yo sag.do u think its wise to stduy a course thats new in any university?i just discovered that the course im gonna study has jus been introduced!

tek1:

yo sag.do u think its wise to stduy a course thats new in any university?i just discovered that the course im gonna study has jus been introduced!

You have to consider it on case by case basis. Ask yourself the following questions:

1) Is there a demand for the skills the course teaches in the respective/relevant industry?

2) Does the University offering the course have expertise and enough clout (i.e teaching, infrastructure, reputation) in the subject area to sell the new course and graduating students to the employers in the relevant industry?

3) Is the new course a disruptive and innovative course that fills a gap in the industry that no (or few) other university offer?

4) Will the course sufficiently differentiate you positively from other candidates that studied a different course (maybe a more holistic, not specialist course) that previously quasi-satisfied the industry demand?

The more your answer of "Yes" progressively builds from question 1 to 4, the more it is a great opportunity/good idea.

At the end of the day, all courses were new at some point.

sag.thks once again dogg.hope i'll get to see ya whn i get dere! na visa remain

tek1:

sag.thks once again dogg.hope i'll get to see ya whn i get dere! na visa remain

Good stuff, homeboy, I dey. Best of luck with the visa.

Endowment funds are financial donations to Universities by ex-students, businesses, philantropists etc to help run the school, conduct research or support students.

The donors to the fund normally instruct that the money should be invested as an untouchable principal in some security and only the income from the investment should be spent, so that the donation last for future generations of students.

Endowments have historically been a big thing in America since the 1800s. Today, universities there have huge endowments. For example, Harvard's endowment fund is bigger than Nigeria's annual budget. Endowments are big there because a lot of the top Unis are private, hence they rarely get funds from government to run the school so they have to get it elsewhere (endowment and school fees) and their alumni play a key role in endowment donations. It is not as big in the UK as virtually all universities are public, so the government historically have always provided funds annually for the operations of the uni.

Yet still, a lot of UK unis have endowment funds on the side but focus on them have been very, very low until the last 10 years. The biggest 2 are Cambridge and Oxford, but if you compared their funds to the unis in US, Cambridge will not enter the top 6 and Oxford not in top 9. Five years ago, this would have been worse (both will not enter top 30), it is just recently both universities made a huge fundraising campaign to beef up endowments and make it a strategic source of funds. Edinburgh that is 3rd in UK, I am sure, will not enter the top 100 in US. The key point to note is that UK unis historically have just depended on government for funds (something most US unis do not have good access to) and on the research grants they get from companies. Also a big endowment is usually only as relevant in determining a universities richness/funding as the interest generated, since it is this interest that is (usually) spent.

Endowment funds give strong indications of:

1) How well past students of a Uni have done as (a) they have disposable income to donate and (b) the size of the donation indicates how well-off they might be. If the students are doing well enough to be freely donating, and high sums too, then it suggests the uni can aid attendees' careers.

2) Respect for the university in the business world. If businesses and philantropists are donating that much to a uni, then it likely shows the uni is highly regarded.

But it is far better to look at it from the funds available per student:

Top 10 UK uni's for Endowment Funds per student
  1) Cambridge   £222,875
  2) Oxford         £171,414
  3) Edinburgh    £6,800
  4) LSE             £6,624
  5) Liverpool     £6,064
  6) KCL             £4,880
  7) Glasgow       £4,345
8.) Imperial      £4,050
  9) St Andrews  £3,690
10) Durham        £3,400

Top 10 UK uni's for Endowment Funds (Absolute)
  1) Cambridge   £4,100m
  2) Oxford         £3,600m
  3) Edinburgh    £164.7m
  4) Manchester  £137.8m
  5) KCL              £103.6m
  6) Liverpool      £103.5m
  7) Glasgow       £102.5m
8.) Reading       £71.6m
  9) Birmingham  £71.1m
10) LSE             £57.3m

Compare with US:

Top 10 US uni's for Endowment Funds (Absolute)
  1) Harvard               £17,108m
  2) Yale                    £10,884m
  3) Stanford              £8,413m
  4) Princeton             £8,409m
  5) UTexas (All)         £8,108m
  6) MIT                    £5,321m
  7) Michigan (All)       £4,000m
8.) Columbia             £3,929m
  9) Northwestern       £3,630m
10) UPenn                 £3,447m

BBC picks up my observation earlier on this thread about PPE at Oxford.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11136511

[size=18pt]Why does PPE rule Britain?[/size]

It is the degree of choice for the Westminster elite, claiming six cabinet members and three Labour leadership contenders among its alumni. Why does Oxford's politics, philosophy and economics course dominate public life?

