The Student Room Group

Why go to a good uni if it doesn't even matter?

I'm applying for the following undergraduate courses:

BSc Financial Economics - Birkbeck, University of London - ABB
BSc Finance and Economics - Lancaster University - AAA

There's a huge difference in the grade requirements. The Finance industry is so tough to get into and so a Masters is almost a must in my opinion. I would love to go to a Top 5 University for a Masters but reading around Studentroom, there seems to be very little consideration for where you graduated from. It's more focused on the class you achieve which at any university in theory should be equally difficult to achieve. So my question is, why bother working towards Lancaster (Top 10 University) rather than Birkbeck (Top 25), when it makes very little difference when applying for Masters and in turn jobs afterwards?

All opinions appreciated, Thank you!
Universities do matter to an extent but your case is different as there isn't a huge gap between your preferred unis in terms of rankings. An employer will always choose a UCL student over a london met student if given the chance..
It's the overall perception that going to go a good uni shows you are more clever. Clearly with Lancaster, you need to work hard at school to get the extra two A grades, and then I am guessing you will be more harshly examined to keep you on top of your studies, ie weekly tests, etc. Your grades will also be more exam based as opposed to coursework based as its easier to get higher marks in coursework.

Also, in Maths, with certain unis they taught topics at different levels. For example a topic I may cover in one module in my first year, a "lesser" uni might split it up into two topics in say the second year, meaning I get more maths in in a more intense course showing my ability to work at that level.

Its like if someone said to you "this guy is a surgeon from Cambridge" or "this guy is a surgeon from Uni X (rubbish one)", you will be more impressed by the Cambridge guy as he went to Cambridge.

Also, some companies only take top uni students. The company I work for now only came to like a handful of unis to offer jobs, etc. If I was to settle for second best like you are planning, I wouldn't have walked out of uni straight into a job.
Reply 3
Original post by RudeyCanudey
I'm applying for the following undergraduate courses:

BSc Financial Economics - Birkbeck, University of London - ABB
BSc Finance and Economics - Lancaster University - AAA

There's a huge difference in the grade requirements. The Finance industry is so tough to get into and so a Masters is almost a must in my opinion. I would love to go to a Top 5 University for a Masters but reading around Studentroom, there seems to be very little consideration for where you graduated from. It's more focused on the class you achieve which at any university in theory should be equally difficult to achieve. So my question is, why bother working towards Lancaster (Top 10 University) rather than Birkbeck (Top 25), when it makes very little difference when applying for Masters and in turn jobs afterwards?

All opinions appreciated, Thank you!


What I'm saying is not 100% fact, but its something worth thinking about.

You're right most firms ask for a 2:1, but the uni you go to and the course you not only affects the chances of getting an interview or job but starting salary. e.g. my cousin works for a company called Mace, almost everyone came from UCL Imperial etc, he went to Huddersfield and there were only 4-5 out of 100 which weren't from a top 20 uni.

Another thing to look into is actually figures, chances are less students get a firsts or a 2:1 at the former uni if u go on unistats or something, which may affect your ability to go to a uni with an amazing masters.

Although the former is lower ranked, it is also in London, is it worth paying double in maintenance and living costs. Most students in London I know spend 13k+ a year.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending