Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

TSR Argument:'There is no point going to university if it isn't in the Russell Group' watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cardine92)
    Surely not if you're doing something like English, Art, Drama, Law, Languages etc because for the most part they don't change so why would anyone need to research them intensively. Science is changing and developing all the time but Wuthering Heights probs has the same meanings it had ten years ago.

    And besides, if all the grad students and proffessors are doing so much research are they really going to care about teaching you. AND afaik at undergraduate level you're pretty much still learning the basics so it's not like you're going to discover anything new. Just being in the Russell Group doesn't make a university better than anywhere else.
    Nope. You think languages don't change? And you think we only need to look at something if it's changing, rather than understanding what makes it like it is?

    I wouldn't like to comment on how Wuthering Heights has changed because I haven't read it, but I can assure you when we do essays we're encouraged to read publications as recent as possible, as citing opinions published in 1952 are almost certainly either completely out-of-date or contested/expanded upon in recent research.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I do think that research-led universities are better, otherwise the lecturers aren't really proper scholars. If I wasn't taught almost entirely by Doctors and Professors then I'd be less likely to take their views seriously. But that doesn't mean a teaching-led university is a waste of time, of course it isn't!

    As for Humanities never changing, many of the books I use for essays have been written in the last ten years. Many of them have ideas that aren't present in earlier books, and sometimes look at topics in completely different ways. Besides, Humanities aren't just about things that were written years and years ago, any course worth its salt will have plenty of new stuff as well.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think it should make any difference whether it's a Russell Group uni, a 1994 Group uni, or whatever other groups exist out there. Saying there's no point in going to Uni if it's not a Russell Uni is like saying "There's no point in going on holiday this year unless it's with Thomson." - it doesn't matter about the name, or the 'high quality', or whatever people think makes these Unis far superior to others.

    The point of going to University shouldn't be based around name and prestige and association, it should be something more personal like going to University to further yourself, your interests, and get something out of life. That was my reason for choosing Cardiff, and not letting my teachers pressure me into applying to Oxbridge.
    I know Cardiff is a Russell Uni, but that had nothing to do with my decision in coming here. I wanted a place where I shared something with the lecturers - I came to the open day and discussed Spanish politics with one of them, and thought "Yep, this should be my firm choice". Who cares if it's 1st or 121st for Spanish?

    Honestly, people who work by league tables and prestige and all that nonsense shouldn't be allowed to go to University simply because they end up sounding up themselves. "Oh, well, I can't possibly go to Brighton. It's #26 for my subject..." - eugh. No thank you. Just go wherever the hell you want and stop making it a competition for who has the better Uni - how old are we? 6? What is this? My dad's car is bigger than your dad's car? It's a bloody educational centre, and each lecturer has their own specific strengths and weaknesses, so you can't realistically base a decision off the prestige of the Uni.

    EG:
    Cardiff is in the Russell Group. Therefore it should be at the 'forefront' of research in each of the respective fields here. However, we have lecturers who are brilliant at what they do, and who take an interest in their subject as well as their students; and we have others who seem totally disinterested, who seem like they just want to publish books and not lecture about their subject.
    It's the same in all Unis, regardless of how 'good' they are perceived to be. And all lecturers have their own specialities - we have a lecturer in Galician Studies, we have another who specialises in Slovakian Film, and another who looks into Gay and Lesbian Identity in Hispanic countries - I know Birmingham has a lecturer in Basque Studies. Every University is different, regardless of name, age, size, prestige, or whatever the hell else you want to base it on. So, therefore, I find this argument idiotic.

    [/rant]
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I turned down 3 offers from what i now realised are "Russell Group" universties to pick a 1994 group uni as my firm.
    (Uni of Sussex for Chem, Ranked N1 by Guardian, if anyone is interested)

    I agree that you need to be somewhere relatively decent to get the best out of you and the course.
    Although i think it's mainly if you're going for a masters or a PhD then the research starts to matter.
    But because the top unis in certain subjects aren't even on this "Russell Group" then i don't think it matters.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cpj1987)
    :rofl: I hate the university so much that I'm leaving...once I've finished my degree!
    yay *high five to that*
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ormaybeitsjustnarcissism)
    Nope. You think languages don't change? And you think we only need to look at something if it's changing, rather than understanding what makes it like it is?