In the corridors of power, at the very highest reaches of government, a form of educational freemasonry holds sway.

It has nothing to do with Eton College, nor even the Bullingdon Club - both far more commonly-cited lightning rods for resentments about class, privilege and the fast track to power.

Instead, the surest ticket to the top - for Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem politicians alike - is surely a degree in politics, philosophy and economics (PPE) at the University of Oxford.

No fewer than six members of the cabinet, including the prime minister, foreign secretary and chief secretary to the treasury, are Oxford PPE graduates, as are an additional two ministers who attend their meetings.

Labour, for all its egalitarian rhetoric, can hardly claim an advantage. As ballot papers go out to the party's members for the leadership contest, three of the contenders for that crown - David and Ed Miliband, plus Ed Balls - are alumni, as are such big names from Gordon Brown's government as Lord Mandelson, Jacqui Smith, Ruth Kelly and James Purnell.

Indeed, in the present House of Commons there are believed to be some 35 Oxford PPE-ists, compared with 20 Old Etonians.

It is a tradition that stretches back decades. Harold Wilson, Edward Heath, Shirley Williams, Edwina Currie, Barbara Castle - all left their mark on politics in different ways, but all started out with an Oxford PPE.

That Oxbridge graduates in general make up a disproportionate number of the nation's elite is, of course, hardly news, as is the fact that UK politicians of all parties are drawn from a narrow educational base compared with the rest of society.

But what is it about this one course in particular that it holds such an apparently indomitable grip on the highest echelons of power?

A degree defined by breadth rather than depth seems tailor-made for the Westminster system and its regular reshuffles, in which front-line politicians can be running the prison service one day and attempting to steer the economy the next while aspiring to the grand diplomacy of the Foreign Office.

The very title of the course itself conjures up an image of each student as some kind of civic ubermensch, a combination of Machiavelli, Mary Wollstonecraft and David Ricardo.

But Observer columnist Nick Cohen, an Oxford PPE graduate, says he now regrets switching to this "silly degree" from history while an undergraduate.

He notes that, while the influence of the École Nationale d'Administration on producing public servants is a regular subject of regular controversy in France, the scope of Oxford's PPE department receives relatively little scrutiny.

"It's a degree for generalists, and British society has always loved generalists," he says. "But I think we'd certainly benefit from more scientists and engineers at the top.

"It's far easier to condemn Eton or the failure of the comprehensive system. But I went to Oxford, Christopher Hitchens went to Oxford, Ian Hislop went to Oxford - who are the people who are going to eviscerate the phenomenon?"

Indeed, journalists are almost as well-represented as statesmen and women among well-known PPE alumni, not least at the BBC. Political editor Nick Robinson, economics editor Stephanie Flanders and the Today programme's Evan Davis are all graduates (full disclosure: the present author studied politics at Edinburgh).

Nonetheless, few would deny that competition for a PPE place is fierce, and that the course itself imposes a rigorous workload.

Students typically must endure two tutorials a week, in which they present a paper and are grilled on it intensively - such sessions having a ratio of just one or two undergraduates for each academic.

Professor Iain McLean, who taught the course from 1978 to 1991 and counts Nick Robinson among his former charges, says the breadth of the subject matter covered and the fact that students are constantly challenged to justify themselves prevents any danger of "group think". (I love this. I personally pride myself on independent thought)

"It's fundamental to the teaching method to be Socratic - it's our job to ask questions and encourage analytical thinking," he says.

"It was designed to be deliberately broad. Because it's interdisciplinary, we can speak across subject boundaries."

Indeed, PPE's introduction in the 1920 - initially under the title "modern greats" - was designed to offer an alternative to classics for scholars hoping to enter the civil service.

