Turn on thread page Beta

Could I get in a Russell group uni if I did these A-Levels? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    And I will say once more, what gives you the experience to say that this is the case?

    No because you're making a number of assumptions. The first is that employers look at league tables. By and large those involved in recruitment do not even look at league tables even if they do have a preference for certain universities. Do you really expect employers to rush to the league tables are produced every year and disect them?

    Neither will most know who the Russell Group members are. Even those who do, they'll recognise the equally quality universities outside the RG and that the group is only a lobbying group. A university in the RG is not necessarily better, or produces higher quality graduates, than one outside. Particularly not 1994 Group institions.

    They are reasonably informed people and will realise that universities do not steadily decline in quality from an arbitary position. They also have experiencing in dealing and working alongside graduates from a range of universities. This experience is often more likely to influence them than league tables.

    Graduates were employed long before league tables and the RG came only in the early to mid 1990s. How did employers differentiate between applicants then? Academic performance, interview performance, work experience...

    The second assumption is that they place high focus on university name. This can vary significantly from employer to employer and by sector/job role. By and large it plays a minor role (if any at all) and, when it does, is usually only of consequence in the early stages of an application. An employer will not reject a person who has enviable experience and impresses in interview just because he or she went to a universities outside the top 20.

    You're barely more likely to attend a top 10 or 20 university if you're at a RG university. In fact take a look at the Independent's Complete University Guide (2011).

    Four of the top 10 are RG universities. 1994 Group unis include Durham (4th) and St Andrews (6th).

    Look at the top 20. 10 are Russell Group, Eight are from the 1994 Group and 2 are in neither (Aston and Buckingham).
    So that's an even split, isn't it?

    So I'm afriad based on this year's table you're completely incorrect. Even if you take an average from the previous 18 years there is probably not much of a difference.

    I also don't know why you keep using this arbitary number of 20 either. There is no some difference quality between those universities ranking in the top 20 and those ranking, say, 20 - 40. There invariably is not. Broadly speaking the quality of students and graduates from the universities is comparable.

    You are not a graduate employer. There are people involved in graduate recruitment who will, more or less, back up what I say (which is based on experience).

    Unemployment is at a high level, though many of these will be people with limited qualifications. Although I still recognise graduate employment certainly exists at a higher level than because they usually don't know what the Russell Group is and the universities in that group. When it is used in a job advert, which is rarely, it is used as a broad term for what they may think of as "good" or traditional universities (namely pre-1992 universities) and it isn't even a hard and fast rule, either.
    Er that's a lot of waffle for something that is easily answered by:
    I've talked to employers before and it is something they consider, and know about, as they themselves are from universities.
    Now as I've said before, this is to do with more specific job applications e.g. anything to do with science, engineering etc, not your run-of-the-mill office work.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    I've talked to employers before and it is something they consider, and know about, as they themselves are from universities.
    That's not actually exacttly what I said nor did I say that employers themselves are from universities (I said that they have gained experience due to employing graduates over a number of years). But, in short: -

    1. By and large they don't pay attention to league tables.

    2. Despite what you have said the RG universities don't always make up the majority of the top 20 universities in the country. In the Indepndent's current table they are the minority albeit only just.

    These were the two main points.

    Now as I've said before, this is to do with more specific job applications e.g. anything to do with science, engineering etc, not your run-of-the-mill office work.
    Yes, graduate employment, exactly what I'm referring to. Do you honestly think I'm referring to something like an admin assistant? Law, journalism, Civil Service, medicine, engineering...

    Engineering courses are often accredited by professional organisations and, once again, the 1994 Group universities can offer particularly strong engineering departments anyway (Bath, for example). Aberdeen, neither a RG or 1994 Group university, was quite a popular university in the 1970s and 1980s, due to oil, and it, along with Robert Gordon (in Aberdeen) have excellent courses and its graduates remain well represented in the oil industry and offshore energy sector. I'm friends/a close acquintance of the MD of an engineering company (was MD of the company my father, a design engineer, worked for) and an Aberdeen graduate. This has been confirmed by him (who admits that he choses according to experience and other criteria and not university name). This has also been verified by directors of another company I have experience with (including a market leading offshore engineering firm). All very successful business people, worth a few million, and with plenty of industry knowledge and experience. I can give you names if you want. This doesn't mean that a number of large companies, particularly those with a high volume of applicants, won't operate some kind of filter. But this is not some "Russell Group only" filter.

    Foundation posts in the NHS are "blind" with the university name not disclosed. The Civil and Diplomatic Service are broadly accepting (a small number of universities are still disproportionately represtended in the CS but this is due to a number of factors, including that the graduates from these universities will tend to be the brightest and most able, the most successful applicants are not necessarily ones from RG universities - Durham being one example - the stats are available to view just google them).

