So which ones are considered to be the Top ones nowadays?

[Guest55]

Sorry - this is what Imperial have said to many of my students who have gone there for interview.

Are you calling them liars?

[zee]

Sorry - this is what Imperial have said to many of my students who have gone there for interview.

Are you calling them liars?

No, I am not calling anyone anything as emotive as a "liar". I said "I'm sorry, but I don't believe that", i.e. your claim:

"Imperial... proudly says at interviews that it throws out a third during the course."

and I gave reasons, statistics and links as to why I did not believe it. Here are some more reasons:

I cannot believe such a shocking statistic is possible for an elite institution, or that they would boast about it, or that it could be hidden from all surveys and league tables, whether government ones or related to surveys of students.

At a boringly pragmatic level, funding is related to student numbers. If you lose a third of them, you can't keep that quiet. And what about logistics: either you have students sharing single rooms at the start of the year, or you have empty rooms for part of the year? Similar with space in lecture theatres etc. Even a wealthy university like Imperial couldn't afford such rates of wastage.

I suppose Imperial could lie to government statisticians, though I doubt it, but Student Finance would know about it from ex students - unless there is some conspiracy of silence between the university and those it has thrown out AND not a single disgruntled ex student (or any of their friends, teachers or parents!) has ever squealed about it!

If I or my child had worked hard, turned down other good unis, got into debt and was then kicked out with a third of their classmates, I'd be running to ombudsmen, my MP and the press, along with many others, claiming the admissions process was not fit for purpose and demanding damages and either readmission or a refund. It's the sort of story the media would love; social inclusion versus academic elitism.

So, I'm sorry, I don't know how or why you and your students have got that impression, but I still cannot believe it is true.

And now that I've given all the reasons for my position, I'd be interested in how you dismiss the data in all the links I provided and how you think such a huge deceit, involving thousands of students over the years, could be kept secret from the authorities and media, especially when Imperial itself apparently boasts of the fact.


(For the record, my sample size is smaller than yours, but DS1 had no inkling of this in any of his detailed research about Imperial, or at the open day last summer or his (successful) interview last term. Nor have any of the several Imperial students and graduates I know mentioned losing friends this way. However, that is merely anecdotal. It is hard facts and logic that make it impossible for me to believe the claim of throwing out a third of the students.)

[Guest55]

I have taught for many years and have a number of students each year that have applied to Imperial, mainly for Engineering - they ALL have reported this has been said to them.

So if you accept that the students are not lying then why do Imperial say this to them?

[zee]

So if you accept that the students are not lying then why do Imperial say this to them?

I have absolutely no idea.

Do you have any idea either why Imperial would routinely lie to applicants, or else how Imperial could tell some applicants (and all the 33% they expel), yet keep it secret from government statisticians and the media, year after year?

[Guest55]

"Dr **** reported that considerable efforts had been invested into reducing the failure rate in the 1st and 2nd years and these had met with marked success."

http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/pls/portalli ... 541909.PDF" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is in the public domain that their failure rates are high. High rates in Engineering can be covered up by low drop out elsewhere.

[mike1880]

Except that the document is based on data from 6-9 years ago, the quote refers to failure rate in internal exams (not unrelated to drop-out rate but not the same thing) and no actual figures are given. The only specific mention of drop-out rates (last page, referring to the college as a whole) says they "seem respectable, thanks to a highly selective entry process and good pastoral support through the tutorial system" which implies that they are in fact on the low side.

It seems somewhat unlikely to me that an institution that requires such a high entry standard from its students would expect to throw so many of them out empty handed.

Mike

[zee]

Guest55: If you believe Imperial habitually expels a third of its engineers before graduation, you surely have a moral duty to contact Michael Gove and the media asap with this shameful and shocking news. In the meantime, I presume you advise your students in the strongest possible terms against applying to Imperial.

mike1880: Well put.

[asdguest]

Perhaps the confusion arises from here:

http://live.cgcu.net/news/2093" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

but why anyone at Imperial would wish to brag about it I'm not sure. Judging by Minutes already posted there does seem to have been a growing concern at the college about the ability of A level students admitted.

further investigation reveals:

https://workspace.imperial.ac.uk/regist ... e%2019.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and looking at drop out rates:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... grees.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting.

[wurzel]

A family member teaches Physics at UCL, where they apparently lose around 10% of their undergrads by the end of the first year (only speaking for Physics here), through 'dropping out' or failure of exams at this stage. He tells me that, from his knowledge of Imperial's physical science and engineering courses, the first year looks significantly tougher than equivalent courses at UCL, although by the end of the third year the students cover pretty much the same ground. There is a generally-held perception that Imperial is less willing to support the weaker students throughout the course and would prefer to lose them at an early stage.
There is something to be said for finding out as early as possible if students are going to struggle. It does not help a very weak student to allow endless retakes if they then come out at the end of three years with a poor degree. However, having made an offer and taken them on, I think the university should make its best effort to support them through the course. Probably Imperial is sufficiently well subscribed that it can afford to support a relatively high dropout rate.

[vivienphung]

I was an undergraduate at Imperial for 3 years in the Maths department and was not aware of many of class mates being thrown out. Having said this, this was donkey years ago!

This is a competitive world, if any of the students cannot keep up with the standard and having provided with the relevant support from the college (I consider the support was good in my time), then I dont see the problem of expelling them.