From their second year onwards students are offered a greater degree of specialisation and the opportunity to focus their interests.

The journalist Toby Young, who read PPE at Brasenose College two years ahead of David Cameron, is a defender of the course and believes it offers a firm intellectual grounding for would-be leaders across the political spectrum.

"Among the 10 people reading PPE at the same time as me at Brasenose, you had everything from Monday Club fascists to revolutionary Marxists, plus every shade of opinion in between," he says.

"But when I went on to study at post-graduate level at Harvard, everybody was a liberal. One of the hallmarks of PPE graduates is that they are quite independently minded."

But the question remains: why does this course in particular dominate cabinet tables, rather than similar programmes at Cambridge - or, for that matter, the PPE degrees offered by the universities of Durham, Lancaster and York?

Geoffrey Evans, a fellow in politics and a senior tutor at Nuffield College, Oxford, acknowledges that the course's reputation for producing top-rank politicians is self-perpetuating, with the "the elite frog pond of Oxford" proving a strong lure for students with the means and wit to get through the door in the first place.

"They are pretty bright too, it is fair to say - though they will in the main have had advantageous circumstances in which to cultivate that brightness," he adds. "And ambitious - many no doubt see such positions as a natural outcome of their social and educational opportunities, and the circles in which they mix will in general hold lofty expectations as to what constitutes a suitable occupational outcome.

"All in all, it's how the class system works."

Maybe so. Either way, the political battles of the future seem at least as likely to be fought first in the Oxford quads where PPE is taught as the playing fields of Eton.

@ sagamite, i love to see a person who is well informed and able to make and observe things in an intellecual way,

Growing up in the UK my Dad hammered the 'british' mindset and system into me to ensure I knew the cream from the crop,
red brick universities as they are called are basically the oldest founded universities, hence why Oxford and csmbridge will remain the TOP DOGS they were the first universities founded in the UK and are world renowned,

I wont go into league table because I believe there has been some foul play going on with Former Polytechnics or Colleges popping up above elite known redbricks universities such as the likes of Manchester, Liverpool and DURHAM!

However, people who know better will be able to pick out the redbricks without referring back to the league table, it can sometimes be highly deceptive,

Thanks sagamite for enlightening people about important issue which will help people choose correctly for future benefits!

^^^ Thanks, babes.

In regards to League Tables, the Guardian one is just rubbish and I totally disregard it.

And I normally disregard any criterium that is of no relevance to intellect of student or research achievements of institution.

Even the criteria I decide to regard, I still have to re-evaluate for likely loop-holes e.g. Average entry scores or bias focus. I think it will have made sense to have average entry scores for the top 80% or 90% of courses as some universities offer courses that cannot request high grades. Also some league tables are too focused on Science and hence a world class institution like LSE is not even in the top 30 globally, which I know is a fallacy.

Sagamite:

^^^ Thanks, babes.

In regards to League Tables, the Guardian one is just rubbish and I totally disregard it.

And I normally disregard any criterium that is of no relevance to intellect of student or research achievements of institution.

Even the criteria I decide to regard, I still have to re-evaluate for likely loop-holes e.g. Average entry scores or biase focus. I think it will have made sense to have average entry scores for the top 80% or 90% of courses as some universities offer courses that cannot request high grades. Also some league tables are too focused on Science and hence a world class institution like LSE is not even in the top 30 globally, which I know is a fallacy.

I totally agree hun!! The Guardian disappointed me to be frank, I dismissed their league table a while ago when I saw The University of Manchester drop to the 30's, I knew then their version of Achievements or criteria used to assess Universities were and still is garbage!

But some people still know better,

Hello guys, I currently hold an offer to study communications eng. In Univ of Leeds, Univ of Nottingham, Univ of Strathclyde, Univ of Birmingham and Durham univ. I am confused on which one to go for. I need u guys to rank these univs in terms of 1. ranking of course(Electrical/electronic eng) in the UK and 2. job prospects after graduation.
I have gone online to check the ratings of these univs in Electrical/electronic eng but I get conflicting report.
Thanks

Emma.Msc:

Hello guys, I currently hold an offer to study communications eng. In Univ of Leeds, Univ of Nottingham, Univ of Strathclyde, Univ of Birmingham and Durham univ. I am confused on which one to go for. I need u guys to rank these univs in terms of 1. ranking of course(Electrical/electronic eng) in the UK and 2. job prospects after graduation.
I have gone online to check the ratings of these univs in Electrical/electronic eng but I get conflicting report.
Thanks

Hardly would anyone in HR care about or look up Electrical/electronic Engineering tables, they are just going to know which universities are good overall.

