Anonymous
09/21/2025 18:20
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just average them out:
This is the avg using the same weight:
1. Oxford — avg 2.33
2. Cambridge / LSE & St Andrews — tied at avg 2.67
3. Durham — avg 4.33
4. Imperial — avg 6.00
5. Warwick — avg 8.00
6. Bath — avg 7.67
7. Loughborough — avg 10.00
8. UCL — avg 10.67
9. Lancaster — avg 11.33
10. Exeter — avg 14.00
Your averages are not correct…. This is the correct avg of all 3:
1. Oxford — 2.33
2. Cambridge / LSE / St Andrews — 2.67
3. Durham — 4.33
4. Imperial — 6.00
5. Bath — 7.67
6. Warwick — 8.00
7. Loughborough — 10.00
8. UCL — 10.67
9. Lancaster — 13.00
10. Bristol — 13.33
11. Exeter — 14.00
These averages make a lot more sense. I went back 10 years of CUG, Guardian and The Times. Despite minor movement here and there on the top 10, these have been pretty much static for 10 years.
Anonymous
09/21/2025 18:18
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:people on this board ONLY care about these rankings because they hate St Andews and are annoyed that it's ever near the top.
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
It is very simple. Despite having very high tariffs for UK students, it is admittedly easier for good US students from good private schools to gain acceptance there. And for more American brains, they cant reconcile the fact that an easier admissions for American is different than the school being a decent school. I understand. Even if I disagree. Most Americans have been pre-condition to believe low admissions rate equals amazing education….
it's easier to get into every Oxford and Cambridge from the US too. UCL is much easier.
holistic admissions in the US makes admissions to top 20 colleges HARD for everyone, including unhooked UMC white kids.
It is not easy for US students to get into Oxford or Cambridge as undergraduates. It is possible, but it is not easy.
DP. The word "easier" is comparative. The word "easy" is absolute.
It is not "easy" for any unhooked student to get into Oxbridge. Partly for financial reasons (i.e., much higher international fees), it really is "easier" for an international fees applicant to be accepted at Oxbridge than an equally qualified UK applicant.
Nearly all UK universities, including Oxbridge, operate at a loss with their UK students. They need enough international fees students to make up the budget deficit.
You are still applying American terms. The UK does not have a "hook" or "non-hook" system. That's exclusively US.
And I know about the finances in the UK, thanks. I am from the UK.
That post was really not intended for you, but instead to the many others who are reading DCUM.
Separately, I promise you that hooks do exist in the UK (trivial example: Prince William would have been accepted to any UK uni where he applied). I also know of cases where UK faculty kids were accepted when equally qualified UK students did not, due to faculty parent calling in a favor. The ethics of that might be murky, but it has happened. The UK hooks are different, and fewer, than in the US but they exist.
DP: you don't know what you are talking about, and you are wrong. Prince William would definitely have been accepted to Cambridge, yes, bc his forebears put that clause into the donation that founded one of the colleges (can't remember which one).
No other "hooks", in the US sense, matter, other than a thumb on the scale for UK kids from low SES backgrounds. Tutors, in deciding who to admit to each course, do consider gender balance but don't consider geographic representation (within or outside the UK). Tutors have reported being somewhat biased against US applicants, bc they are likely to have HYPSM offers and therefore much less likely to yeild to Oxbridge (which messes up some weird internal calculations btw the colleges). At the tutor level, they report that they do not consider additional tuition from overseas students. That extra money doesn't go to the college, but to the university.
Here's the biggest difference, reported to me recently. A friend of a friend made a large donation to one of the colleges at Cambridge. (That alone is unusual, bc alumni support in the UK is not typical.) After signing the final papers, the college official said, "It's too bad your DC can't apply to this college, bc that would be a conflict of interest."
It is certainly true that acceptance rates at Oxbridge are at least double those of top US schools. However, being a US applicant is not a 'hook'.
This is true for Oxford and Cambridge. LSE on the other hand….my son had a a couple of “royal” kids in his class (from middle eastern countries) who had no business being there. Barely graduated with a 2:2. Only reason they were there were due to donations from their countries to LSE.
Anonymous
09/21/2025 17:42
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:people on this board ONLY care about these rankings because they hate St Andews and are annoyed that it's ever near the top.
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
It is very simple. Despite having very high tariffs for UK students, it is admittedly easier for good US students from good private schools to gain acceptance there. And for more American brains, they cant reconcile the fact that an easier admissions for American is different than the school being a decent school. I understand. Even if I disagree. Most Americans have been pre-condition to believe low admissions rate equals amazing education….
it's easier to get into every Oxford and Cambridge from the US too. UCL is much easier.
holistic admissions in the US makes admissions to top 20 colleges HARD for everyone, including unhooked UMC white kids.
It is not easy for US students to get into Oxford or Cambridge as undergraduates. It is possible, but it is not easy.
DP. The word "easier" is comparative. The word "easy" is absolute.
It is not "easy" for any unhooked student to get into Oxbridge. Partly for financial reasons (i.e., much higher international fees), it really is "easier" for an international fees applicant to be accepted at Oxbridge than an equally qualified UK applicant.
Nearly all UK universities, including Oxbridge, operate at a loss with their UK students. They need enough international fees students to make up the budget deficit.
You are still applying American terms. The UK does not have a "hook" or "non-hook" system. That's exclusively US.
And I know about the finances in the UK, thanks. I am from the UK.
That post was really not intended for you, but instead to the many others who are reading DCUM.
Separately, I promise you that hooks do exist in the UK (trivial example: Prince William would have been accepted to any UK uni where he applied). I also know of cases where UK faculty kids were accepted when equally qualified UK students did not, due to faculty parent calling in a favor. The ethics of that might be murky, but it has happened. The UK hooks are different, and fewer, than in the US but they exist.
DP: you don't know what you are talking about, and you are wrong. Prince William would definitely have been accepted to Cambridge, yes, bc his forebears put that clause into the donation that founded one of the colleges (can't remember which one).
No other "hooks", in the US sense, matter, other than a thumb on the scale for UK kids from low SES backgrounds. Tutors, in deciding who to admit to each course, do consider gender balance but don't consider geographic representation (within or outside the UK). Tutors have reported being somewhat biased against US applicants, bc they are likely to have HYPSM offers and therefore much less likely to yeild to Oxbridge (which messes up some weird internal calculations btw the colleges). At the tutor level, they report that they do not consider additional tuition from overseas students. That extra money doesn't go to the college, but to the university.
Here's the biggest difference, reported to me recently. A friend of a friend made a large donation to one of the colleges at Cambridge. (That alone is unusual, bc alumni support in the UK is not typical.) After signing the final papers, the college official said, "It's too bad your DC can't apply to this college, bc that would be a conflict of interest."
It is certainly true that acceptance rates at Oxbridge are at least double those of top US schools. However, being a US applicant is not a 'hook'.
Anonymous
09/21/2025 17:18
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:people on this board ONLY care about these rankings because they hate St Andews and are annoyed that it's ever near the top.
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
It is very simple. Despite having very high tariffs for UK students, it is admittedly easier for good US students from good private schools to gain acceptance there. And for more American brains, they cant reconcile the fact that an easier admissions for American is different than the school being a decent school. I understand. Even if I disagree. Most Americans have been pre-condition to believe low admissions rate equals amazing education….
it's easier to get into every Oxford and Cambridge from the US too. UCL is much easier.
holistic admissions in the US makes admissions to top 20 colleges HARD for everyone, including unhooked UMC white kids.
It is not easy for US students to get into Oxford or Cambridge as undergraduates. It is possible, but it is not easy.
DP. The word "easier" is comparative. The word "easy" is absolute.
It is not "easy" for any unhooked student to get into Oxbridge. Partly for financial reasons (i.e., much higher international fees), it really is "easier" for an international fees applicant to be accepted at Oxbridge than an equally qualified UK applicant.
Nearly all UK universities, including Oxbridge, operate at a loss with their UK students. They need enough international fees students to make up the budget deficit.
You are still applying American terms. The UK does not have a "hook" or "non-hook" system. That's exclusively US.
And I know about the finances in the UK, thanks. I am from the UK.
That post was really not intended for you, but instead to the many others who are reading DCUM.
Separately, I promise you that hooks do exist in the UK (trivial example: Prince William would have been accepted to any UK uni where he applied). I also know of cases where UK faculty kids were accepted when equally qualified UK students did not, due to faculty parent calling in a favor. The ethics of that might be murky, but it has happened. The UK hooks are different, and fewer, than in the US but they exist.
Anonymous
09/21/2025 16:59
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:people on this board ONLY care about these rankings because they hate St Andews and are annoyed that it's ever near the top.
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
It is very simple. Despite having very high tariffs for UK students, it is admittedly easier for good US students from good private schools to gain acceptance there. And for more American brains, they cant reconcile the fact that an easier admissions for American is different than the school being a decent school. I understand. Even if I disagree. Most Americans have been pre-condition to believe low admissions rate equals amazing education….
it's easier to get into every Oxford and Cambridge from the US too. UCL is much easier.
holistic admissions in the US makes admissions to top 20 colleges HARD for everyone, including unhooked UMC white kids.
It is not easy for US students to get into Oxford or Cambridge as undergraduates. It is possible, but it is not easy.
DP. The word "easier" is comparative. The word "easy" is absolute.
It is not "easy" for any unhooked student to get into Oxbridge. Partly for financial reasons (i.e., much higher international fees), it really is "easier" for an international fees applicant to be accepted at Oxbridge than an equally qualified UK applicant.
Nearly all UK universities, including Oxbridge, operate at a loss with their UK students. They need enough international fees students to make up the budget deficit.
You are still applying American terms. The UK does not have a "hook" or "non-hook" system. That's exclusively US.
And I know about the finances in the UK, thanks. I am from the UK.
Anonymous
09/21/2025 16:29
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:people on this board ONLY care about these rankings because they hate St Andews and are annoyed that it's ever near the top.
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
It is very simple. Despite having very high tariffs for UK students, it is admittedly easier for good US students from good private schools to gain acceptance there. And for more American brains, they cant reconcile the fact that an easier admissions for American is different than the school being a decent school. I understand. Even if I disagree. Most Americans have been pre-condition to believe low admissions rate equals amazing education….
it's easier to get into every Oxford and Cambridge from the US too. UCL is much easier.
holistic admissions in the US makes admissions to top 20 colleges HARD for everyone, including unhooked UMC white kids.
It is not easy for US students to get into Oxford or Cambridge as undergraduates. It is possible, but it is not easy.
DP. The word "easier" is comparative. The word "easy" is absolute.
It is not "easy" for any unhooked student to get into Oxbridge. Partly for financial reasons (i.e., much higher international fees), it really is "easier" for an international fees applicant to be accepted at Oxbridge than an equally qualified UK applicant.
Nearly all UK universities, including Oxbridge, operate at a loss with their UK students. They need enough international fees students to make up the budget deficit.
Anonymous
09/21/2025 15:40
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:people on this board ONLY care about these rankings because they hate St Andews and are annoyed that it's ever near the top.
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
It is very simple. Despite having very high tariffs for UK students, it is admittedly easier for good US students from good private schools to gain acceptance there. And for more American brains, they cant reconcile the fact that an easier admissions for American is different than the school being a decent school. I understand. Even if I disagree. Most Americans have been pre-condition to believe low admissions rate equals amazing education….
it's easier to get into every Oxford and Cambridge from the US too. UCL is much easier.
holistic admissions in the US makes admissions to top 20 colleges HARD for everyone, including unhooked UMC white kids.
