next »

[olelukoie]

I am hoping to get some information about Brunel University.  Without any academic experience in the UK, it is hard for me to translate the general information I have read about it into any real sense the profile of the place, what kind of league it is in, whether it is more of a research or teaching institution, how it is perceived in terms of prestige, etc.  Any information would be appreciated; thanks in advance.

[the_walrus]

It is a plate-glass.  Start here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_glass_universities .

[hphphp]

Academically, I think it depends on which area/dept. you are looking at. Some are pretty good some aren't. It was well known for engineering (and probably still has good engineering school).
Location-wise it's at the western edge of greater london, not too far from heathrow. So you're not very close to the city but is somewhat cheaper.

[olelukoie]

To the reply with the glass-plate wiki link:

Thank you. Yep, I had come across that article and that term while googling it, but that's sort of what I meant--it's hard for me to get a sense of what that means today.  I get that it's part of the wave of these new universities, but are they all perceived as inherently different from the old ones?  Where is Brunel in comparison with other post-1960s universities?  

[olelukoie]

Academically, I think it depends on which area/dept. you are looking at. Some are pretty good some aren't. It was well known for engineering (and probably still has good engineering school).

I am in the social sciences...

[babbinacara]

The Guardian has this moderately useful tool, with which you can search for university rankings in your field:
http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityguide2009

The results of the last RAE (Research Assessment Exercise) are here:
http://www.rae.ac.uk/
Go to Results and sift for Brunel and your field.

Not everyone agrees with the methods used to calculate either of these rankings, but they should give you a rough idea of the Research/Teaching balance and the group of institutions that are roughly parallel.

[wegie]

I have to admit that I prefer the Times rankings to the one the Grauniad produces. The Grauniad's rankings are occasionally just plain odd.

The big divide nowadays isn't between Oxbridge, the red bricks and the plate glass universities. They're now all lumped together as pre-92s. The two big divides are between pre and post-92 institutions and between the Russell Group, the 94 group and everybody else. Brunel isn't a member of either the Russell Group or the 94 group, and their RAE results were relatively weak, so they may be in danger of slipping down towards the ranks of the teaching-focused universities (their results are similar to those which had the VCs of Liverpool and Reading reaching for the knife). On the other hand, their strategic plan leading up to the REF strongly emphasizes the retention of the research-intensive mission. After that, if the social sciences still only have middling scores, all bets would probably be off.

[the_walrus]

If you believe, like my dean (and I'm not sure I do...), that it's better to be in a mediocre department in a high-ranking university than in a good department in a crap one, then this ranking of universities based on total RAE outcomes might be of use as well:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2008/dec/18/rae-2008-results-uk-universities

Brunel looks very middle of the road by that measure---pretty low for a pre 92, but at the top of the post 92 leagues.  I guess this would be consistent with them not being in either the russell group or the 1994 group, very roughly the groups of more prominent research institutions in the country.

[wegie]

If you believe, like my dean (and I'm not sure I do...), that it's better to be in a mediocre department in a high-ranking university than in a good department in a crap one, then this ranking of universities based on total RAE outcomes might be of use as well:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2008/dec/18/rae-2008-results-uk-universities

Brunel looks very middle of the road by that measure---pretty low for a pre 92, but at the top of the post 92 leagues.  I guess this would be consistent with them not being in either the russell group or the 1994 group, very roughly the groups of more prominent research institutions in the country.

I think your dean may have a point there. I did my doctoral work in the comp sci department at Aber (which consistently outperforms in the RAE), and the constant push to try and get better incoming MSc and PhD cohorts despite the location and overall mid-ranking reputation of the university overall was a real strain. At a higher ranking university overall, there's a) usually more money sloshing around the system, b) the possibilities for internal collaboration to help pull one's department up are much greater and c) you've probably got more than one RAE cycle before the VC gets an itchy trigger finger.

Of course, I have also worked in a department at a Russell Group university where a bad RAE rating in 1991 led to a bloodbath comparable to the St Valentine's Day Massacre in the run up to RAE 1996. 

[runwithscissors]

Though not about teaching or research, be aware that Brunel has some of the most Godawful 60s brutalist architecture. Go watch A Clockwork Orange again and picture trendy students in place of droogs and you'll get the idea.