AS IF it wasn’t difficult enough. When choosing a degree course, you can find yourself eyeing up hundreds of different options with the same name at a hundred different universities, whether you are looking at the undergraduate or postgraduate level. The first port of call for many people is a league table, a tool that promises to cut through all the glossy prospectus propaganda and give you a real comparison of academic institutions.

Prospective students are increasingly relying on league tables to help them decide where to study, and it is easy to see why when these tools seem at once insightful, straightforward and convenient. There are many tables out there, though – can any of them give you a definitive answer as to which university and course is best for you? A personalised league table called U-Multirank, set to be released this spring, will offer a ranking based on your selected criteria. Will it provide an improvement on existing league tables?

Three of the most popular national league tables are published by The Guardian, The Times and The Sunday Times, and the Complete University Guide. Global league tables, such as those put together by Times Higher Education (THE), QS and Shanghai Ranking, are primarily aimed at a different readership. “It’s fair to say that THE’s first audience has always been senior faculty and senior administrators of universities and policy-makers,” says Phil Baty, editor of THE’s World University Rankings. “We find our rankings are used more at government level as a kind of geopolitical indicator, as a performance tool for governments and university leadership.”

The three main national compilers judge universities on the basis of different criteria, using publicly available data collected in surveys and assessments by organisations including the Higher Education Statistics Agency and the Higher Education Funding Council for England. The Sunday Times league table, for example, ranks universities and departments by student satisfaction, research quality, student qualifications on entry, graduate prospects, grades and completion rates, spending per student and the ratio of staff to students. The Guardian‘s compilers focus more on satisfaction and teaching, and exclude research quality.

It is difficult to measure something like teaching quality, however. “There’s nothing really available globally that gives you a sense of actual teaching quality, in terms of an inspection approach,” says Baty. “So we use a series of proxies.”

Topping the tables

A low staff to student ratio, for example, is considered a good indicator of quality teaching. But a higher number of teachers wouldn’t mean much if they weren’t good at teaching, says Baty. “You can’t tell the quality of food in a restaurant by the number of waiters who are serving you,” he says. “Staff-student ratios are quite useful to give you a sense of the kind of environment you might have at a university, but you can report your staff numbers in so many different ways to get very different results.”

To get a better idea of students’ opinions on teaching quality, many compilers turn in particular to the National Student Survey, conducted by research company Ipsos MORI. As part of the survey, students are asked how much they agree with statements like: “staff are good at explaining things.” But such surveys are subjective, flimsy and open to manipulation by the universities themselves, says Harvey Goldstein, a social statistician at the University of Bristol. “If your future success depends on some evaluation, you’re jolly well going to put some effort into presenting the best side of yourself,” he says.

“Student surveys are subjective, flimsy and open to manipulation”

Climbing up the league tables can certainly benefit a university. Last April, economists Xiaoxuan Jia and Arnaud Chevalier at Royal Holloway, University of London, found that as a university rises through the ranks of The Guardian league tables, for example, it can expect applications to rise. An institution that moves up ten places in a league table can expect 140 more applications, the pair say. The increase could enable universities to fill courses low in numbers, saving them from being shut down. Institutions running more popular courses, on the other hand, can expect a higher number of capable students, chosen from a larger pool of applicants.

These applicants may also prove more profitable for a university, because international students – who can end up paying up to £35,000 per year in tuition fees – tend to be heavily influenced by league tables when choosing a UK institution.

As a result, university administrators can end up focusing on ways to improve their league table ranking, rather than making more fundamental improvements, says Baty. “Rankings have become so powerful and so influential that there is a risk that universities play the rankings game, rather than stick true to their mission and doing what’s right for them,” he says.

The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge consistently rank at the top of the UK league tables. Although some may find it fun to brag about their league-topping institution, in truth, it is hard to define “best” in terms of universities, says Johnny Rich, higher education consultant and director of Push, an independent online guide to UK universities. While one university might aspire to be a top research centre, another might be aiming to increase social mobility in a specific region. To compare them like for like is at best arbitrary, at worst unfair. “There is no point in comparing the University of Cumbria with the University of Cambridge, for example – they exist for entirely different purposes,” he says.