It is not easy for US students to get into Oxford or Cambridge as undergraduates. It is possible, but it is not easy.
Anonymous
09/20/2025 17:03
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:people on this board ONLY care about these rankings because they hate St Andews and are annoyed that it's ever near the top.
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
It is very simple. Despite having very high tariffs for UK students, it is admittedly easier for good US students from good private schools to gain acceptance there. And for more American brains, they cant reconcile the fact that an easier admissions for American is different than the school being a decent school. I understand. Even if I disagree. Most Americans have been pre-condition to believe low admissions rate equals amazing education….
it's easier to get into every Oxford and Cambridge from the US too. UCL is much easier.
holistic admissions in the US makes admissions to top 20 colleges HARD for everyone, including unhooked UMC white kids.
Anonymous
09/20/2025 16:06
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:people on this board ONLY care about these rankings because they hate St Andews and are annoyed that it's ever near the top.
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
It is very simple. Despite having very high tariffs for UK students, it is admittedly easier for good US students from good private schools to gain acceptance there. And for more American brains, they cant reconcile the fact that an easier admissions for American is different than the school being a decent school. I understand. Even if I disagree. Most Americans have been pre-condition to believe low admissions rate equals amazing education….
Anonymous
09/20/2025 16:04
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just average them out:
This is the avg using the same weight:
1. Oxford — avg 2.33
2. Cambridge / LSE & St Andrews — tied at avg 2.67
3. Durham — avg 4.33
4. Imperial — avg 6.00
5. Warwick — avg 8.00
6. Bath — avg 7.67
7. Loughborough — avg 10.00
8. UCL — avg 10.67
9. Lancaster — avg 11.33
10. Exeter — avg 14.00
Your averages are not correct…. This is the correct avg of all 3:
1. Oxford — 2.33
2. Cambridge / LSE / St Andrews — 2.67
3. Durham — 4.33
4. Imperial — 6.00
5. Bath — 7.67
6. Warwick — 8.00
7. Loughborough — 10.00
8. UCL — 10.67
9. Lancaster — 13.00
10. Bristol — 13.33
11. Exeter — 14.00
Thank you for doing this. averaging these 3 rankings is a good process. maybe tweak the weights a little since most think the CUG is a little more comprehensive. Maybe 40% CUG, 30% Guardian/30% The Times.
Shouldn’t change anything in the top5, but would be interesting to see.
Anonymous
09/20/2025 15:27
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Oxford is #1.
No surprise.
Except it’s #4 in OP’s list
That was not OP’s list. It was THE Times list. When the other post averaged the 3 main UK rankings Oxford comes out top (no surprises).
Anonymous
09/20/2025 15:26
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Only two schools are considered tops, obviously: oxford and cambridge.
LSE also has a strong reputation, but only in the business world.
Thank you for your irrelevant contribution. Now we know what a housewife VA has to say about UK schools….
DP. Did you forget what website you're on? Most people on here are from DC, MD, and VA. Who are you expecting to respond to this post? If OP wanted the opinion from people living in the UK, they should have known not to post this here.
OP DIDNT ask for anybody’s opinion. She was simply posting the results of the new rankings….
Anonymous
09/20/2025 14:24
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
people on this board ONLY care about these rankings because they hate St Andews and are annoyed that it's ever near the top.
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
why do they hate it? who the f knows. I live in the unites states and care very little about this.
rank the best colleges in India or South Africa and I'll also have no option there. China? No opinion.
but here, about the UK, they care. and it's all about one small school. it's BIZARRE behavior
Anonymous
09/20/2025 13:51
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Oxford is #1.
No surprise.
Except it’s #4 in OP’s list
Anonymous
09/20/2025 13:42
Subject: Final UK undergrad ranking is out as if last night (The Times)
Anonymous wrote:Imperial College London is the MIT/CalTech equivalent for the UK, except that Imperial also has a medical school.
Good info. Thank you.