Standard baring

July 7, 2000

Brian Brivati is entitled to his views about Oxford, but he seems to have based much of his argument on a simple fallacy (Soapbox, THES, June 30). Teaching quality assessment says nothing about the relative standing of departments. Like all "quality" matters, it is based on conformity to a type or standard. In this case, it is the conformity to, or the discrepancy of, a department in practice, in relation to its claims in its self-assessment document.

Thus Kingston could score 23 out of 24, but if by some mistake the assessors had been sent the Oxford self-assessment, it would be likely to fail. Likewise, Oxford would not match up terribly well against the Kingston document. Different institutions have different priorities and should be judged on that basis.

John Newbery

Industrial training tutor and principal lecturer, School of Chemical and Life Sciences, University of Greenwich

Please login or register to read this article.

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments


Featured jobs

Student Researcher

University Of Greenwich

Recruitment Officer (Channel Management)

University College Dublin (ucd)

Assistant Professor in Finance

Durham University

Research Associate

Kings College London