Which is more prestigious?

un1v

Which is more prestigious, Durham or Manchester?

Reply 1

ANB1993

10

Original post by un1v

Which is more prestigious, Durham or Manchester?

Durham definitely. However, Both are fantastic institutions but Durhams reputation is better.

Reply 2

HenryD

12

Durham, but Manchester is still excellent.

Reply 3

Foghorn Leghorn

16

Manchester is far more well known around the world.

Reply 4

bestofyou

18

Neither.

Prestige is rendered pretty much into nothing after Oxbridge (could extend that to Imperial for being a well renowned STEM uni).

In terms of the top universities outside of the ones mentioned, there is very little if anything between the rep a university.

Personally I'd say Manchester because it is a large and well know city which will help with international job applications.

People will hate this view I have on this matter and neg me without calling me on it because they have no response. So I will take all negs as 'you are right but I hate this view therefore I shall show my hatred towards it and neg it but obviously not argue since you are right'

In other words unless you are applying to Oxford, Cambridge or Imperial (if doing a STEM subject) you would be a bit of a fool if you chose a course based on the prestige of a uni.

Of course bragging rights is a serious factor you must consider when applying. There is nothing I like better than telling people that I go to a better university than they do and therefore I am a superior person. I love when they try and argue, all I need to do is show how old the stone work at my uni is and then slap down the rankings table from a very tory newspaper and watch them cry as they discover us torries don't think their university is in the top 5. Then I urinate on them as they curl into a ball and weep. So yeah, make sure you factor in prestige when applying.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 5

yorkshire.lad

11

Depends on the course

Reply 6

tory88

18

It depends on the subject, but honestly you should choose where you're happiest unless there's a massive difference in teaching quality. Go and look around each of them and decide based on that, not on what a forum tells you is better...

Reply 7

ANB1993

10

Original post by bestofyou

Neither.

Prestige is rendered pretty much into nothing after Oxbridge (could extend that to Imperial for being a well renowned STEM uni).

In terms of the top universities outside of the ones mentioned, there is very little if anything between the rep a university.

Prestige and reputation precede many universities. The red bricks, the 1994 group etc all carry different levels of prestige. There are 3 main levels. Level one- Oxbridge, UCL, LSE. Level two- Durham Manchester etc. Level three- Newcastle, Liverpool etc.

Reply 8

TH3-FL45H

19

Original post by bestofyou

Prestige is rendered pretty much into nothing after Oxbridge (could extend that to Imperial for being a well renowned STEM uni).

In terms of the top universities outside of the ones mentioned, there is very little if anything between the rep a university.

I know! - there's no difference in prestige between lse or warwick and london south bank or greenwich, is there?! :facepalm:

To answer the op, i personally think durham has more prestige and it is also ranked higher than manchester in most university rankings. It does also depend on the course though.

Reply 9

bestofyou

18

Original post by ANB1993

Prestige and reputation precede many universities. The red bricks, the 1994 group etc all carry different levels of prestige. There are 3 main levels. Level one- Oxbridge, UCL, LSE. Level two- Durham Manchester etc. Level three- Newcastle, Liverpool etc.

lol Durham was 1994 group until very recently.

You saying that Manchester was a better uni in 2010 but has all of a sudden got worse because Durham is now RG?

What about unaffiliated universities? Are they at the bottom of the pile?

Clearly these levels are not your personal thoughts based on absolutely nothing but conjecture and obviously have been taken from a very respectable study, but I will have to ask if I can see a source. I mean I believe this level system is not something you just completely made up a few seconds ago based on personal opinion...it is just other people might want to see a source.

Reply 10

ANB1993

10

Original post by bestofyou

lol Durham was 1994 group until very recently.

You saying that Manchester was a better uni in 2010 but has all of a sudden got worse because Durham is now RG?

What about unaffiliated universities? Are they at the bottom of the pile?

Clearly these levels are not your personal thoughts based on absolutely nothing but conjecture and obviously have been taken from a very respectable study, but I will have to ask if I can see a source. I mean I believe this level system is not something you just completely made up a few seconds ago based on personal opinion...it is just other people might want to see a source.

I know it was 1994 group until very recently. I never said that red brick universities were more prestigious than 1994 at all. You are reading into something that is not there, searching for an argument.

I know a lot of people in a lot of very respected firms in Dublin and London. They all say it is more about who you know whilst the reputation of these universities globally plays it's part. In terms of reputation, yes, MOST of the unaffiliated universities are not as prestigious as these others. Now this does not mean they are studying at bad universities or their degrees are not respected. I am purely talking about the top top firms.

Also, before you ask, I do not attend any of Oxbridge, LSE, UCL, Durham or Manchester universities, so this is not pig-headed arrogance by myself. I am just stating what most people inside know. To disregard this is plain naivety.

