Why does TSR shame some universities?

Scroll to see replies

Some employers do care. I just looked at a job listing for a grad scheme calling for graduates from "top 20 unis", without giving any clarification of what that meant. Going by which legaue table? By what criteria? Academics, student satisfaction? Not to mention the fact that the subject league tables are completely different from the general ones. Makes you wonder what sort of candidates they actually want.

That's the only grad job advert that has mentioned university of the ones I've seen, but I guess it matters more in some industries e.g. finance. Most people I've spoken to, across all sorts of industries and in academia, have said that it matters little for your first job, and less after that.

I suspect that type of advert is delboy recruitment consultatants speculatively trying to get some cv's in to tout to prospective clients rather than acting under instruction from a company.

Reply 21

516359

Original post by perimuz

There's a reason the unis are slated by people, I'd ask someone who's gone to one of them. I'm applying to Edinburgh myself but not just because its a good uni, mainly cos its free :wink:

Posted from TSR Mobile

To Scottish citizens :frown:

I wish I read the fine print there

Reply 22

ggllnghm

Even the Civil Service Fast Stream doesn't give a **** about your university. They only accept those with a 2:2 or above and find out your exact academic credentials afterwards. TSR is made up of mostly moronic teen snobs to whom the TES is their bible.

Reply 23

AtomicTheory

Original post by Philbert

They probably just put that in to suggest that they want people from university which are traditionally perceived to be good and tend to come fairly high up in league tables. I highly doubt they actually sift through applicants and reject the ones who are at university number 21 or below that year.

Reply 24

Joinedup

Original post by ggllnghm

well yeah, but you're not thinking about the TES, That's the trade paper for school teachers.

Reply 25

tazarooni89

Original post by G D G

Looking on many threads, it seems unless a university is in the top 30 or so it's called a "****" university. Do employers share the same views?

Also, how can kids (most still at A level) judge a university?

I for the record am an A2 student from September.

There are some people who will know from beforehand exactly what they want to do after university. In such cases, they can simply choose whichever university and whichever course will allow them to do that. In some cases it may be a highly ranked university and in other cases it may not be, but it doesn't matter. They're getting what they want at the end of it.
For example, if a person ultimately wants to be a doctor, they can do medicine at a low ranked university, but it doesn't really matter - they'll get the job they want.

However if a person doesn't know exactly what they want to do after university, or are likely to change their mind, then they should really do something which will keep their options open. For example, a person might know that they want a career in the financial sector, but not know exactly what they want to do. In those cases, by going to a highly ranked university, they continue to keep their options open. But by going to a low ranked university, they close a lot of doors for themselves, which they may have later decided they wanted to go through. Studying Economics at Cambridge is unlikely to count against you with any of the employers you're interested in, but it may do if the university is not highly rated.

Because of that, it's important to know which universities are "better" than others, so that you can choose the best one you manage to get into. Especially nowadays, when competition for jobs is extremely fierce, you want to show your prospective employers as unblemished a CV as you possibly can.

Reply 26

chappers-94

Don't know really, universities like London met I can understand being shunned, because they're genuinely awful. But most unis are good for undergraduate, for post graduate it's completely different.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 27

Justpin

There is a lot of snobbery.

When I did my first undergraduate degree, which was vocational, my qualification put me at level 3 with 6 exams until I got professional status. (+ the work experience requirement) While the top universities which did the exact same subject put them at the start of level 2. Meaning they had to do 12 exams to take until they qualified...

There were 50 places between the top universities and this one.

Also, Queen Mary has just made it into the Russell Group, the top 20 research universities in the UK. Wanna know how they managed to do this? They sacked a load of their long-standing science bods and recruited people who are more known for publishing research. All good and well, until you realise there's no actual institutional improvement, other than they now have staff who... publish more. Does this make them better teachers, or even better scientists? Nope! They just churn out more 'stuff' so it keeps the university on the map. Quantity over quality, and all that.

For all I know, the new staff might be quite brilliant, but after reading a fairly pessimistic article on it all, I must say it does sound like a simple case of... box ticking!

Reply 28

ggllnghm

Original post by Joinedup

well yeah, but you're not thinking about the TES, That's the trade paper for school teachers.

Times Education Supplement?

Maybe it's called something different now

Reply 29

ggllnghm

I am hoping to apply to:

1) Kent (ABB)
2) UEA (ABB)
3) Essex (ABB-BBB)
4) Oxford Brookes (BBB)
5) Portsmouth (BBC)

For American history. I know Portsmouth isn't a spectacular university, that's why it is my last choice. However, I have heard people on here slagging off the others. Are the others really that bad?!

Reply 30

WheresPebbles

Original post by ggllnghm

I'm planning on applying to Kent and Oxford Brookes too (though I'm planning on doing psychology) and they seem alright to me... I'm making the presumption people wouldn't go to them if they were that bad. Which might be a bit of a stupid way to judge universities *shrugs*

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 31

username1039383

Original post by WarrenBuffett

People are really snobbish mate!! In fact i am aswell!! TBH students who don't get higher than CCC shouldn't even waste their time at UNI and are better off getting a job and progressing their careers!!

I got AAA but didn't get higher than 2:2 in my first 2 years because i was super lazy and the course is way too hard unless you like working hard and have decided to drop out and reapply at a different UNI but now i feel like i'm applying at second rate UNI's(leeds,cardiff,loughborough etc etc) which won't impress employers!!!

karma at its finest

Reply 32

madders94

People judge my university a lot because they've never heard of it and its low in the league tables, but honestly, it's been going for... what, five years? For my course and what I want to do, it's incredible. In terms of industry links, variety and expertise of the lecturers, I've not seen anywhere else like it.

It's funny - and pathetic - when people pass comment on a uni without ever actually going there, because it's the cool thing to do.

Reply 33

Joinedup

Original post by ggllnghm

Times Education Supplement?

Maybe it's called something different now

yeah that's a weekly magazine full of serious teacher stuff and job ads for teachers. teachers, like most people who've been to uni and now have careers, don't think much of league tables afaict though they'll probably be pleased if you go to oxbridge and they get a story in the local paper out of it.

The times league table is in the times newspaper.