Talk:University of London

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the University of London article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
A mortarboard This article is part of WikiProject Universities, an attempt to standardise coverage of Universities and colleges. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
"The Albert Memorial" - the London Portal's current "Showcase Picture" This article is part of WikiProject London, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to London. If you would like to participate, you can improve the article attached to this page or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles.
B This article has been rated as b-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.


Contents

[edit] Alumni

The famous alumni listed are mostly UCL alumni. Add alums of other University of London colleges, or restrict these to the pages of the colleges themselves? Lukobe

Quotation: "...with between 10 and 20 percent of all UK students attending its colleges..." - could no one be more precise - surely some authority collects and maintains statistics on student numbers? Djegan 22:25, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Indeed they do, the HESA. Taking their figures the number actually works out at just over 5%, so I've edited the article accordingly. Daduzi 20:49, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I've added a lot more alumni, hoping to broaden the scope and deal with the criticism that the list was UCL centric. But I think now the list is getting very long - shall we create a page for alumni in their own right? Timrollpickering 11:23, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

It may be time for that especially considering the recent addition by an anonymous user. Lukobe 17:05, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Perhaps Former students of the University of London, with a brief selection here?
James F. (talk) 20:42, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Could you elaborate? Not sure quite what you mean. Lukobe 22:08, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
As in, the complete listing at the above, linked to from this page but with a small selection of the most famous ones here. Of course, the decision as to which ones are "most famous" is POV, but sometimes editorial discretion is useful. ;-)
James F. (talk) 23:06, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan! :) Lukobe 02:30, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Recognised or Listed bodies

Are Courtald and Cancer Research still Listed Bodies? I thought they now had college status in their own right. Both are listed as individual institutions in the HESA statistics [1] and [2] Timrollpickering 22:19, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[3] states that the ICR is a College within the UoL. Courtaulds is less forthcoming. Icairns 00:05, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Further to this, the British Institute in Paris (BIP) is now called The University of London In Paris (TULIP). I see a ghosted link to the University of London Union also appears on some pages. 00:15, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] External Degree program

Someone with a better awareness of where to place it among the constituent college, etc. should include the large external degree program (www.londonexternal.ac.uk), and probably link it to distance education. 64.229.40.47 06:35, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] University of London Royal Postgraduate Medical School

How does this school fit into the overall structure? Fawcett5 15:23, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

  • The British Postgraduate Medical School, based at Hammersmith Hospital, was incorporated by Royal Charter in 1931 and opened in 1935. It was the result of recommendations by the Athlone Report of 1921, and was a pioneer institution of postgraduate clinical teaching and research. The school has always been closely linked with the Hammersmith Hospital and the Medical Research Council, where its teaching research and clinical work is carried out. Senior Academic staff of the school provided consultant services and academic leadership for Hammersmith Hospital.

The school became part of the British Postgraduate Medical Foundation in 1947, and was known as the Postgraduate Medical School of London. In 1974 the school became independent, with a new charter and the title Royal Postgraduate Medical School. In 1988 the school merged with the Institute of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, and became part of the Imperial College School of Medicine on its formation in 1997. --Duncan 15:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] University of London Alumni?

The University of London Alumni page should be deleted. It is basically a plagerism of the LSE Alumni page with a few additions. Also it is misleading to say that people are alumni of the University of London. No one studies at University of London. People study at member colleges for University of London degrees. The University of London is only a degree awarding body. - Sarah H

A lot do study at the University of London, whether at the central institutes, on intercollegiate degrees or in research. From recollection Birkbeck's School of Continuing Education has its origins as the central University Extra-Mural programme, whilst the External degree programme is at least marketted at being the University, not colleges. The central University operates as more than just a degree awarding body, with many central facilities - e.g. Halls, Library, ULU...
I agree the list needs a rethink but to say no-one studies at the University of London is misleading and inaccurate. Timrollpickering 15:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • It is not misleading to say that people are alumni of the University of London, for the reasons stated above. More than one fifth of the University's students are in the external programme, which is three times the size of Imperial College. One could also consider the federal LLM program. I studied at London Business School, which is formally a graduate faculty of the University of London. Its students are granted UoL degrees. Considering the possible withdrawal of LSE, IC and UCL from the University, it's important to avoid historical revisionism, where people who are graduates of the University are painted out to not be. --Duncan 15:22, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
OK lets take the example of JFK. Saying JKF is LSE alumni is the truth. But saying JFK is University of London alumni is misleading (especially as he did not take a degree, the only function of Uni of Lond).
People graduate from UCL, KCL, LSE, Imperial etc with University of London degrees. They do not graduate from the University of London.
But I can compromise on this issue. If it is made clear that the list is of those who received Uni of London degrees (those who didn't take Uni of Lond degrees should not be on the list), and if the list puts in brackets which college they graduated from, that would make the section far more accurate. I would have no problems with such a list. And I dont think anyone can object to calls for an entry or section of an entry to be made more accurate.
Anyway, the list needs to spun off into a separate entry, as has happened with other university alumni pages. I dont have the technical know-how to do this. Can someone establish a separate University of London "alumni" page with the amendments I've mentioned? - Sarah H
Why not name the section something along the lines of "Alumni of University of London colleges"? I think a precise wording would be better than having to verify who did and did not gain UL degrees (which would be a nightmare). If we can settle on a name I have a list of alumni and could get the page up and running fairly quickly. Daduzi 03:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Alumnus does not mean 'graduate', it means former student, so there is no need to be so specific about who did or did not attend a college. Luckily, this means that the bizzare notion that people graduate from college of the University but not from the University need not be resolved. Those without degrees can be on the list, including President Kennedy. I am happy to call Senate House and ask their opinion... --Duncan 17:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Imperial leaving UL

The article should mention that Imperial has left UL, also I think other colleges have award powers they do not use (eg I think LSE has this), also the article might do well to mention some of the impending controversy that might result in the disintegration of UL, info here: http://education.guardian.co.uk/administration/story/0,,1663818,00.html

  • Imperial has not left the University. It has announced that is will negotiate towards that. Of course, that meas it still many not happen. One outcome that can be ruled out is the disintegration of the University, even if the LSE and UCL follow it. --Duncan 11:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Central School of Speech and Drama joined University of London

That happened in September 2005, see here. I've added the category and the template University of London to Central School of Speech and Drama, but I can't find whether it should go under Recognised bodies or Listed bodies, so I have touched neither the text in University of London nor the template University of London… I'll leave that for UK editors to decide.  :-) --EjpH 00:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Provisional Alumni list up

I've set up a page for a list of notable staff and students of the University of London. The paragraph at the top would be inserted into the main article, with a link to the list. I haven't linked to it yet since I'd appreciate if others could have a look and give some comments on structure, mistakes or omissions. Thanks. Daduzi 22:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

If nobody has any objections I'll go ahead and put in the top paragraph in the page above into the article, with a link to the page. --Daduzi 13:06, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, done--Daduzi 13:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] UCL/Imperial merger?

A recent revision claims UCL and Imperial are to merge. I thought this plan was abandoned back in late 2002 - or is this a new attempt?

This plan was indeed abandoned, and I can find no info about a second attempt. Lukobe

Though the London Centre of Nonotechnology is an Imperial/UCL collaboration, the two are currently concerned with attempts to leave UL, not merge bits within it. MilleauRekiir 12:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Major overhaul

I've just completely re-organised the page, following the guidlines set on Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities, and added some more information while I was at it. I'm sure it's not perfect, so I'd appreciate some copyediting. There's also a few sections that could do with expanding, but I hope this sets us off to a good start. --Daduzi talk 08:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment by Sir Richard Sykes

Sir Richard Sykes, Rector of Imperial College, said "Do we want to be badged as London University along with some less prestigious institutions?"

The quotation can be found here: Donald MacLeod, 'Getting out of London', The Guardian (Tuesday December 13, 2005)

I was wondering if there has been speculation as to which institutions he is regarding as less prestigious. Does he mean all of the other constituent parts of the federal University of London? There are surely one or two institutions in the university that are on a par with Imperial. I'm sure Imperial likes to think of itself as the next thing after Oxbridge (or, somewhat unrealistically, as on a par with Oxbridge), but I don't think it has an exclusive claim in that respect. The newspaper league tables are, of course, rather silly, but we know that people pay attention to them. LSE, SOAS, and UCL have all beaten Imperial in at least one league table, and I think on more than one occasion (the Guardian table has traditionally treated LSE, SOAS, and UCL quite favourably). In my opinion, for what it's worth, Oxford and Cambridge constitute the top stratum, and Imperial, LSE, SOAS, UCL, and a handful of non-London institutions (York and Warwick, for example) make up the second stratum. Looking at the Telegraph "table of tables" (2003), the other London colleges are ranked King's (15th), Royal Holloway (28th), Queen Mary (43rd), and Goldsmith's (56th). (Birkbeck, CSSD, Courtauld, Heythrop, ICR, IoE, LBS, LSHTM, the Royal Academy of Music, Royal Vet, School of Pharmacy, St George's, Paris, and the SAS are not listed). Has there been speculation? Has any of it been published? What do people think?--217.134.85.25 15:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What's wrong with the word "College"?

Am I the only person wondering why University of London colleges are steadily dropping the word "College" from their colloquial names? We have "Royal Holloway, University of London", "Birkbeck, University of London", and "Queen Mary, University of London". "Queen Mary" is the silliest sounding because Queen Mary was so obviously somebody's name. "Thomas Holloway, University of London" or "George Birkbeck, University of London" would sound even sillier. What is wrong with the word "College"? The only sensible ones I can think of are Christ Church, Oxford and Peterhouse, Cambridge (and of course places called "Something Hall" - Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, for example). These make sense because they do include a substantive - "Church" and "-house". Is the U of L trying to sound grand by having eccentrically named colleges? Maybe SOAS will become "OAS"?

Secondly, what's wrong with Bedford and Westfield, as in Royal Holloway and Bedford New College and Queen Mary and Westfield College? I admit that "The King's Hall and College of Brasenose" has been shortened to "Brasenose College", but that evolved rather more gradually.--AlexanderLondon 00:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

On the second, and easier point, there isn't much of Bedford and Westfield that's noticable in the current institutions (and RHUL is nowhere near Bedford - geography seems to be an ever more important consideration). At QMUL there are some portraits of past principles, a clock, a road on campus named "Westfield Way" and one or two other things, but other than the name one could spend their entire time at QMUL and not encounter any overt Westfield legacy. I presume the same is true for RHUL.
Also QMUL is officially the merger of four institutions - see for instance the notes on this recent press release:
Queen Mary's roots lie in four historic colleges: Queen Mary College, Westfield College, St Bartholomew's Hospital Medical College and the London Hospital Medical College.
Adding in Barts and the London to the full institution title would render even the acronym unwieldy.
As for "college" there is a growing feeling that in the UK people associate the term with further education/sixth form colleges. Some institutions are so famous that they can get away with still using it (ICL, KCL, UCL) but others have opted to drop it. Also "Queen Mary & Westfield College, University of London" so easily reduces to "Queen Mary & Westfield" (give or take an additional "College") whereas "Queen Mary, University of London" ensures that the UofL part is always present. I don't actually think it sounds silly (only when people shorten it further to "Queen Mary") - namewise it's not that far from "Queen's University of Belfast". Timrollpickering 08:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm interested by the idea that colleges are increasingly thought of as 6th form colleges or FE colleges. I've always found the word college useful, but maybe because I did my first degree at a collegiate university, so "college" did actually mean the college itself (as in "are you going back to college now?", enquired of a friend when leaving a lecture, which would almost never be held in a college, but in central university premises). Now that I am at SOAS I find it difficult to know what to refer to it as. The correct term is "School", I suppose. Neither "college" nor "university" sound quite right, but "school" doesn't either, so I have to call it SOAS. I do take the point that with London colleges, which are in effect universities, to say "college" (to describe King's, UCL, Goldsmith's, etc) does somewhat detract from the fact that one is actually talking about a university, and not a college in the Oxbridge/Durham sense, and yet to refer to those places as "university" doesn't quite work either, since they are also colleges, and they are quite small and contained (compared to Oxford, for example, which sprawls across the whole city).
As for the Queen's University of Belfast, it does, crucially, contain the word "University". My point is just that without the word "College", I'm left asking, "Goldsmith's? Goldsmith's what? Ah, Goldsmith's College". Of course in every day speech we might refer just to Balliol and expect somebody to know what we meant, but "Balliol, University of Oxford" would sound daft compared to "Balliol College, Oxford".--AlexanderLondon 10:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Just looking at the Goldsmiths website it seems the branding is a mess - the current masthead logo is "Goldsmiths, University of London" but the contact details are for "Goldsmiths College, University of London" and the page is copyrighted to "Goldsmiths College". And that's just the frontpage!
By and large most UofL institutions have at least one of "University", "College", "School" or "Institute" in the corporate branding. It's the contractions that get messy. Using the arconyms for "QMUL", "RHUL" and maybe "SGUL" (although medical schools can often get away with the hospital name) is workable (and, if memory serves me correct, are also used for the internet domains) but "BUL" sounds weird and I can't recall anyone ever using it (and the internet domain is BBK). Broadly it works give or take the odd anomaly or protest (anyone remember when "Imperial College" - short form "IC" - changed its branding to "Imperial College London" with intended short form "Imperial" and provoked a "keep the comma" protest from people who didn't want it called "ICL"?).
As for "college", the term was used at my BA/MA university (Kent) but by my day the concept was generally rather meaningless to students on the ground other than an irritation at times when it came to allocation of scarce facilities like accomodation (now phased out) and lockers. Most of the original plans for each college being a tight family seem to have fallen apart as number grew (they were envisaging c600 students in each of up to ten colleges, not 3000+ in four), an ever smaller proportion lived in the colleges (and non-college accomodation was built) and college based facilities became open to all students and some individual colleges lost their own (e.g. dining halls and "Junior Common Rooms"). And graduates who returned for postgraduate study were often members of different colleges from when they were undergraduates. Indeed whenever I post to the alumni mailing list I identify myself by my courses of study, not my college. Timrollpickering 10:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
There's no mystery here. The word college is unclear to a foreign applicant; taking the word university in the title increases the value, and adding London increases it further. And of course the branding will be inconsistent: universities are often weakly led, consenual organisations without the tight branding control found in corporate settings. --Duncan 12:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Third oldest university debate article

I have now created Third oldest university in England debate to try to explain all the debate about whether it's Durham, KCL, UofL or UCL. This was mainly because attempts to explain it on the individual articles were getting out of sync (e.g. both the Durham and King's articles were asserting the claim as fact in the main article, whilst a footnote on King's mentioned the point of the Charter and was added to by an anonymous user asserting that the London School of Economics proves an institution doesn't need a charter to be a good university!). I think it would work best if the detail and explanation for this is kept on one page. Please come and help enhance the article. Timrollpickering 16:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colleges no longer in existence

Could someone who is able to do it right update the line on Wye College? ("Now part of Imperial College") Much obliged, Notreallydavid 03:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LSE, King's and UCL announce plans to award their own degrees in THES

Somebody questioned the inclusion of this information as it was "rumour". The Times Higher Education Supplement seems much firmer in their assertion than this would suggest, and there was no denial in the subsequent issue from any of the colleges or from the University of London itself.

The Times Higher article directly cites the director of the LSE ("Many of our students are now surprised to find themselves given a University of London certificate on their graduation day. We have therefore decided that it would be better for the LSE to issue degrees in its own name in future. We await approval from the University of London as a whole to that proposal.") and states that King's College and UCL had "also told The Times Higher that they hoped to award their own degrees from 2007-08." Consequently this does not seem to be a rumour at all. ThomasL 15:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

It's no rumour - it's been on the cards for some time and preparations for this are underway. It won't be an instant 100% change as any student enrolled pre 2007 (2006 for Imperial) is still entitled to a UofL degree, though Imperial at least offers them the option to take a college degree instead.
My immediate reaction to the quote "Many of our students are now surprised to find themselves given a University of London certificate on their graduation day" is that if an individual college isn't going to bother to acknowledge the link and tell their students then it is solely responsible for their surprise. (Also do LSE use their own stationary for exams? QMUL uses UofL stationary.) Timrollpickering 10:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


From a email cced to the LSE Alumi Subject:"LSE Director's Letter to Alumni" 8 March 2007 21:19:

“ ... Turning to more domestic matters, there are changes afoot in relation to the School’s position within the university of London. The University of London has become a somewhat less significant feature of life here than it was in the past. In the early 1990s the government’s funding of higher education was changed, so that the grant support we receive come directly to us, rather than through the University of London. And, over the years, almost all of the joint programmes we run with other colleges in London have been dismantled. As the lawyers among you will know, the university wide LLM was dropped in favour of an LSE degree about 5 years ago. Now, the University’s central functions are small, and amount to little more than the Senate House Library, a swimming pool, and one or two ancillary functions.

In these circumstances, colleges have been considering their position within the university. Imperial has decided to leave all together. For the moment we, along with Kings and University College London, have decided to remain, but to issue degrees in our own name in future. That means that people entering the School from 2008 onwards will be given an LSE degree, rather than a University of London one. We shall also be making changes in our certificates and gowns etc. ...

 ”

--Philip Baird Shearer 10:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../u/n/i/Talk%7EUniversity_of_London_2618.html"