    I wouldn't like to comment on how Wuthering Heights has changed because I haven't read it, but I can assure you when we do essays we're encouraged to read publications as recent as possible, as citing opinions published in 1952 are almost certainly either completely out-of-date or contested/expanded upon in recent research.
    I was making a massive generalisation and I didn't word it very well but there is more scope for research in sciences, social sciences included. That's not to say that research in the arts isn't valuable but it's less tangible than say, stem cell research or discovering new particles hence more funding.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I strongly disagree, its really does'nt matter, as long as you graduate thats the most important thing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    nah russell group is only important if you trade on reputation. my uncle didnt go to russell group, but ended up doing research at cambridge- the only Uni's that trade on their international rep are oxbridge, imperial and LSE
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Exeter, Durham, Loughborough and St Andrews aren't in the Russell group - they are in the 1994 group.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blue_shift86)
    That is shear arrogance to make such a comment. **** the russel group, **** uni! To all the state compers out there - the russel group is full of toffs and arrogant *****. I highly recommend going to middle to low uni's to study cos u learn stuff there AND you have a good time. I'm at ucl and I totally hate it, so much so that i'm leaving uni after BSc this june

    Peace to all the state compers out there :cool:

    *middle finger up* to all u toffs out there. *******!
    Oh no, what's wrong with UCL?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Funkachillislap)
    Which is the bold assertion you are referring to? At no point did i say i agreed to 'there is no point of going to a university outside of the Russell and the 1994 groups.' I only added my viewpoint in the current situation. Socially i believe that nothing could compare to uni life; so I wouldn't say don't go, so long as students are realistic about the actual benefits in the long term - a point which is largely exaggerated (in my school at least).

    As for the experience; i do not have any of my own, but articles i have read along the theme of 'graduates have the wrong skills' and 'too many graduates for not enough jobs' suggest to me that graduates are not benefiting in the way that is being advertised.

    Finally, do you know anyone who was 'really passionate about their subject' and didnt get into one of the top 20? (ok so maybe top 20 is too high and maybe in reality, referring to the point i made in my previous post, i should have said top 50)
    The bold assertion was that going to a university not in the top 20 for a partiuclar subect is probably not going to improve somebody's job prospects and the reason why I said that you do not have the life experience required to make that assertion is because as you said, neither you nor any of your peers are in graduate jobs right now let alone employing new graduates for graduate jobs and so are relying on articles from the biased, sensationalist media.

    'Graduates have the wrong skills' is not something that is going to be fixed by a top 20 uni. Especially with arts degrees, most employers will not give a **** about your knowledge of the subject that you studied and will care more about "soft skills" which unis spend comparatively little time teaching regardless of whether it is Oxford or London Met.

    (Original post by LiveFastDieYoung)
    erm im at oxford simply to get myself in the most employable position ever, i dont give two whoots about the academic study of law! my three vacation schemes even though i only scraped a 2:1 in mods seem to suggest my university may have had something to do with it
    Never before have I seen a TSR user contradict their own username so much :p:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bhumbauze)
    My experience over the last 6 years: people getting specific vocational / business / IT qualifications at ex-polys get graduate employment much more easily than people getting traditional degrees from top Universities. This doesn't include medicine / dentistry / engineering, but it DOES include Law and straight sciences.

