Which is more prestigious?

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

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!

Within the UK, Durham. Internationally, Manchester.

But really, any difference in apparent prestige is not huge, and any difference in employability will be down to YOU not the university you went to - your work experience, your grades, etc. etc. will be far more important than the question of whether you went to Durham or Manchester.

I wish I knew what was right for me! Haha but thank you, that's good advice. Can I ask what uni your son decided on going to? He's clearly doing very well for himself!

No they wouldn't, certainly not based only on the Uni.


Posted from TSR Mobile

No they wouldn't, certainly not based only on the Uni.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Yes I agree! It's just 'it's not what you know, it's who you know', so wondered if either university could give me a head start when I try to find a job.

Who you meet at uni is almost entirely down to chance - and actually, you won't really know which of the people you've met at uni will be advantageous to you for years after you graduate, when people have forged their own careers.

I can't seen that there would be a quantifiable difference between the two - both tend to attract bright, ambitious, upwardly-mobile types who want to (and will) do well in the future.

Wrong!

My place (engineering) did.

Reasons were Imperial's course was more practical and it has strong links to industry as opposed to just pure theory.

Well in my company, it certainly happened on several occasions, so I'm afraid you're wrong.

Wrong!

My place (engineering) did.

Reasons were Imperial's course was more practical and it has strong links to industry as opposed to just pure theory.

How is this supposed to be related to my post?

Edit: to clarify my point, I absolutely agree the name carries weight, but saying that this applies only to Oxbridge is inaccurate

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.

Ah Ok, but that was based more on course focus rather than Uni prestige which is what this thread is about. I take your point though.

But surely prestige encompasses course content, reputation, employability?

Cambridge's engineering course is very general, whereas Imperial's is more specialised right from the start.

If you want to specialise immediately, Cambridge's will teach you a lot you probably won't be interetsed in.

So some companies prefer Imperial.

Given that this thread began with a general discussion about which Uni as a whole is more prestigious I'd say no. Also I doubt it's a case of them feeling the teaching is hugely superior at Imperial more than it is them preferring the more focused nature of it, and to say that that makes the course more prestiges than Cambridge's would be a mistake in my opinion.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Would you happen to know which has stronger links with industry between Manchester and Durham?