They will only look at subject tables if there is some exceptionality in the subject. For Engineering, if it is not Cambridge or Imperial, which are the exceptional universities in Engineering, then you can as well just use the overall league table on the 1st page which would place Nottingham at the top of the four.

Sagamite:

Hardly would anyone in HR care about or look up Electrical/electronic Engineering tables, they are just going to know which universities are good overall.

They will only look at subject tables if there is some exceptionality in the subject. For Engineering, if it is not Cambridge or Imperial, which are the exceptional universities in Engineering, then you can as well just use the overall league table on the 1st page which would place Nottingham at the top of the four.

Thanks Sagamite,
I am actually caught in between Durham and Leeds. I hear Durham univ is very prestigious but i am having doubts about the strength of their engineering(though they claim to be 'ranked 3rd in Engineering in the Times Good University Guide 2010'. Also, the univ of leeds claim to be the best in electrical and elect eng. in the 2008 RAE. Can u give me a detailed analysis of these two univs.
Thanks
NB i am going for masters

This is amazing:

[size=18pt]In Law Schools, Grades Go Up, Just Like That[/size]

One day next month every student at Loyola Law School Los Angeles will awake to a higher grade point average.

But it’s not because they are all working harder.

The school is retroactively inflating its grades, tacking on 0.333 to every grade recorded in the last few years. The goal is to make its students look more attractive in a competitive job market.

In the last two years, at least 10 law schools have deliberately changed their grading systems to make them more lenient. These include law schools like New York University and Georgetown, as well as Golden Gate University and Tulane University, which just announced the change this month. Some recruiters at law firms keep track of these changes and consider them when interviewing, and some do not.

Law schools seem to view higher grades as one way to rescue their students from the tough economic climate — and perhaps more to the point, to protect their own reputations and rankings. Once able to practically guarantee gainful employment to thousands of students every year, the schools are now fielding complaints from more and more unemployed graduates, frequently drowning in student debt.

They have come up with a number of strategic responses. Besides the usual career counseling measures, many top schools have bumped up their on-campus interview weeks from the autumn to August, before the school year even starts, because they want their students to have a chance to nab a job slot before their counterparts at other schools do.

Others, like Duke and the University of Texas at Austin, offer stipends for students to take unpaid public interest internships. Southern Methodist University’s Dedman School of Law even recently began paying profit-making law firms to hire its students.

“For people like me who have good grades but are not in the super-elite, there are not as many options for getting a job in advance,” said Zachary Burd, 35, who just graduated from Southern Methodist University. A Dallas family law firm will receive $3,500 to “test drive” him this August.

“They’ll get me for a month or two, for free, to try me out,” he said. “It’s safer for them, and it’s a good foot in the door for me.”

But the tactic getting the most attention — and the most controversy — is the sudden, deliberate and dubiously effective grade inflation, which had begun even before the legal job market softened.

“If somebody’s paying $150,000 for a law school degree, you don’t want to call them a loser at the end,” says Stuart Rojstaczer, a former geophysics professor at Duke who now studies grade inflation. “So you artificially call every student a success.”

Unlike undergraduate grading, which has drifted northward over the years because most undergraduate campuses do not strictly regulate the schoolwide distribution of As and Bs, law schools have long employed clean, crisp, bell-shaped grading curves. Many law schools even use computers to mathematically determine cutoffs between a B+ and a B, based on exam points.

The process schools refer to as grade reform takes many forms. Some schools bump up everyone’s grades, some just allow for more As and others all but eliminate the once-gentlemanly C.

Harvard and Stanford, two of the top-ranked law schools, recently eliminated traditional grading altogether. Like Yale and the University of California, Berkeley, they now use a modified pass/fail system, reducing the pressure that law schools are notorious for. This new grading system also makes it harder for employers to distinguish the wheat from the chaff, which means more students can get a shot at a competitive interview.