    So no... how can it be "pointless" not to go to a University in the Russell group if graduates even from low-scoring ex-polys are getting graduate employment within months of graduating?
    well thats not true. http://www.highfliers.co.uk/download/GM10Report.pdf
    this article would beg to differ. Where it states the most targeted unis for graduate recruitment for the top unis were mainly Russeell Group. There was NOT one ex-poly in there. Maybe when your talking about serving coffee people from ex-polys are more desired but when it comes to the upper echelons of graduate jobs where the highest salaries are an Economics graduate from Warwick will be more desired than someone with a BA in Stage Management fro Birmingham City
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shyopstv)
    Never before have I seen a TSR user contradict their own username so much :p:

    I am almost completely sober at the moment, is that more contradictory?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Really what is the requirement, or on what basis was the Russell Group formed that makes it the british version of the ivy league?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Is it named after Russell Peters?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cardine92)
    Surely not if you're doing something like English, Art, Drama, Law, Languages etc because for the most part they don't change so why would anyone need to research them intensively. Science is changing and developing all the time but Wuthering Heights probs has the same meanings it had ten years ago.
    Erm, it definitely is worth doing research into languages - have you never heard of linguistics?

    I'd also argue that researching language change is fairly crucial - it's fundamental as our key tool of communication.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tha_Black_Shinobi)
    well thats not true. http://www.highfliers.co.uk/download/GM10Report.pdf
    this article would beg to differ. Where it states the most targeted unis for graduate recruitment for the top unis were mainly Russeell Group. There was NOT one ex-poly in there. Maybe when your talking about serving coffee people from ex-polys are more desired but when it comes to the upper echelons of graduate jobs where the highest salaries are an Economics graduate from Warwick will be more desired than someone with a BA in Stage Management fro Birmingham City
    Your link proves the person's point just as much as it disproves it.

    IT and engineering are in the top 4 types of graduate vaccancies. A history graduate will not get into either of these even if it is a 1st from Cambridge whereas a Computing/Engineering graduate with a 2:1 from Anglia Ruskin would stand a chance. The leading sector is finance where both of those graduates would find it very difficult.

    The most targeted uni in the country was Manchester. Would you recommend that everyone goes to Manchester even if they have an offer from Cambridge? No because being at a university that is not targeted by a given company does not mean that you are not allowed to apply for jobs there.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's not the end of the world if you don't go to a Russell Group Uni, on average there are 10 applicants to one place in Russell group institutions so many people might not get in, doesn't mean it's the end of the world though.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by domino0806)
    Durham and St Andy's aren't in the Russell group whereas universities such as Birmingham, Cardiff, Leeds, Liverpool, Sheffield, Manchester, Newcastle are, and they're obviously worse...
    come again?
    maybe i've misinterpreted what you have said but.........
    indeed st andrews and durham are better but the way you put that you make it look as though all those unis are sheds of education in comparison with the mighty st andrews and durham?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shyopstv)
    Your link proves the person's point just as much as it disproves it.

    IT and engineering are in the top 4 types of graduate vaccancies. A history graduate will not get into either of these even if it is a 1st from Cambridge whereas a Computing/Engineering gradate from Anglia Ruskin would stand a chance. The leading sector is finance where both of those graduates would find it very difficult.

    The most targeted uni in the country was Manchester. Would you recommend that everyone goes to Manchester even if they have an offer from Cambridge? No because being at a university that is not targeted by a given company does not mean that you are not allowed to apply for jobs there.
    Does not prove his point at all. Computing/Engineering is just one of the sectors. Even still I'm pretty sure someone with a Chemical Engineering degree from Imperial/Cambridge is probably more likeley to a job than a Anglia Ruskin grad cetis paribus.If you actually looked law was the second highest starting salary where a somewhere with a History 1st from Cambridge is likely to have a good shot. My point was that people with a traditional degree from the top unis have the best shot so your finance point is invalid. Someone with an economics or maths degree from LSE or Oxford has a good chance of getting into the finance sector. I never suggested that people should choose Manchester over Cambridge. I said that if you can going to the top unis would be best for your graduate chances. I think its pretty obvious that although Manchester's prestige is a factor in its position its size makes it number 1 on the list
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.