Aaron Porter, educational consultant and former president of the National Union of Students, agrees. Students not looking to apply to the top performing universities are frozen out of league table considerations, he says. “Lots of the metrics are heavily weighted towards research performance in universities, reputation and the historical performance of a university,” he says.

“A better starting point is to get users of the league tables to indicate before they see a league table what factors are important to them,” says Porter. “Then, once they’ve input that data, for the league table to be generated around their personal specifications.”

Tailor your table

This is just what U-Multirank will offer. The tool, developed by 15 research institutions, ranking organisations and web designers across Europe, will enable users to create a personalised table constructed around their specific preferences. It will select a list of suitable universities from more than 500 global institutions.

“The people that do the league tables normally choose the criteria and specify the outcome,” says Simon Marginson, a higher education sociologist at the Institute of Education. “With U-Multirank, working from a large database, you select what you want the rankings to be about and then you find how each institution stands.”

Although, as sceptics of the project have pointed out, U-Multirank will use the same, flawed data sources as existing league tables, the results will at least be tailored to the user. Rich, who acted as a consultant on the U-Multirank project, says that the top performing universities will still perform well in this ranking system, but they won’t always score more highly than institutions with different aims. “I’m sure the MITs [Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which ranks highly in many global league tables] of this world will still shine, because they do well in a lot of different areas,” Rich says. “But they won’t do so in areas that aren’t their mission, and they won’t continue to cast a shadow over those institutions that exist, for example, as regional centres of excellence.”

Existing league tables can help overwhelmed prospective students pick a university, though. “Choosing is something of a minefield – you’re talking about 120 institutions, so there has to be some possibility of shortening the list,” says Bernard Kingston, university consultant and creator of the Complete University Guide.

But “some people will never fully accept rankings because by their nature such rankings are quite simplistic”, says Baty. “You’re reducing a university in all its wonderful multifaceted qualities into a single number, and it’s inherently going to be a crude exercise.”

Whether you use the standard league tables or not, it is always worth seeking out extra information and advice, perhaps from alternative league tables (see “Alternative choice: Student life isn’t just studying“). Postgraduates are at an advantage – they can mine their current tutors and collaborators for tips. It is a good idea to visit institutions and speak to current tutors and students. A lot of what constitutes a good university experience can’t be expressed by numbers on a table.

This article appeared in print under the headline “Leagues ahead?”

When it comes to choosing a place to study, there are a fair few league tables on offer to help you make your decision (see “Leagues ahead? The best way to judge universities“). But most of the big ones assess fairly similar criteria, namely student satisfaction, entry standards, research quality and graduate prospects. What about the many other important factors that might influence your choice?

Around a quarter of students wish they had done a little more homework before choosing their university, and 1 in 10 regret the choice they ended up making, according to a recent survey of around 16,000 students, conducted by Which? University. Luckily, there are a host of alternative league tables out there, ready to reveal what you really need to know about the place you’ll be spending arguably the best years of your life.

Perhaps you’re wondering what your university’s green credentials are like? Student campaign group People and Planet compile an annual Green League, ranking UK universities using criteria such as use of renewable energy, carbon emissions and recycling. Manchester Metropolitan University holds the top spot in the latest (2013) Green League. Although the Universities of Cambridge and Oxford top many traditional league tables, they rank 113th and 132nd, respectively.

Maybe the steady rise in tuition fees has got you worried about the total cost of university. Last year, online cash payment service provider . The company considered tuition fees, rent, insurance and entry to student events as well as the cost of a hoody, a pint and a pizza near the campus. Universities in Scotland tend to be the best bet for those looking to save, while, unsurprisingly, the ones in London are most expensive. However, part-time work pays more generously in the big smoke. That is why, in 2010, NatWest bank reported that London was the most cost-effective city to study in.

Of course, university life is about more than just working. It is a great opportunity to get involved in student activities and societies. Which? University used last year’s survey to compile league tables that rank universities by their provisions for sporty, creative and political students, as well as those looking for a good night out. The top sporting universities include Loughborough University and the University of Bath. Students looking to participate in a “strong political scene”, on the other hand, might consider courses at SOAS or the University of Oxford, for instance.

Student discount website offers another set of university comparisons including happiness, library fines and drinking, ranked on the basis of the site’s student survey results.

And then there are all the awards dished out to universities. Those presented by Times Higher Education, for example, include prizes for support for early career researchers and engagement with employers – useful offerings for science students.