Students and faculty say they are merely trying to stay competitive with their peer schools, which have more merciful grading curves. Loyola, for example, had a mean first-year grade of 2.667; the norm for other accredited California schools is generally a 3.0 or higher.

“That put our students at an unfair disadvantage, especially if you factor in the current economic environment,” says Samuel Liu, 26, president of the school’s Student Bar Association and the leader of the grading change efforts. He also says many Loyola students are ineligible for coveted clerkships that have strict G.P.A. cutoffs.

“We just wanted to match what other schools that are comparably ranked were already doing,” he said.

Nearby University of California, Los Angeles, made its grading curve more lenient in the fall of 2005, in part to keep up with “nationwide shifts in grading,” said Elizabeth Cheadle, the dean of students at U.C.L.A.’s law school.

The University of Southern California and the University of California Hastings College of the Law responded by increasing their own curves last school year.

What’s more, U.S.C.’s law school dean, Robert K. Rasmussen, said he was partly inspired by the school where he previously worked, Vanderbilt University Law School, which had also changed its curve a few years ago.

These moves can create a vicious cycle like that seen in chief executive pay: if every school in the bottom half of the distribution raises its marks to enter the top half of the distribution, or even just to become average, the average creeps up. This puts pressure on schools to keep raising their grades further.

Loyola Law School’s dean, Victor J. Gold, said he had already received a plea for advice from a student group at Chapman University School of Law, which will have the toughest grading curve in California after Loyola acts.

One notable school has managed to maintain the integrity of its grades through an idiosyncratic grading rubric. The University of Chicago Law School grades its students on a scale of 155-186, a system so bizarre that employers are unlikely to try to match it against the 4.0 scale or letter grades used almost everywhere else.

It is unclear whether grade inflation is particularly effective at helping students get jobs, especially because many large firms adjust their expectations accordingly.

Many hiring partners say they read Above the Law, a legal blog, that gleefully reports (and mocks) grade changing efforts — from leaked student memos — even when schools themselves don’t announce the changes.

Employers say they also press law schools for rankings, or some indication of G.P.A.’s for the top echelon of the class. And if the school will not release that information — many do not — other accolades like honors and law journal participation provide clues to a student’s relative rank.

“Every year we do our homework,” says Helen Long, the legal recruiting director at Ropes & Gray, a firm with more than 1,000 lawyers. “And besides, if a school had a remarkable jump in its G.P.A.’s from one year to the next, we receive a big enough group of résumés every year that we’d probably notice.”

Smaller firms, however, may not have the resources to research every school’s curve, and may see too few students from any given school to track changes from year to year.

James Wagner, the hiring partner at the 29-lawyer Boston firm Conn Kavanaugh Rosenthal Peisch & Ford, said he hadn’t noticed any grade inflation in the last couple of years. But he has noticed something else new from applicants.

“About a third to half of the résumés I’ve been getting now profess a love of the Red Sox,” he chuckles, wondering if the students had been coached by their schools.

“But I’ll bet that if you compared résumés for those same candidates,” he says, “when they apply to New York firms they love the Yankees, and for Chicago firms, it’s the Cubs.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/business/22law.html?_r=1

Emma.Msc:

Thanks Sagamite,
I am actually caught in between Durham and Leeds. I hear Durham univ is very prestigious but i am having doubts about the strength of their engineering(though they claim to be 'ranked 3rd in Engineering in the  Times Good University Guide 2010'. Also, the univ of leeds claim to be the best in electrical and elect eng. in the 2008 RAE. Can u give me a detailed analysis of these two univs.
Thanks
NB i am going for masters

Sorry, I missed that Durham was on your list.

In regards to overall prestige, Durham is the most prestigious of the lot. Better than Nottingham.

I wouldn't know much about their engineering. For Engineering, normally, it is Cambridge and Imperial that lead the way. The red-brick multi-faculty universities (UCL, Manchester, Warwick, Durham, Southampton, Leeds etc) also have a good reputation.

Unfortunately, I can't think of any analysis that differentiate the second pack apart from overall prestige.

Southampton is tops for electrical electronics engineering blad
durham is more prestigious as a university but not tops in terms of engineering delivery

PS: I shud know dis cos ma first degree was in Electrical/Electronics Engineering

Thanks alot for all this Sagamite, It was really helpfull

@sagamite thanks u very much
@jay bee, thanks but which should i go for- durham or leeds?

PS- why are ratings of univs online so conflicting?

@ Sagamite , Jaybee and others
Do u guys know anything about the job prospects of communications engineering and Analogue and digital Integrated circuit design? I currently hold an offer in Analogue and digital Integrated circuit design at Imperial College but I really prefer communications engineering.
What should I do? Go for comm, eng in Leeds or Durham OR Analogue and digital Integrated circuit design at Imperial?

Dude wat are your career plans?
With communication engineering, you had be restricted to telecoms or what not.
Analogue and digital Integrated circuit design might be the way as it provides more employment route.
Imperial is you best bet ma guy. Imperial on a CV means you are already guaranteed a thorough look of ur CV.
I hope you know you going to be doing modules like DSP and you have to be tops with mathlab. Imperial no be moin moin oh. I still have some books i can pass on sha

If u want to do general electrical/electronics engineering then go to southampton.

@Emma MSC, i wouldnt debate much go straight for GOLD which is Durham University,
Emplyers deny it in this country to their back teeth but will say it among their colleagues who are the same stature in society,
The Brits SNUB people from Non red brick Universities, They also pick and choose who to give interviews to according to the University you went to and of course your classification but believe me your University Name speaks VOLUMES!

Durham is world renowned University, where the elite go to, my cousion did her Masters there,
Nottingham is another very good University but I would go for Durham still,

good luck

Thanks guys

Another world ranking came out yesterday and LSE is not even in the top 10 of UK unis.

http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2010/results

One has to be careful with the way these rankings are judged as LSE is no doubt in the Top 4 in the UK and apart from Oxford and Cambridge, the only other UK uni with supreme, undilluted worldwide prestige.

One of the factors that affect LSE's ratings is nobel prizes and science/technology bias of rankings.

LSE has 16 nobel laureates overall when compared to top US multi faculty universities it might not seem as high (Uni of Chicago has 85). Even UCL has 21, but when one considers that LSE only teaches social sciences, then one would realise that only half of the nobel prizes are really open to LSE students and its academics (i.e. only Nobel prizes in economics, peace and literature).

Rankings using Nobel prize winning without taking this into context is a bit misleading. Afterall, LSE has won 1/4 of all nobel prizes in economics and no other uni in the world (not even Harvard) can compete with this. Unfortunately, rankings take no account of size or field concentration of university.

If world rankings was done based on social science field alone, LSE will be in the Global Top 5 always, so the rankings are not reflective of the specialism of the Uni and is Science biased.

@sagamite,pls i would like to know the university to study masters in public health and what are the good job prospects.thanx
u r really doing a good job.

benefe:

@sagamite,pls i would like to know the university to study masters in public health and what are the good job prospects.thanx
u r really doing a good job.

I would think:

Cambridge
Oxford
Imperial
UCL
KCL
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Glasgow
Nottingham
Newcastle
York
Leeds
QMW

Should all be good for health science courses.

Job prospects, I would not know. Not really my sector.

All the world rankings are out this year.

Here are the UK Top 10 for 2010 produced in the format:

UK Rank) Name (World Rank)

And I list at the bottom UK Rank of my top 10 that did not make Top 10.

THE World University Rankings (mainly Research Excellence biased [65% weighting])
  1) Cambridge (6)
  2) Oxford (6)
  3) Imperial (9)
  4) UCL  (22)
  5) Edinburgh (40)
  6) Bristol (68)
  7) KCL (77)
8.) Sussex (79)
  9) York (81)
10) Durham (85)

LSE (11), Warwick (-), St Andrews (15)


SJTU Academic Rankings of World Universities (mainly Natural Science Research and Awards biased [60% weighting])
  1) Cambridge (5)
  2) Oxford (10)
  3) UCL (21)
  4) Imperial (26) 
  5) Manchester (44)
  6) Edinburgh (54)
  7) KCL (63)
8.) Bristol (66)
  9) Nottingham (84)
10) Sheffield (88)

