I just looked at the staff list. It's not a very big department in terms of faculty. Fewer than 40 and not all of them look like they are full-time.
That's relatively big for a European department.
Essex
-
I just looked at the staff list. It's not a very big department in terms of faculty. Fewer than 40 and not all of them look like they are full-time.
That's relatively big for a European department.
Not these days in the UK. I think all the other top departments are bigger.
-
It's been a while you've been in Essex have you? Like in all UK departments (including in London) people show up for seminars, and for Wednesday's meetings.
Size doesn’t matter. Especially not in London where faculty rarely show up anyway for anything. Essex is a decent sized department with people actually around
-
So if Essex isn't a top department and critics don't trust the REF, who are the other contenders (besides the obvious Oxford and Cambridge)?
Don't listen to the nonsense on here. Essex is a top department in an average university, which always produces animosity. In political science, Oxford, LSE and Essex are currently the best, and probably in that order.
-
It's been a while you've been in Essex have you? Like in all UK departments (including in London) people show up for seminars, and for Wednesday's meetings.
Size doesn’t matter. Especially not in London where faculty rarely show up anyway for anything. Essex is a decent sized department with people actually arounddon't know about Wednesday meetings, but seminars are not well attended at Essex.
-
So if Essex isn't a top department and critics don't trust the REF, who are the other contenders (besides the obvious Oxford and Cambridge)?
Don't listen to the nonsense on here. Essex is a top department in an average university, which always produces animosity. In political science, Oxford, LSE and Essex are currently the best, and probably in that order.
in what universe? league tables disagree.
-
So if Essex isn't a top department and critics don't trust the REF, who are the other contenders (besides the obvious Oxford and Cambridge)?
Don't listen to the nonsense on here. Essex is a top department in an average university, which always produces animosity. In political science, Oxford, LSE and Essex are currently the best, and probably in that order.in what universe? league tables disagree.
You can't simultaneously point to the league tables and say that the REF should not be consulted. The research quality component of the league tables is determined by the REF. And if you sort by research quality, Essex is at the top.
But, beyond that, I read the work people have produced, and it appears to me as though the best work is being produced by people at Oxford, LSE and Essex.
-
So if Essex isn't a top department and critics don't trust the REF, who are the other contenders (besides the obvious Oxford and Cambridge)?
Don't listen to the nonsense on here. Essex is a top department in an average university, which always produces animosity. In political science, Oxford, LSE and Essex are currently the best, and probably in that order.
in what universe? league tables disagree.You can't simultaneously point to the league tables and say that the REF should not be consulted. The research quality component of the league tables is determined by the REF. And if you sort by research quality, Essex is at the top.
But, beyond that, I read the work people have produced, and it appears to me as though the best work is being produced by people at Oxford, LSE and Essex.It'll be interesting to see how the next REF shakes out, and whether the Essex position will have declined, given all the departures and the growth of other UK departments.
-
What are the metrics people are using here? Sounds like REF favors Essex, but then league tables, which include dumb indicators like undergrad satisfaction, diminish Essex's standing.
Seems like the REF is better than a reputational rating like US News in the US. How do critics of Essex want to evaluate departments?
So if Essex isn't a top department and critics don't trust the REF, who are the other contenders (besides the obvious Oxford and Cambridge)?
Don't listen to the nonsense on here. Essex is a top department in an average university, which always produces animosity. In political science, Oxford, LSE and Essex are currently the best, and probably in that order.
in what universe? league tables disagree.You can't simultaneously point to the league tables and say that the REF should not be consulted. The research quality component of the league tables is determined by the REF. And if you sort by research quality, Essex is at the top.
But, beyond that, I read the work people have produced, and it appears to me as though the best work is being produced by people at Oxford, LSE and Essex. -
It'll be interesting to see how the next REF shakes out, and whether the Essex position will have declined, given all the departures and the growth of other UK departments.
I'm at one of those other big departments in the UK. Yes, they have grown in size. But it doesn't mean they grow stronger in terms of research. There is a strong tendency to hire like-minded scholars. And with the big UK departments (other than Oxford, LSE and Essex) being full of pomo, critical studies, and normative theory proponents, they hire more people of that kind in order not to be disturbed by what they perceive as theory-free regression monkeys. Meanwhile Essex, Strathclyde, and a few other more quantitative places do the same thing on the other end of the spectrum, which enables them to keep their REF positions. Universities are now competing in two different market segments: student satisfaction vs. research intensity. At my department, all they care about is coddling students. And they are climbing in the rankings. But not in the REF. So no, I wouldn't expect Essex etc. to drop in the REF table. But I'd probably be happier at a place that values research.
-
Odd that no one is boosting any other programs. Maybe because no one outside the UK knows about any of those places or ever interacts with their faculty or its scholarship.
so many essex boostersbecause it's those americans at Essex. they are bitter and want to go back to the states, but can't.
-
Your theory is the American scholars at Essex at posting pro-Essex propaganda on this board?
Odd that no one is boosting any other programs. Maybe because no one outside the UK knows about any of those places or ever interacts with their faculty or its scholarship.
so many essex boostersbecause it's those americans at Essex. they are bitter and want to go back to the states, but can't.
-
Well, scholars at Essex, American or not. Same with LSE and Oxford. Scholars outside the UK could not care less about any of this. Its embarrassing.
Your theory is the American scholars at Essex at posting pro-Essex propaganda on this board?
Odd that no one is boosting any other programs. Maybe because no one outside the UK knows about any of those places or ever interacts with their faculty or its scholarship.
so many essex boosters
because it's those americans at Essex. they are bitter and want to go back to the states, but can't. -
It'll be interesting to see how the next REF shakes out, and whether the Essex position will have declined, given all the departures and the growth of other UK departments.
I'm at one of those other big departments in the UK. Yes, they have grown in size. But it doesn't mean they grow stronger in terms of research. There is a strong tendency to hire like-minded scholars. And with the big UK departments (other than Oxford, LSE and Essex) being full of pomo, critical studies, and normative theory proponents, they hire more people of that kind in order not to be disturbed by what they perceive as theory-free regression monkeys. Meanwhile Essex, Strathclyde, and a few other more quantitative places do the same thing on the other end of the spectrum, which enables them to keep their REF positions. Universities are now competing in two different market segments: student satisfaction vs. research intensity. At my department, all they care about is coddling students. And they are climbing in the rankings. But not in the REF. So no, I wouldn't expect Essex etc. to drop in the REF table. But I'd probably be happier at a place that values research.
'...which enables them to keep their REF positions'. This erroneously connects REF performance to the presence or prominence of quantitative work. Essex did very well last time, but Strathclyde did not. Sheffield ranked either the same or better than Essex last time, with no discernible quant presence. Quant work does not necessarily do better in the REF, an exercise which does not reflect the preferences or fashions of American political science.
-
'...which enables them to keep their REF positions'. This erroneously connects REF performance to the presence or prominence of quantitative work. Essex did very well last time, but Strathclyde did not. Sheffield ranked either the same or better than Essex last time, with no discernible quant presence. Quant work does not necessarily do better in the REF, an exercise which does not reflect the preferences or fashions of American political science.
If only there were systematic methods to test this. Oh wait, not in your version of reality. Essex did very well, Sheffield gamed the rankings, and Strathclyde started hiring more quant folks only after the last REF (though I seem to recall they were already in the top 10 last time). The next REF will tell if that leads to an improved position. I predict yes. Their chair is a former Essex dude.