic as selling an iPhone for £750, which also seems to work.

In other words, you're suggesting that a spot at a university can be a Veblen good¹, where demand increases with higher cost.² That's likely true; in fact, it's almost inevitable, since demand is often taken as a sign of quality for scarce goods. (That's why artificial scarcity is a useful marketing tactic.)

But there may be contributing factors. I've studied at five programs in three US universities, graduate and undergraduate, and taught at a couple. My wife is the director of one of the most successful³ graduate program in her field. So I have some experience with what entices students to apply and, if offered a place, attend a program here in the States.

Rigorous admissions standards (particularly if those standards are based more on actual academic performance and demonstrations of competence and intellectual vigor, rather than standardized test scores⁴ or other simplistic metrics) may, with some probability, imply a student body which is more competent, dedicated, and focused; if the admissions process is decent, one that has greater diversity of experience and interest; a program that is not simply a degree mill; and a faculty which is more engaged with students (because the students are more interesting). Those all contribute to a better classroom experience and a brisker pace which means more material can be covered.

¹Depending on the university's ability to get it perceived as such, which is largely a matter of reputation and somewhat less one of marketing.

²Here "cost" includes the effort required to be admitted, and not simply price.

³For example, likely the best at placing graduates in jobs of their chosen type; among the best at successfully recruiting students, both in terms of total applications and at recruiting top-choice students; short time-to-degree; high student academic productivity.

⁴As someone who routinely scored top marks in standardized tests, from grade school through the GRE, I'm fairly sure they primarily measure the subject's ability to do well on standardized tests. The main skills required for most of them are relaxation, focus, and the ability to learn and use test-taking tricks.