Hi,
This has been bugging me for a while on this forum — why do people act like universities such as Exeter, York and Nottingham (unis which I’ve seen) are as good as, or give as many opportunities as, somewhere like UCL, Durham or LSE? Even seen Oxbridge thrown in there.
It’s crazy to me and simply wrong. They are not in the same tier and someone who goes to Durham with a 2:1 is going to have more opportunities and viewed as a better candidate to someone who went to Exeter with a 2:1 because it’s objectively a better uni.
If all these unis were as good as each other and going to Exeter over UCL would be fine, why is UCL so much harder to get into and has a better calibre of students?
I’m not saying Exeter, York, Notts, Bristol or wherever are bad unis at all as they’re not. Yet trying to claim they get you on the same level as a Durham or UCL is just wrong.
Just because some people from the MC went to Exeter, it’s an anomaly is it not? They’ll be people from the MC who went to Reading or Leicester - are we going to claim these would be fine over UCL because it doesn’t matter as long as you as a candidate are good?
It’s ludicrous and making people make incorrect and wrong decisions by saying “go to Exeter over UCL if you like the campus”.