University of Leicester (UK)

For those familiar with British schools, what is your general opinion of the University of Leicester. I have seen the usual UK university rankings and Leicester is generally ranked in the 30-40 spot (out of 100 or so schools). Leicester has many DL programs and seems to be an innovator in the field. Other than that, I don't know much about this institution. I am interested in pursuing a graduate degree.

Additionally, would anyone happen to know if their diplomas mention anything about "distance learning" or "external programme" or the like, which distinguishes the holder from the campus-based program. I know (from information provided in this board) that the University of London's diploma specifically states the graduate studied as an "external student" and, thus, I was wondering if Leicester's diploma used similar wording.

Thank you in advance for any information you might be able to provide.

 

During the 5 or 6 years that I was involved in marketing their programs in the US (1994-98), we really came to like that place a lot, in that they were tremendously responsive to students, both by Email and phone, and by sending significant numbers of faculty on annual or semi-annual trips to the various countries where they operated, to meet with students -- and, importantly, by re-doing many of their syllabuses to make them specifically relevant to the countries where students were. (We represented just the MS in training and in human resource management, but were quite familiar with the programs in criminal justice and the MBA.)

The diplomas said nothing about method of earning, at least back then.

PS: One of the first people who earned a Master's at Leicester was C. P. Snow, probably their best-known graduate.

 

The "external student" thing is blown way, way, way, way , way out of proportion with respect to the UoL.

The UoL is fine, however they often are very restrictive with respect to payment of fees (i.e. they often require payment over 24 month, although the program may be achived over several years).

 

>>The "external student" thing is blown way, way, way, way , way out of proportion with respect to the UoL.<<

Could you explain HOW the "'external student' thing is blown way" out proportion? Doesn't the diploma specifically state something like "Having studed as an external student...."?

 

I agree with Ken on this one. It's blown out of proportion because it's not important. What is important is how stringent and meaningful are the requirements for one to be awarded the degree. In any case, if in fact one earns a degree as an "external student" why be concerned that this is accurately reflected on the diploma?

Gert Potgieter (who is enrolled in a University of London Master's program, and who truly doesn't care if they type the diploma on recycled tissue paper.)

 

At the graduate level, it often helps to look at departmental reputation rather than at overall university ranking.

You may want to consult the results of the recent 2001 Research Assessment Exercise at:
.
http://www.rae.ac.uk/results/

You can get the data listed by university or by subject.

 

1) The degree is from a prestigious university
2) The standards for the external degrees are the same as the internal
3) The programs are basically the same as the on-campus ones... you can transfer from the external to the internal in some cases

 

question: what is good, and what is bad in these UK research results? i cannot find any kind of scale? (or to say it shortly: i seem to be too stupid to understand the rating...)

can you help me?

greets
t

 

You will find three columns. The first column is the actual research ranking, on a scale from 5* (best), through 5, 4, 3a, 3b, 2 to 1 (worst). The second column is a letter symbolizing the percentage of departmental staff that is research active. The third column is the full time equivalent research active staff number.

An better explanation of the assessment results format is located here:
.
http://www.rae.ac.uk/Pubs/4_01/section3.asp

It will tell what each number ranking means, how to interpret the letters etc.

If you snoop around the links on these pages, you will find a description of the RAE methodology and stuff.

 

okay, the 5(*) to 1 - ranking wasn´t clear to me. thanks a lot.

 

An interesting post from another board...

No, I'm not a HW MBA student, though my son recently graduated from HW. I was drawn to contribute because of comments about the graduation at HW - I attended a HW graduation last year and was not overly impressed. HW could do a much better graduation ceremony with little effort and cost.

Also, I'm also not unfamiliar with distance learning as my first degree was with the Open University and I'm involved in producing distance learning materials for advanced courses.

A difficulty for anyone producing distance teaching materials for the US market is that they generally have to made less rigourous than the those for the UK market. The Open University degree's now available in the US are 'cut down' from the UK courses. We have an on going debate as to whether we should do the same for our materials - a decision is yet to be made.

HW have apparently not gone down this road, and comments I have seen suggest that many Americans find the learning approach very difficult - but of a very high standard and well worth the effort.

The difficulty for many Americans to appreciate that on an academic level the British Education system is moving to becoming 'the international standard' against which qualifications are measured.

This is not a accident, the UK system has evolved over the years to create structures for the quality control and assement of examinations at high school, associate degree, undergraduate degree and postgrad that are not found in any other system.

Also, with the UK's historical tradition of having to deliver qualifications over what was once a far flung Empire, there is considerable experience with distance learning and adaptation of course material to foreign requirements. The first distance learning courses were produced by London University and UK civil service for Government employees in the 19th century.

In the past Americans have had little contact with the UK education system, but HW has changed all that, as has the IBO programme for schools (notionally 'international' but in reality operated from Wales). A few schools in Florida and Virginia have chosen to go over entirely to the UK operated 'IGCSE' high school system.

The benefits for the schools concerned in the USA are not huge (IGCSE is meaningless to most Americans) but the programme is an international standard - these schools can accurately compare thier results against schools in the UK, Egypt, Jordan, India, Switzerland, Spain and over 100 countries that operate the same programme.

The same is true of colleges throughout the world - including China, India, Russia, and elsewhere that operate the UK HND 'Associate Degree' programme.

So my point is that there is really no comparison between a UK accredited degree and one in the US. You are comparing something defined and regularly quality controlled with a nebulous, 'feeling' that Americans have about thier particular qualification or educational establishment.

You may well be able to make a fine PC computer from compenents - If you had to choose between half a dozen homebuild machines and a Dell and had say 10 seconds to make decisions - which would you choose?

The answer is obvious.

As I said in another post, watch out for when US Community Colleges go for HND accreditation. That will be the end of the US education system as you know it.

And this isn't a matter of British hubris, both US adminstrations (Clinton and Bush) have been in consultation with the UK government about the use of the UK system as a model. Both Laura Bush and Clinton have had direct experience working in UK education.

The recent Bush proposals are development of ideas explored by both adminstrations.

Wow that was a long post. . . . next question?

 

And again...

For me, it was the same reasons as everyone else said. (Flexibility, cost, no GMAT needed, etc) When I was first looking around for an MBA program, HW was actually last on my list. Like you said, there are plenty of similarly priced MBA program in the states. However, the little extra that changed me around was:
1) I've always heard UK schools are more difficult than US. I wanted to see for myself. (So far, the answer seems to be YES). Also, I like how UK schools use external examiners.

2) I knew that I couldn't afford, nor probably get into schools like Harvard, Yale, MIT, etc. So when I looked at DL MBA programs in the US, the choices available in my ballpark were California State Domingueze Hills, Baker College, Capella, NOVA, City University, and a few other state colleges. None of these colleges had the reputation and history that Heriot-Watt does.

3) I wanted to be more 'internationalised'. I work in Japan with people from around the world. When people (especially Brits) know I'm an American enrolled in a British MBA program, it helps me seem less 'American' to them. I'm not sure if that makes sense or not. Also, since I live overseas and won't know where I'll be one month or the other, and it's very convenient to take exams through the British Councils.

 

One more time...


Yes, but Scotland does have the QAA and Scottish Qualification body. . . US colleges don't. So while Scottish and English Universities do not have standardised courses they do have what amounts to independent peer review.

It's a long while since I was an undergraduate, but two of my children recently graduated from HW and Edinburgh. . . both of them commented on the lack of prepareness of US students, not so much in terms of knowledge, but in the emphasis on independent learning and knowledge acqusition in UK universities.

This is borne out by the recent publication of OECD PISA report, which shows UK students to have very advanced analytical and interpretive skills compared to most other nations.

As I mentioned in another post, the UK HND system has great advantages over the US 'Associate Degree' programme. An organisation like HW working in partner with some the Scottish FE colleges could achieve a very high degree of market penetration and provide an appropriate 'feeder' system for the MBA.

 

"WalterRogers" quotes someone else: I attended a HW graduation last year and was not overly impressed. HW could do a much better graduation ceremony with little effort and cost.

During our 7 years involvement in marketing for them, we learned that they do two graduations a year. The winter one is dull, grey, indoors, tedious. The summer one is outdoors, strawberries and cream, strolling violins, pipes, joyful. The videos I've seen tend to confirm this.

 

Yet the UK HND is in no way comparable to the US associates degree. They are different animals and fulfill different functions. A UK HND is at the level of a UK pass degree*. The commencement study level of the major in a UK HND is at "A" level, and the study is usually another two years narrowly focused on that major. A US associates degree generally includes the broad education component comprising the first two years of study of a four year US college degree. The first two years of a US college degree cover subjects up to about the level of UK "A" levels. This then prepares students for study in the final two years of a US 4 year degree, or alternatively, for employment with a terminal credential at the US 2 year college level. In other words, HND study starts where US associates degree study ends.

If US 2 year institutions switch to an HND based credential, how do you get US students from high school level to the level necessary for entry into this putative HND? Add yet another layer? It is like asking UK GCSE students to leapfrog the two years through "A" level. This just makes no sense. What would be required is that US K-12 learning be accelerated a full two years such that, at the end, American high school seniors were being taught material at the level of UK "A" level. Similarly, US college academic subject level would have to "shift left" by two years.

In the end, what is being suggested is that the US adopt the UK system in its entirety. While there may be some merit to that notion, it's worth pointing out that the US has, overall, been well served by a higher education system that has facilitated its rise to the status of the world's super power, while in comparison, over the same period, Britain, with its superior education system, has experienced a precipitous decline.

My sense based on first hand experience is that Dearing* was correct in concluding an associates is about equivalent to "A" level, and a US bachelor's degree is at the level of a UK pass degree or HND (i.e. 2 years UK university). A US master's degree is about the level of a UK honors degree (3 years UK university**). The reason for the disparity is simply that UK students who have completed "A" level, are already about one to two years ahead of their American brothers and sisters in those subjects going into university study.

Yet my experience in industry is that US graduates (at master's or Ph.D. level) with experience are every bit as capable as their UK counterparts, and critically, in many instances, a good deal more productive.

Lawrie Miller
who in addition to US bachelor's degrees, holds both UK HND and HNC


Further reading on UK/US degree equivalencies

* DEARING REPORT - APPENDIX 5 SECTION 7.1
"The team gained the impression, based on an inspection of syllabuses and examination papers, that the American high school diploma compares in standard with GCSE and the associate degree with GCE A-level and Advanced GNVQ, the bachelor’s degree with a UK pass degree or higher national diploma and the Master’s degree with a bachelor’s honours degree from a British university. "

See http://www.ncl.ac.uk/ncihe/
Appendix 5 Section 7.1


**Excepting Scotland where the 4 year honors degree is the norm, and entrance requirements are set around end of US 1st year college (Scottish Higher grade).

**********************************************

 

Hi,

I see Leicester U. ranks No. 20 out of 123 in the UK Sunday Times 2001 university league.

In the review, it is stated that Leicester has gone three years without a subject being rated other than Excellent (top grade) by the UK Quality Assurance Agency.

Quite a lot of its DL programs are offered by agencies here in the Middle East and seem to be quite popular.

From what I have seen with Sheffield Hallam and Strathclyde, there is no distinction made about a DL- or Campus-based degree. My guess is that Leicester won't distinguish either.

I think London is a special case, because the programs are offered by the Extension College of London University.

Good luck,

Neil

 

Neil,

Thank you for your response. I had looked at the various 2000 UK university rankings, which generally placed Leicester in the 30's range. Its good to know that the school has moved up to the Top 20 in the 2001 rankings.

I suspected that Leicester did not distinguish between modes of learning in its diploma, and your and Dr. Bear's comments were helpful in this regard.

James