Norrington Table

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Norrington Table is an annual ranking of the colleges of the University of Oxford based on a score computed from the fraction of undergraduate students earning each of the various degree classifications based on that year's final examinations.

Overview[edit]

Currently, the Norrington Table is calculated by awarding 5 points for a student who receives a 1st Class degree, 3 points for a 2:1, 2 for a 2:2 and 1 for a 3rd, divided by the maximum possible score (i.e., the number of finalists in that college multiplied by 5), and expressed as a percentage (rounded to 2 decimal places) per college. Although the difference between the highest places on the table is usually very slight, the top colleges remain very competitive about their rankings on the Table. Their competitiveness has been heightened in recent years by increased media attention on the rankings.

Previously the university had refused to endorse an official table, leading to inaccuracies (see Criticisms below), so the university finally published its own rankings using examination results from all final year undergraduates in 2005.

History of the Norrington Table[edit]

Contrary to popular belief, the Norrington Table was not created in 1962 by Sir Arthur Norrington, who was then president of Trinity College. Norrington did not invent the idea of producing a table of the results of Oxford Colleges. Rather, he suggested a refinement to the weightings given to results by a pre-existing table. Norrington's scoring system was suggested in 1963 and abandoned after 1985, owing to changes in the Oxford examination system.[1]

On 5 September 1963, Norrington had a letter published in The Times, in which he objected to the table that their correspondent had invented two days earlier (3 September 1963, p. 12). The Times had previously published a table of Oxford Colleges' results in 1962 (29 August 1962, p. 5).

Norrington wrote: "Your Correspondent has analysed the final examination results this year and gives an order of merit, among the first colleges, based on the percentage of Firsts and Seconds. This, in effect, is the same as basing it on the percentage of Thirds, and gives it no extra credit for Firsts. College A, for example, that gets 20 Firsts, 60 Seconds, and 20 Thirds scores less by this method than College B that gets no Firsts, 81 Seconds and 19 Thirds, but surely A has, in reality, done much better than B. A better result, I submit, is obtained by a points system in which a First scores more than a second and a Second more than a Third. If you make the points 3, 2, and 1 respectively and calculate what percentage of its "possible" each college has secured, you will find that College A, with 200 points out of 300, has scored 66.67 per cent, and B, with 181, only 60 per cent. This method of calculation will be found to promote Magdalen and Merton, which come surprisingly low in your Correspondent's order." (5 September 1963, p. 13)

In 1986, when Oxford for the first time split Second Class honours into Upper Seconds and Lower Seconds, The Times unilaterally adopted the Tompkins Table, which gives more weight to a First class degree: five points for a First, three for a 2.1, two for a 2.2, and one for a Third. This system was invented in 1981 by Peter Tompkins, of Birkenhead, as a method of classifying the results of Cambridge colleges, and a table compiled by Tompkins on this basis was published on 28 August by The Times (28 Aug 1981, p. 10) alongside a table using the Norrington scoring system, which had been compiled by the Cambridge Evening News. The Tompkins Table became the preferred rating for Cambridge colleges and has prevailed for Oxford colleges, too, since 1986.

Recent rankings[edit]

Below is the Norrington Table for the academic year 2013/14:[2]

Rank College Norrington Score
1 Merton College 74.70%
2 St John's College 74.56%
3 Worcester College 73.98%
4 New College 73.96%
5 Wadham College 73.79%
6 Jesus College 73.76%
7 Hertford College 73.33%
8 Harris Manchester College 72.59%
9 Magdalen College 72.18%
10 Lincoln College 72.13%
11 Trinity College 71.94%
12 St Catherine's College 71.73%
13 St Anne's College 71.58%
14 Corpus Christi College 71.52%
15 Exeter College 71.29%
16 Christ Church 71.11%
17 St Hugh's College 70.99%
18 Keble College 70.53%
19 Brasenose College 70.09%
20 Balliol College 70.09%
21 St Hilda's College 69.75%
22 St Peter's College 69.48%
23 Oriel College 69.02%
24 University College 68.85%
25 Mansfield College 68.47%
26 Lady Margaret Hall 68.32%
27 Somerville College 68.22%
28 St Edmund Hall 68.13%
29 The Queen's College 68.00%
30 Pembroke College 63.14%

Past rankings[edit]

Norrington Table rankings since 2006:[2]

NorringtonTable.png

Criticisms[edit]

The table is biased towards colleges which have larger than average numbers of students in science subjects such as Chemistry and Mathematics[citation needed] where a higher proportion attain a 1st Class degree compared to arts degrees (where more students attain a 2.1), a feature in respect of which scores are adjusted in the corresponding Tompkins Table at Cambridge.

There was also a fear that colleges could be unreasonable in demanding students who may miss a 2:1 to be "sent down" (expelled), or those who may miss out on a 1st to defer. There was general feeling amongst students that this happened frequently - it was included in the campaign of at least one candidate in the 2008 OUSU elections.[citation needed]The culture which brought about such an issue however seems to have been condemned to the past.

Up until 2004, a key criticism was that students were allowed to withdraw their names from the public lists and were thus not counted — Trinity College President Sir Michael Beloff likened this to a Premiership final league table, only with several random results missing. In 2004, in response to this criticism, the University started issuing its own official Norrington Table, which accounted for all degrees issued, including those of people who opted out of the public lists. The rankings published since then, therefore, do not possess this weakness.[citation needed]

John Lucas, FBA, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford, presented a critique of the Norrington Table in a 1980 article.[3]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

External links[edit]