Perhaps in an ideal world, a single league table would assess all of these factors and provide a simple answer in terms of the best place to study. In reality, while the information is out there, you’re going to need to practise your research skills before you start a course.

This article appeared in print under the headline “An alternative choice”

IT’S no secret that the oil and gas industry is an established pillar of the UK economy. Not only has the industry weathered the 2008 financial crisis, but recovery in output . Investment is surging, and job opportunities are doing the same. This is creating some exciting prospects for new recruits, either cleaning up current practices or changing the way we extract energy altogether.

The UK runs on oil and gas. Together, and the ever-rising needs of a growing population mean this figure is unlikely to change any time soon. The UK Oil and Gas Industry Association predicts that . As a result, money has poured into the industry. Investment in oil and gas has , and is set to rise again next year. The knock-on effect is that the demand for engineers is on the up and .

But it’s not all about the money. In a warming climate, perhaps the greatest appeal of a career in the oil and gas industry is the chance to transform the way we generate and use energy. Lyle Andrews, head of graduate resourcing in several international locations for energy giant , thinks there has never been a more exciting time for engineers to get involved. “There’s demand for energy going up but also a lot of innovation going on across the energy sector, with new sources of hydrocarbons as well as alternatives,” he says.

John MacArthur, vice president of gas technology at believes this innovation will be especially important given recent research. According to a report from Imperial College London, we are going to have to halve our carbon dioxide emissions by 2050 if we want avoid dangerous levels of climate change. Engineers and researchers in the oil and gas industry can play an important role here: “One of the biggest opportunities of working in the energy industry is being involved in the solutions,” says MacArthur. “By the middle of this century, 65 per cent of our energy mix will still be fossil fuels. If we want to keep under 2 °C of global warming, then they need to be clean.”

“The biggest opportunity of working in the energy industry is being involved in climate change solutions”

MacArthur and his colleagues are working on ways to reduce the CO₂ emissions associated with burning fossil fuels. One key technique involves capturing the CO₂ released and storing it underground, in a process known as carbon capture and storage (CCS). Although environmental groups believe investing in renewables is a better idea, “carbon abatement” techniques such as CCS could reduce fossil fuel emissions by up to 90 per cent, according to by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The – a partnership between several major energy companies – is exploring how CCS can be implemented on an industrial scale, and MacArthur is a board member.

The efforts are still largely at the research stage, tackling the huge engineering challenges involved in constructing appropriate pipelines and storing CO₂ below the ground. But this is where the expertise of oil and gas specialists will be vital, says Mike Stephenson, director of science and technology at the .

Stephenson says a career in the energy industry gives new engineers a chance to make an impact on fossil fuel emissions. “My advice would be to go into big companies that are forward looking… companies that might be doing oil and gas now, but have got an idea about enhanced oil recovery or CCS in the future,” he says.

Oceans of opportunity

Whatever size company new recruits join, there are a huge variety of engineering roles to choose from. Petroleum engineers, for example, monitor the flow of oil and gas from reservoirs and through pipelines to ensure a steady fuel supply. Reservoir engineers are responsible for maximising oil or gas recovery, and advise on how best to extract these fuels. Above ground, civil engineers help design, build and maintain huge offshore structures, seeing them through from an initial concept to operations and eventually to decommissioning. Environmental specialists are in charge of keeping things clean, and monitor and minimise the impacts of operations on wildlife (see Case study: Explosions at sea).

Whether you’re interested in an industry position or an academic career, an engineering degree is a good place to start: there are plenty of academic institutions investigating ways to manage the environmental impacts of fossil fuels. As a petroleum geoscientist at Imperial College London, interests lie in the Arctic – a region . Fraser and his colleagues are investigating ways to exploit these resources without damaging the region’s fragile ecosystem. “It’s about looking for ways to do this sensibly, to build [extraction] structures that can withstand the harsh conditions up there, and to understand first and foremost where the oil and gas is,” he says.

The future of arctic drilling, along with hydraulic fracturing (fracking) to extract shale gas, remains highly controversial and many protest that the resulting environmental damage cannot be justified. But Fraser believes the best way to make a difference is to change the industry from the inside.

“With smart people in oil companies, things will get done well,” says Fraser. “And the lights won’t go out.”