Staff Writer Alfie Ray explores the impact of university rankings on London students and how they fuel perceptions of elitism between London universities.
If you’ve ever had an interaction with a student from another London University, I’m sure you’ve been hit with the question: “Where do you study?”
Referring to the university you attend, this simple four-word question carries a weight that often goes unnoticed.
In response to your answer, you may be met with the casual “Oh, my friend studies there!” or perhaps the more dismissive “Oh… really?”
Regardless of the response, these short interactions act as quiet playgrounds in which issues of prejudice, hierarchical thinking and, perhaps most evidently, elitism, are explored.
Of course, I, like most students, have experienced this interaction from both sides of the equation. Admittedly, at times I have caught myself dismissing the work of students from lower ranking universities, thoughtlessly telling myself that, because their university is less “prestigious” than my own, their research output must be of a lower quality – this sort of thinking is, as I’ve already said, thoughtless.
University Rankings – A Cesspit of Elitism
So, where do these elitist ideas come from?
According to Sarah Amsler, an educational researcher from the University of Lincoln, university ranking systems may well be the culprit.
Emerging in the UK in the early 1990s, following a governmental shift in favour of school auditing, these ranking systems aim to empower “motivated students across the globe to fulfil their potential” by ranking universities on a series of criteria. The QS World University Rankings system, for example, judges universities based on 5 key “lenses”:
Research and Discovery (50 percent weighting), which analyses the quality and impact of research. Employment and Outcomes (20 percent weighting), which places focus on the employment prospects of students after graduation. Learning and Experience (10 percent weighting) which evaluates the general quality of learning. Global Engagement (15 percent weighting), a measure that relies on the ratio of international to home students, as well as international research prospects. And Sustainability (5 percent weighting), which focuses on “the impact of academic research across the UN’s 17 sustainable development goals”
Measured through a variety of methods, such as student survey results, these criteria are used to calculate a university’s rating out of 100, which is then used to rank the university against 1500 other institutions. King’s College London, for example, has an overall score of 85.7, placing it at #37 in the world ranking.
Whilst these rankings may provide students with an insight into the strengths and weaknesses of prospective universities, Amsler contends that they may well lead to elitist discourse between universities and their students.
“Rankings in general may be understood not as neutral methods for understanding the quality or value of education, but as politico-ideological technologies of valuation and hierarchisation that operate according to a principle logic of inclusion and exclusion”. – Sarah Amsler, University of Lincoln.
Student with head in hands. Photo by Alexandra Koch on Pixabay, https://pixabay.com/photos/student-man-desperate-depression-6976999/
How Do Students Perceive These Rankings?
With this in mind, I surveyed 20 University of London students from Royal Holloway University of London (Royal Holloway), King’s College London (KCL) and University College London (UCL) about their perceptions of ranking systems, with a particular focus on the QS rankings.
To gauge students’ initial understanding of the university ranking system, I asked the participants to rank the following 7 universities in order of where they imagine the universities to be placed in the QS World University Rankings:
Imperial College London (ICL) (#2)
UCL (#8)
KCL (#37)
London School of Economics (LSE) (#62)
Royal Holloway (#465)
Goldsmiths University of London (Goldsmiths) (#701)
University of Arts London (UAL) (#851)
(Universities are listed in descending order based on the 2027 QS World University Rankings).
Surprisingly, none of the participants ranked them in the correct order.
70 percent of participants predicted that ICL would rank the highest, meanwhile only 20 percent of participants expected KCL to place third, with most expecting the university to place lower. Half of the participants expected LSE to place second; no one predicted that it would come fourth.
This makes it clear that most students, especially King’s students, perceive KCL to be a middle-ground university in relation to other London Universities. Whilst ICL is not a member of the University of London anymore, it is interesting that participants were well aware of its placement above their own universities. However this, as well as the misplacement of LSE in second, may well have been a reflection of the universities’ high placement in other university rankings.
In contrast, the lower-ranking universities were often underestimated by participants. 70 percent of individuals expected Goldsmiths to place last, meanwhile, half placed Royal Holloway in 6th or 7th.
Once again, the trend of students undervaluing their own university is evident. Although, this trend seemed to avoid students from UCL.
Whilst King’s students underestimated the university’s placement in rankings, UCL students either accurately predicted or overestimated their university’s placement, revealing an interesting divergence in how the two groups view their own universities.
Divergence and Discrimination
This dichotomy also makes itself clear in interactions between students from KCL and UCL, with King’s students often feeling looked down upon by UCL students.
One participant, an undergraduate student at King’s, said that they had “told a girl [that they] went to KCL and she proceeded to tell [them] that she was smarter… because she attended UCL for Philosophy”.
Meanwhile, a postgraduate student from UCL also claimed to have experienced hierarchical elitism against King’s students in interactions with their classmates, stating:
“I feel like there’s an internal hierarchy where students in UCL think they’re better than KCL”.
Nevertheless, this hierarchical culture not only seems to exist between King’s and UCL but also between participants from Royal Holloway claiming that they are often judged by other University of London students because their university is not a member of the Russell Group. The Russell Group are an elite group of 24 universities who work to “advance and champion [their] positive economic, societal and cultural contributions” by working together to improve education and complete research.
“I’ve had a negative experience… especially from other University of London students, [with them often] indicating that they don’t see Royal Holloway as a serious institution”. – Thomas, 19, Undergraduate, Royal Holloway
“I don’t attend a Russell Group, and I don’t take a STEM subject, therefore certain people believe [that] my degree is pointless and [that] the university I’ve chosen isn’t good enough”. – Kathryn, 19, Undergraduate, Royal Holloway
In this, we can see how hierarchical elitism affects both Russell Group and non-Russell Group students. Whilst the former have the privilege to debate their rankings with other Russell Group students, the latter aren’t only judged for their lower ranking, but also for their position outside of the group.
On the other hand, some participants also claimed to have benefited from their university’s ranking, especially when it came to their family’s perception of their degree.
My family are “very proud of me, they’re confident that I will be successful and that my university will give me an advantage”. – Undergraduate student from UCL
“For my course personally, RHUL is very high in rankings so, once I tell them that and compare [them] to more well-known unis like UCL, KCL, LSE and Imperial, I get a better reaction”. – Undergraduate student from Royal Holloway
This, however, once again reveals how rankings negatively shape our perceptions of London universities. If students are only able to receive a positive reaction when they place their university or course in comparison with others, what is the point of the ranking in the first place? Are QS aiming to empower students to “fulfil their potential” or are they merely empowering us to judge our peers?
The Verdict
Despite the potential benefits that they can provide, it is obvious that, within London’s intercollegiate culture, university rankings like the QS World University Rankings seem to cause more harm than good.
By pitting universities against one another, these rankings create a hierarchical culture, in which the high-ranking “elite” universities are in constant competition; lower-ranking institutions are marginalised into insecurity; and degrees are chosen not by individual merit, but by the subjective quality of the institution in which they are taught.
To explore more of our Features content, click here.
About the author
