(Original post by ArcaneAnna)
Agreed with the above. Masters from a more 'prestigeous' uni would benifit you.
But does is matter if you get an A in a subject in a state school that ranks at the bottom of the list or in the most expensive public school? No. It's still the same qualification.
The only difference, and the only reason the 'better' uni's have a higher acceptancy rate in firms is because they have the correct 'circle of friends'.
People have become somewhat naive, thinking that they can get through life simply on good qualifications. Knowing the right people is still the main path to good careers.
However.....you can just not mention that you've been to uni and just list all your experiences and skills.
As long as you know what you're doing, are confident that you do it well.....insist on an interview where you can show 1st hand just how good you are (if you are, that is.)
I speak from personal experience (somewhat...) a family friend of ours owns a very substancial bank in Russia, and he never went to school past the age or 16.
no a 2:1 is not equivalent across universities. Some 2:1s are much harder to gain than others.
We sit exams set by the university we're at. Standards vary significantly across universities otherwise nobody would bother attempting to get into any university that wasn't their local one unless they particularly hated their parents.
a person who got a first in accounting would I think possibly not even be able to get a pass at one of the elite universities which offers finance related degrees e.g. LSE/ Warwick etc.
Because the standards are so much higher, it's like comparing apples and oranges.
He's done very well at a much easier course and the questions just aren't comparable because the standard is so inferior.
It's practically worthless for the kind of career in IB he wants to pursue.
It is a degree and he can do some very good jobs with it, but just not ones in IB because ultimately he stands no chance against all the people with 500+ points at A level and a 2:1 in a seriously difficult degree.
Anyone on the LSE's finance course could go to UEL and get an 80% average with the bare minimum of effort.
How do I know this?
A while ago I compared (with a few friends) returned exam scripts from several universities which included Manchester and the LSE as well as a few others and like Manchester's exams are a joke. They have multiple choice questions for compulsory economics/ maths modules which are ridiculously easy in comparison to LSE.
Manchester is ranked far, far above UEL so it makes me shudder to think how poor the standards must be there if Manchester's are considered fairly high for a university.
It's not his fault, it's the lack of information available that encourages people to take **** courses at **** universities which land them jobless with a whole load of debt.