University rank is unimportant
Scroll to see replies
I wouldn't say unimportant. In general, the quality of a university and its ranking in the most popular league tables shows a correlation. Although, a few universities such as King's and Manchester would be higher on the league tables if this were the case, and both are considered to be in the better half of the Russell Group, especially King's, by employers.
There are other factors to consider other than league tables. I've just had a university prep week at Sixth Form, and during the talk about alternatives to higher education, one of the speakers stated that vocational degrees, such as those offered at the Open University, have a higher employment rate than degrees from the Russell Group. In most cases however, I imagine the job isn't as good to start off with.
Posted from TSR Mobile
There are other factors to consider other than league tables. I've just had a university prep week at Sixth Form, and during the talk about alternatives to higher education, one of the speakers stated that vocational degrees, such as those offered at the Open University, have a higher employment rate than degrees from the Russell Group. In most cases however, I imagine the job isn't as good to start off with.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by welshboi
These threads constantly appear and what always seems to come out is that it is all largely subjective. I myself will be studying Law and German at Cardiff University, in a profession renowned for competition and prestige playing I'm happy to be going to a decently ranked Russell Group, Cardiff is by no means the top for Law nor is it rubbish but I loved the University and it's the perfect setting for me to work hard and excel. At the end of the day if you whore yourself off to league tables you will more than likely end up doing worse as you eliminate any idea of whether you like a place when you select your University. Reputation can be important but even more important is going somewhere that you want to be, not somewhere you applied to because it was 5th in the rankings and not 6th.
I'll be applying for Law with German!
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Incredimazing
Woo! You are quite literally one of the first people I've spoken to applying for Law and German, we seem to be a rare breed!
Original post by welshboi
Woo! You are quite literally one of the first people I've spoken to applying for Law and German, we seem to be a rare breed!
Haha, yeah! It seems so interesting. Whereabouts in Germany does Cardiff take you on your year abroad?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Do you guys think universities which aren't in any groups, i.e. St andrews, Bath, Surrey may suffer as much bias compared to russel group students, considering the 3 are pretty much some of the best in certain fields?
Also would some 1994 universities therefore be looked upon? Likewise some of them like Royal Holloway, Loughborough and Sussex seem pretty good
And the op sounds like he is overgeneralizing ? Job markets are very competitive, therefore a good university is a start to the CV. Though work experience may help as well, depending on the field.
Being in a 'low' university closes a lot of doors from some employers, but a 'good' university opens. Therefore it matters.
Also would some 1994 universities therefore be looked upon? Likewise some of them like Royal Holloway, Loughborough and Sussex seem pretty good
And the op sounds like he is overgeneralizing ? Job markets are very competitive, therefore a good university is a start to the CV. Though work experience may help as well, depending on the field.
Being in a 'low' university closes a lot of doors from some employers, but a 'good' university opens. Therefore it matters.
Original post by SamJHill
At risk at sounding generalizing and stereotypical, 'top ranking' universities mostly get applied to just because theyre 'top ranking'. If a candidate with sense enough to figure out their own ambitions and career/study path they'd look further than just a university name, at the course content and graduate satisfaction.
Therefore, university ranking is a totally naive way to choose candidates. Top universities don't equate to top jobs, it all depends on the person.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Therefore, university ranking is a totally naive way to choose candidates. Top universities don't equate to top jobs, it all depends on the person.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I agree and disagree, I was drawn to Cambridge obviously by its high status but when I got there its location, course structure and social activities appealed to me, same goes for Warwick. But I will admit I was using league tables when deciding what universities I would like to visit, and I happened to like these two very much. Though this is just me, I know lots of people in my school who apply purely for the oxbridge tag.
Last statement seems a bit naive, lots of students at e.g. Cambridge, Warwick have extensive work experience and extra cirriculars, so they are quite likely to bring along many favourable qualities
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Jkizer
Do you guys think universities which aren't in any groups, i.e. St andrews, Bath, Surrey may suffer as much bias compared to russel group students,
It's unlikely that many employers realise these universities aren't affiliated to a group, and even those who are fairly informed may still think St Andrews, Bath and Surrey are part of the Russell or 1994 Groups.
Also would some 1994 universities therefore be looked upon? Likewise some of them like Royal Holloway, Loughborough and Sussex seem pretty good
No, Was Durham looked down upon until just this last year? Or LSE until 2006?
Broadly speaking employers will know little or nothing about the Russell (and 1994) Group, and are unlikely to know the exact membership.
Though work experience may help as well, depending on the field.
Being in a 'low' university closes a lot of doors from some employers, but a 'good' university opens. Therefore it matters.
Being in a 'low' university closes a lot of doors from some employers, but a 'good' university opens. Therefore it matters.
Work experience may help? Work experience is essential, and more important than brand name. For the vast majority of jobs you cannot attempt to answer a number of interview questions, convince an employer that you're worth investing in, have an idea of your strengths and weakness as a worker, or have an insight into a career, without work experience.
Whilst you may not be closing doors by going to a university such as LSE, Bristol or how much they "open" doors is up for debate. Especially when surveys put the number of employers/graduate schemes that put on emphasis on university name at between 10 to 33% or so (with notable exceptions such as Magic Circle law firms).
Original post by Incredimazing
Haha, yeah! It seems so interesting. Whereabouts in Germany does Cardiff take you on your year abroad?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Passau, Innsbruck (Austria), Halle or Konstanz but I have my heart set on Konstanz, I represented the UK on an international scholarships programme last year and fell in love with the place!
I agree and disagree with this.
im going to a uni which is very small and hardly anyone knows, so they assume it is a bad uni. It's not highly ranked among the large uni's like Cardiff or Manchester or anything.
but it is the most highly ranked for teaching courses (which is the course I am doing), so technically it is highly ranked but relative to the course
im going to a uni which is very small and hardly anyone knows, so they assume it is a bad uni. It's not highly ranked among the large uni's like Cardiff or Manchester or anything.
but it is the most highly ranked for teaching courses (which is the course I am doing), so technically it is highly ranked but relative to the course
Original post by peter12345
I was at an interview for an apprenticeship at a leading global company. Interview went well but just in case I thought I'd use the opportunity to ask them if I wasn't successful and considered university if the university ranking mattered. They said it didn't matter at all, all that mattered was course relevancy and quality. You may then say "but low ranked universities will have rubbish courses" Well they then went on to say that they send a lot of employees to do degrees at LSBU . They were even concerned enough by my revelation that my school told me that you had to go to a top ranked university to have a chance at a good job to have me speak to their schools outreach officer about this misconception.
I am on a masters with a lot of people who did environmental degrees at polytechnics, or even 'lower reputation' redbrick unis than mine and the quality, difficulty and content of the course seems to correlate very well with uni reputation.
A lot of what is considered masters level by other unis was taught to us at undergraduate.
So for this field it obviously does matter.
Obviously there will be exceptions such as vocational courses where it is better to go to a low rep uni.
Original post by redferry
I am on a masters with a lot of people who did environmental degrees at polytechnics, or even 'lower reputation' redbrick unis than mine and the quality, difficulty and content of the course seems to correlate very well with uni reputation.
A lot of what is considered masters level by other unis was taught to us at undergraduate.
So for this field it obviously does matter.
Obviously there will be exceptions such as vocational courses where it is better to go to a low rep uni.
A lot of what is considered masters level by other unis was taught to us at undergraduate.
So for this field it obviously does matter.
Obviously there will be exceptions such as vocational courses where it is better to go to a low rep uni.
What if it was accredited?
Original post by peter12345
What if it was accredited?
There are plenty of crap accredited courses out there I'm sure
Original post by redferry
There are plenty of crap accredited courses out there I'm sure
Why would a respected organization accredit crap courses?
Original post by peter12345
Why would a respected organization accredit crap courses?
I don't know but they clearly do. For example the zoology course at Derby Uni is an absolute shambles. A guy on my masters had never done statistics in his 3 year degree. Yet now he has a 2:1 in zoology. That should not be a thing.
Original post by Wiska
Yes, I should feel prouder than my friend who got into Imperial/ Oxbridge because I got into London Met! Yay! 
