Woxbridge is no more as Warwick drops to 6th place in Guardian league tables

Warwick University dropped three places in [the latest _Guardian_ league table](http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2011/may/17/university-league-table-2012) moving from 3rd to 6th place, it was annouced this week. The development added pressure on the University after Warwick dropped out of the Times Higher Education’s Top 200 World Universities last year due to a change in ranking methodology.

This contradicts previous results as Warwick moved from 4th to 3rd place in the _Guardian_ rankings over the last two years. These high rankings led to the popularisation of the phrase “Woxbridge” [by the _Boar_](/comment/2010/jun/23/woxbridge-tops-tables/) and the creation of [a Facebook group](https://www.facebook.com/pages/Woxbridge-WarwickOxfordCambridge/182299735151353) in recognition of this grouping.

Warwick Students’ Union Education Officer Sean Ruston described the change in ranking as more of a statistical anomaly than a reflection of reality. He also noted that the _Guardian_ rankings tended to produce mixed results, with non Russell-Group Universities Lancaster and Loughborough being placed in the top 10.

Ruston explained one of the major reasons Warwick performed worse this year was due to the employability of graduates being measured 6 months after graduation. Many students at Warwick were Arts or Social Science students who tended to take some time to find careers and many graduates often took gap years or spent time interning after finishing. Ruston argued that measuring employability after two years was a far more accurate measure and this was also advocated by other leading universities.

Warwick SU President Daniel Stevens agreed with Ruston, and also blamed the Guardian placing disproportional weight on the National Student Survey (NSS). Warwick did well in this measure overall, he claimed, but performed poorly in the key categories of assessment and feedback. However, Stevens argued perhaps a positive of this league table slip would be to help put pressure on the University to produce better feedback.

This recognition was perhaps good news for Philosophy student James Appleton who complained that feedback was “poor to non-existent.” The Philosophy Department satisfied only 58 per cent of respondents in the NSS on feedback. Third year Politics student Anna Chowcat also emphasised “Warwick seems to fall down heavily on feedback and this appears to be a consistent problem in other league tables.”

Feedback was an issue the SU was trying to help address, Ruston argued. Pressure was being put on the University to create “early degree, low credit, extensive feedback devises”. Ruston explained that students would benefit from an opportunity to receive around 30 minutes feedback from a tutor early on and learn the “academic language” tutors were seeking that was so often elusive to students.

Ruston also claimed that the Vice Chancellor was concerned about the issue of employability and was aiming more resources at the Career and Skills Department.

The University was keen to stress the positive developments, such as Warwick being ranked second for Business Studies. Warwick also ranked top for American Studies, fourth for Engineering , Mathematics and Sociology and fifth for English.

However, Undergraduate Science Faculty Representative John Lapage raised concern that the Life Sciences Department had dropped from seventh to twenty-first place in a single year. Lapage complained that this was the result of the departments’ staff being forced to focus more on fighting for their jobs than educating. “We would be even lower if it weren’t for certain exemplary staff.”

Reaction from students was mixed; one female third-year History and Politics student asked: “Who cares about the _Guardian_ ranking?” while second-year Politics student Ben Jones commented: “It’s a shame, but these fluctuations seem to happen all the time.”

Chair of Union Council Elect James Entwistle, however, seemed less concerned about the fluctuation in league table position and argued it was “irrelevant when compared to the swinging government cuts in the higher education sector and a lame graduate employment market.”

The _Guardian_ said that overall “Warwick is something of a leader in the academic field, with innovative approaches to community involvement and widening participation.”