LSE (20-30), Warwick (20-30), St Andrews (20-30)


QS World University Rankings (mainly Reputation with Academics and Employers biased [50% weighting])
  1) Cambridge (1)
  2) UCL (4)
  3) Oxford (6)
  4) Imperial (7)
  5) KCL (21)
  6) Edinburgh (22)
  7) Bristol (27)
8.) Manchester (30)
  9) Warwick (53)
10) Birmingham (59)

LSE (14), St Andrews (19)

In all the Top 10s, Sussex is the only university not in my Hot Group and above to make the top 10.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-141689.128.html#msg5905180

Saggi You forgot to mention london metroplolitan university on your list

luizworld:

Saggi You forgot to mention london metroplolitan university on your list

It has its market but it is not one of the most prestigious.

A lot of smart Naija kids go there though due to lack of funding or awareness (the university na university mentality error).

As I said earlier, Mckinsey only targets the Top 10 unis on my list.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-141689.64.html#msg5042359

The other 2 top strategy management consulting firms are Bain and Boston Consulting Group (BCG), and they have updated their website for the year.

Bain on their website targets students from:

Cambridge
Oxford
LSE
Imperial
UCL
Bristol
Warwick
KCL


BCG on their website targets students from:

Cambridge
Oxford
LSE
Imperial
Bristol
Edinburgh

I just saw a job advert for a Strategy management consultancy where they are not the slightest bit ashamed to openly display their discrimination. They advertised it blatantly the university they want candidates to be from and any candidate from another university would not even be considered.

All those Naija peeps I have seen arguing blindly that the university one goes to does not matter, they need no further evidence.

http://tcadserving.top-consultant.co.uk/UK/career/appointmentstwo.aspx?ID=42974

Strategy Analyst - London
Very Competitive Package

Leading Global Pharmaceutical Consultancy is expanding it’s Strategy practice and is looking for talented individuals to join their growing Analyst team.

This is an excellent opportunity to be part of their most prestigious practice, work on cutting-edge projects and gain international exposure to the major Pharmaceutical and Biotech organisations.

Role:

Analysts enjoy considerable control and flexibility in mapping their first years at the company. Staffing on projects is discussed, not simply assigned, while a mix of projects broadens experience and challenges intellect. With the guidance of Senior Consultants, Engagement Managers, and Principals, Analysts participate in all aspects of projects, including:

- Problem formulation and analysis
- Business research and assessment
- Client interviews
- Alternative generation
- Model development and evaluation
- Meeting facilitation
- Creating and delivering presentations to clients

Key Requirements:

- 2.1 or above ONLY from the following institutions: Cambridge, Oxford, LSE or University of London (Imperial, King’s College or UCL [size=14pt]only[/size]).

- Some relevant work experience (Full-time, internship or work placement).


In addition:

The ideal candidate is bright, creative, principled, highly motivated, and disciplined and has excellent business, analytic, problem-solving, communication, interpersonal, and leadership skills. The ability to facilitate client change is also a plus.

Salary: Very Competitive Package

Hi sagamite and others!
Plz, wat do u know about Oxford Brookes University? Plz every thinkable information u hav. Jah bless yah all 4 d good job u r doing.

Don1Dee:

Hi sagamite and others!
Plz, wat do u know about Oxford Brookes University? Plz every thinkable information u hav. Jah bless yah all 4 d good job u r doing.

It is a decent university and generally regarded as the strongest of the poly-turned-unis in the UK.

It is not top-notch, it is not poor.

Apart from that, there is not much one can say about it. It is just another one of the universities.

British universities have done well this year in regards to Nobel prizes, somehow they are connected to 4 out of the 6 Nobels.

- LSE again pulls in the Nobel prize for Economics (with MIT and Northwestern). The professor was educated at Essex and taught at Southampton before.

- Manchester showed they remain top notch for research with 2 of its academics picking the Nobel prize for Physics.

- A professor from Cambridge won the Nobel Prize for Medicine. He was also educated at Uni of Edinburgh and Wales.

- The winner of the Nobel prize for literature used to teach at KCL in the past.