Reply 11

username858757

14

Original post by bestofyou

Prestige is rendered pretty much into nothing after Oxbridge (could extend that to Imperial for being a well renowned STEM uni).

You're right mate. Internationally, its all Oxbridge (and LSE). Even institutions like Imperial are not so well known in certain places (well known in Asia, not so much in America). In the UK, employers/general public would pick Oxbridge graduates over others, but they wouldn't pick an Imperial graduate over any other Russell Group graduate. They would be more concerned about: work experience, degree classification, CV and covering letter, the interview, and compatibility. Having an Oxbridge degree may help make up for minor deficiencies in these areas, but I don't think that an Imperial or Durham degree would make any difference.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 12

Felix Felicis

13

League tables mean **** all.

Manchester is an internationally renowned university, it has 25 nobel laureates, Durham's only shot up in the rankings recently.

Reply 13

un1v

OP

Thanks for your replies. Some of you have said 'it depends on the course', I should have mentioned that I've applied for Geology but can't decide which to go to as I liked them both equally. Just wondered which would give me a better start after I graduate.

Reply 14

Foghorn Leghorn

16

Original post by Felix Felicis

League tables mean **** all.

Manchester is an internationally renowned university, it has 25 nobel laureates, Durham's only shot up in the rankings recently.

I wouldn't say they mean **** all, they are a general representation on how well a university is currently preforming. Certainly they can be flawed, and they are by no means the be all and end all but they can give a good estimate of what experience you will get from attending that uni.

Reply 15

dbkey

5

Original post by Tpx

You're right mate. Internationally, its all Oxbridge (and LSE). Even institutions like Imperial are not so well known in certain places (well known in Asia, not so much in America). In the UK, employers/general public would pick Oxbridge graduates over others, but they wouldn't pick an Imperial graduate over any other Russell Group graduate. They would be more concerned about: work experience, degree classification, CV and covering letter, the interview, and compatibility. Having an Oxbridge degree may help make up for minor deficiencies in these areas, but I don't think that an Imperial or Durham degree would make any difference.

They'd even choose Imperial over Oxbridge if it was for a scientific / engineering post.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 16

Theophile

5

Original post by Tpx

You're right mate. Internationally, its all Oxbridge (and LSE). Even institutions like Imperial are not so well known in certain places (well known in Asia, not so much in America). In the UK, employers/general public would pick Oxbridge graduates over others, but they wouldn't pick an Imperial graduate over any other Russell Group graduate. They would be more concerned about: work experience, degree classification, CV and covering letter, the interview, and compatibility. Having an Oxbridge degree may help make up for minor deficiencies in these areas, but I don't think that an Imperial or Durham degree would make any difference.

Blatantly wrong

Reply 17

bestofyou

18

Original post by Theophile

Blatantly wrong

for the name of the university alone, he is blatantly right. No right minded employer employs alumni. They employ the best graduate. That could be a graduate from LSE or a graduate from South Bank.

We can't generalise saying that the LSE student will get a job on that alone. If this was the case why would LSE students bother to waste time on applications? Surely if this was the case they would have the sense to write 'I am an LSE graduate, PS doesn't even matter what degree I studied so I'll not include it' over an application form and send it into a less prestigious graduate position for example small accountancy firms as opposed to big ones, work there getting priceless work experience and then after a couple of years send in an application to a big city company and blow the thousands of other applicants out of the water with the work experience and the degree not to mention the heavy weighting of the universities name on top of that :rolleyes:

Original post by TH3-FL45H

I know! - there's no difference in prestige between lse or warwick and london south bank or greenwich, is there?! :facepalm:

To answer the op, i personally think durham has more prestige and it is also ranked higher than manchester in most university rankings. It does also depend on the course though.

considering that the OP was talking about Durham and Manchester I didn't think that I would need to state the obvious limitations. However applied to the top 30 or maybe even 40-50 that post holds true.

Reply 18

NHSFan

11

Original post by un1v

Thanks for your replies. Some of you have said 'it depends on the course', I should have mentioned that I've applied for Geology but can't decide which to go to as I liked them both equally. Just wondered which would give me a better start after I graduate.

Hi! I think that a lot depends perhaps on what you plan to do with your Geology degree. My son applied for and had an offer for Geology at Durham (Castle) for 2009-12. He went to interview and stayed overnight and decided against it, as the course was too academic and he wanted something more applied. He also thought it was too 'posh'! He already knew that he probably wanted a career in the petroleum industry. As a parent who admits to being a bit snobby, I thought that perhaps he ought to have chosen Durham. However, as with all 4 of my kids, he was able to make his own decision and he chose a different, RG university and thrived. He achieved a 1st, worked for 8 months, did work experience with an oil company and is presently on a 4 month travelling break before starting an MSc in Petroleum Geoscience later this year.

Ignore prestige.....do what's right for you and your career plans.

Good luck! :smile: