Emma have returned to the top of the Tompkins table after two years of finishing in second place.
They have beaten off competition from old rivals Trinity, who came top last year.
Churchill unexpectedly rose to third- their highest position for 20 years – having progressed from mid-table since 2008.
Among the big losers were 20th placed John’s, whose performance confirms that last year’s rise to mid-table did not arrest their 21st century decline from fourth place in 2001, to an average of 16th since 2005.
Peterhouse, who have become used to sitting in the bottom half of the Tompkins, shot up from 16th place last year to 7th.
The results will come as a shock to the traditionally nerdy Caius, whose 11th position sees them drop out of the top ten for the first time since the year 2000.
Jesus, down five places to 11th, have recorded their worst comparative performance in a decade.
The table, which has been criticised in the past for magnifying small differences between colleges, is based on a system which awards points for all exams for which grades are allocated, with 100 per cent for a first, 60 per cent for a 2:1, 40 per cent for a 2:2 and 20 per cent for a third.
Reaction from the colleges to follow.
Tompkins Table 2010 % Score – % Firsts
1 (2) Emmanuel 69.11% – 33.2%
2 (1) Trinity 67.15% – 32.1%
3 (7) Churchill 67.08% – 29.0%
4 (9) Trinity Hall 66.02% – 25.1%
5 (8) Magdalene 65.31% – 24.3%
6 (3) Selwyn 64.88% – 23.7%
7 (16) Peterhouse 64.85% – 27.0%
8 (18) Clare 64.19% – 23.5%
9 (5) St. Catharine’s 64.15% – 23.8%
10 (6) Pembroke 64.04% – 24.1%
11 (4) Gonville & Caius 63.72% – 24.2%
12 (13) Christ’s 63.62% – 22.0%
13 (10) Corpus Christi 63.48% – 21.6%
14 (17) King’s 62.69% – 23.4%
15 (15) Downing 62.42% – 18.6%
16 (11) Jesus 62.32% – 19.7%
17 (12) Queens’ 62.16% – 22.6%
18 (22) Sidney Sussex 61.86% – 20.3%
19 (19) Robinson 61.79% – 18.3%
20 (14) St. John’s 61.73% – 19.1%
21 (20) Girton 60.38% – 16.4%
22 (21) Fitzwilliam 59.56% – 16.2%
23 (23) Murray Edwards 59.53% – 14.3%
24 (27) Wolfson 59.51% – 10.9%
25 (24) Newnham 58.73% – 14.2%
26 (25) Homerton 58.65% – 14.6%
27 (26) Hughes Hall 57.98% – 16.4%
28 (28) St Edmund’s 54.68% – 8.0%
29 (29) Lucy Cavendish 52.45% – 11.7%
haha anyone think john's might re-think the policy of admitting thicko rugby players? not sure having a good sports team who attract crowds of 25 people is worth the embarrassment of languishing with the grad colleges and homerton!!
and the women only colleges, they are pretty shit
very true
your nerdy insecurity is hilarious
personally i couldnt give a flying fuck where john's is on the tompkins table. ive had a sweet time at university, and not attended a fucking tedious college. much of that has been down to the strength of the sports teams within college. so yes, the "admission policy" of accepting rugby players, or sports players, or any person capable of social interaction is "worth" the horrific shame of being low on the tompkins table for any johnian involved. you know what, i'd happily take last in the table to avoid the kind of people who hand out insults like "thicko" or try to quench their childhood social ineptitude by raving about their shit college's academic tedium.
profound.
well said
Wait, you're confusing rugby players with people "capable of social interaction"…
Seriously, though, does anyone give a fuck about the Tompkins table?
massive lad. i particularly like 'flying fuck'
40% for both a third and a 2:2?
What's that? Emma won something? Oh wait it was the Tompkins table. Booooo.
Actually they did change their admission policy at John's and take candidates who were supposedly more work conscious. There are nowhere near as many sports players in the first year. In your face admissions tutors. Bring back the "thicko rugby players" I say, they were doing alright. Long live Old John's. Sign on and all that, huzzah!
Incorrect… We have a Goldie rower, blues athlete, blues triathlete, numerous blues hockey girls. In fact, It is the largest domination of first year blues sporting players at Cambridge.
Shudddup fresher. When i said sports players I obviously meant "thicko rugby players". This is clearly what anyone talking about John's sport is referring to.
Obviously… Clearly 'Old' and stale.
Very true my good friend. She was probably from St John's Oxford – Naive and ill-informed.
and at least one of the above has been banned from doing his sport by the college…
John's are naive to attract around 30 people between the three undergrad years who obsess about rugby, they are ruining their chances in the table through players' overwhelming presence in what is a tiny college…
not to mention the overwhelming correlation between
'good at rugby' = 'thicko'
oh no Fitz is last on the table (exc. women and mature)
No homerton is last. Or did the exclusions include fake colleges?
homerton is a better college than fitz. nicer ppl, nicer grounds. fuck fitz
Sluttier girls as well…
Never mind that – how many firsts are they giving out these days? The average is over 20% – wasn't like that in my day…
But in your day you could get a job with a 2.2 or even a 3rd from Cambridge…Not any more Mr.
EMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMAAAAAAAAAAA
Old John's is right. I've been here a while and have seen the attitude of the tutors change towards sport/academic work/generally having a social life within the college.
Shame their policy doesn't seem to be working! Perhaps the tutors and directors of studies should look at themselves to improve teaching and take an interest in the wellbeing of their students rather than just simply banning people from taking part in sport…
Exactly, over the last few years I have seen the attitude of the College change from encouraging sport (we were then 4th in the Table) to the current situation where people are actively discouraged, and in many cases banned, from participating in extra-curricular activities (my experience is regarding sport) and we are now 20th in the Table.
I am no mathematician like Tompkins himself, but a correlation I see!! When will they learn that spending time on extra-curricular activities and working are not mutually exclusive?
Never
has it been so clear
how bad a university
Cambridge
is.
girls and old peeps r so dum luk how low they are
judging by the way you write, you arent exactly Einstein
*Judging, *aren't, *Einstein.
Oxford is the way to go…………