Strawman is strong in this one.
Original post by River85
Work experience may help? Work experience is essential, and more important than brand name. For the vast majority of jobs you cannot attempt to answer a number of interview questions, convince an employer that you're worth investing in, have an idea of your strengths and weakness as a worker, or have an insight into a career, without work experience.
Whilst you may not be closing doors by going to a university such as LSE, Bristol or how much they "open" doors is up for debate. Especially when surveys put the number of employers/graduate schemes that put on emphasis on university name at between 10 to 33% or so (with notable exceptions such as Magic Circle law firms).
Work experience may help? Work experience is essential, and more important than brand name. For the vast majority of jobs you cannot attempt to answer a number of interview questions, convince an employer that you're worth investing in, have an idea of your strengths and weakness as a worker, or have an insight into a career, without work experience.
Whilst you may not be closing doors by going to a university such as LSE, Bristol or how much they "open" doors is up for debate. Especially when surveys put the number of employers/graduate schemes that put on emphasis on university name at between 10 to 33% or so (with notable exceptions such as Magic Circle law firms).
I was just thinking of some broad industries such as Accounting, where you basically don't even need a degree, just the relevant training. Im sure that 95% of industries, work experience is pretty essential but for the jobs like accounting you can SOMETIMES scrape your way through, providing you have done the training. (I think the firm sends you on these, providing you show enough commitment and promise, though i agree w/o experience its must tougher convincing them)
Also i only assumed doors are opened by going to 'big named' universities after one of our teachers blabbed on about how you got to aim to get into the top 10 (Vague much?) universities, otherwise your entire job prospect is diminished. Though i disagree with 99% of what he says, i ever so slightly agree that occasionally big names can maybe grab the attention of the employer.... but whether it will result in an interview/offer is another matter.
The way i see it is, a good university is only the start but experience, tests which you may have to do/training and how you present yourself is much more important.
...Why is this thread even made?
Of course University ranking matters. If it doesn't, then why do graduates of certain 'highly ranked' university get higher starting salaries? However, having said that, it's not everything. Other things are taken into consideration like work experience, good references, personality, etc. I do know for sure that employers filter out anyone who doesn't get a minimum of a 2:1...but to say that someone who graduates from Manchester Uni has a higher chance of getting a job compared to someone who graduates from London Met is not necessarily true. Especially with jobs specifying that they want people with good work experiences. Take 'good ranking university' as a high contributing factor, but don't take it as the only contributing factor.
And to the person that said KCL is an ex-poly...as someone who is going to KCL...I am deeply offended :P
Of course University ranking matters. If it doesn't, then why do graduates of certain 'highly ranked' university get higher starting salaries? However, having said that, it's not everything. Other things are taken into consideration like work experience, good references, personality, etc. I do know for sure that employers filter out anyone who doesn't get a minimum of a 2:1...but to say that someone who graduates from Manchester Uni has a higher chance of getting a job compared to someone who graduates from London Met is not necessarily true. Especially with jobs specifying that they want people with good work experiences. Take 'good ranking university' as a high contributing factor, but don't take it as the only contributing factor.
And to the person that said KCL is an ex-poly...as someone who is going to KCL...I am deeply offended :P
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Confused about uni for employability
- Any negatives of Christ's college?
- Importance of A level results for postgraduate study
- Separating educational achievement from self worth
- Warwick Vs Edinburgh Vs Kings College London (History & Politics)
- Physiotherapy in clearing
- gcses for Durham PLS HELP !!!!
- Universities for medicinal chemistry
- QMUL vs University of Manchester Law
- Bath, Nottingham, Edinburgh, Manchester or UCL for Architecture
- A level options
- Uni of Aberdeen
- MSc management for UCL,Manchester,Bayes, Kings
- How common is a Master in the UK ?
- Loughborogh university ranking
- Guardian League Table 2024
- Surrey And Reading Law
- Columbia University New York. Is it any good?
- Uni of York vs. Uni of Nottingham
- Do most student go to a higher ranking uni for pg or a lower ranking uni?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