    In law the situation varies massively from high street solictor firms to the Magic circle, from provincial to top chambers. Once again, the universities most strongly represented at the top levels include non-RG universities (Durham being one).

    In land and estate management Reading, not a RG university, has possibly the strongest course in the country and is well targeted by international firms.

    You don't see how the situation is more complex than you are admitting and this is only scratching the surface.

    Anyway, this thread is starting to go off topic. Feel free to bring it up in a relevant thread when the opportunity comes along. But, if you cannot provide informed opinion and evidence, I'll probably just ignore you. Otherwise we'll just go around in circles.

    There are many threads on this topic and, in at least one thread, my information was broadly supported by Good Bloke - an employer. Do a search if you're bothered. You have failed to provide any evidence or attract any support for your, if not completely untrue certainly very misleading, view.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    That's not actually exacttly what I said nor did I say that employers themselves are from universities (I said that they have gained experience due to employing graduates over a number of years). But, in short: -

    1. By and large they don't pay attention to league tables.

    2. Despite what you have said the RG universities don't always make up the majority of the top 20 universities in the country. In the Indepndent's current table they are the minority albeit only just.

    These were the two main points.

    Yes, graduate employment, exactly what I'm referring to. Do you honestly think I'm referring to something like an admin assistant? Law, journalism, Civil Service, medicine, engineering...

    Engineering courses are often accredited by professional organisations and, once again, the 1994 Group universities can offer particularly strong engineering departments anyway (Bath, for example). Aberdeen, neither a RG or 1994 Group university, was quite a popular university in the 1970s and 1980s, due to oil, and it, along with Robert Gordon (in Aberdeen) have excellent courses and its graduates remain well represented in the oil industry and offshore energy sector. I'm friends/a close acquintance of the MD of an engineering company (was MD of the company my father, a design engineer, worked for) and an Aberdeen graduate. This has been confirmed by him (who admits that he choses according to experience and other criteria and not university name). This has also been verified by directors of another company I have experience with (including a market leading offshore engineering firm). All very successful business people, worth a few million, and with plenty of industry knowledge and experience. I can give you names if you want. This doesn't mean that a number of large companies, particularly those with a high volume of applicants, won't operate some kind of filter. But this is not some "Russell Group only" filter.

    Foundation posts in the NHS are "blind" with the university name not disclosed. The Civil and Diplomatic Service are broadly accepting (a small number of universities are still disproportionately represtended in the CS but this is due to a number of factors, including that the graduates from these universities will tend to be the brightest and most able, the most successful applicants are not necessarily ones from RG universities - Durham being one example - the stats are available to view just google them).

    In law the situation varies massively from high street solictor firms to the Magic circle, from provincial to top chambers. Once again, the universities most strongly represented at the top levels include non-RG universities (Durham being one).

    In land and estate management Reading, not a RG university, has possibly the strongest course in the country and is well targeted by international firms.

    You don't see how the situation is more complex than you are admitting and this is only scratching the surface.

    Anyway, this thread is starting to go off topic. Feel free to bring it up in a relevant thread when the opportunity comes along. But, if you cannot provide informed opinion and evidence, I'll probably just ignore you. Otherwise we'll just go around in circles.

    There are many threads on this topic and, in at least one thread, my information was broadly supported by Good Bloke - an employer. Do a search if you're bothered. You have failed to provide any evidence or attract any support for your, if not completely untrue certainly very misleading, view.
    What is wrong with you? How can you waffle 500 words from 3 lines?
    RG = >% of higher ranking university than any other group. Ergo, just for the ranking consideration, it makes sense to go to a RG university than any other group. Employers take ranking into consideration so say what you want, but you are simply convoluting something which is not nearly as complex as you think it is.
    Employers do take ranking into consideration. To say otherwise is utter, utter **** and only half arsed firms would do that, or firms that go through high volumes of graduates very quickly e.g. Recruitment consultancies. I'm not saying it's to do precisely with the label of RG, so nice strawman, it's simply playing the odds that RG = higher ranking chance.
    Evidence = talked to people at DSTL & other scientific employers, nuclear industry etc who are in the position of hiring people.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    What is wrong with you? How can you waffle 500 words from 3 lines?
    RG = >% of higher ranking university than any other group. Ergo, just for the ranking consideration, it makes sense to go to a RG university than any other group. Employers take ranking into consideration so say what you want, but you are simply convoluting something which is not nearly as complex as you think it is.
    Employers do take ranking into consideration. To say otherwise is utter, utter **** and only half arsed firms would do that, or firms that go through high volumes of graduates very quickly e.g. Recruitment consultancies. I'm not saying it's to do precisely with the label of RG, so nice strawman, it's simply playing the odds that RG = higher ranking chance.
    Evidence = talked to people at DSTL & other scientific employers, nuclear industry etc who are in the position of hiring people.
    Stop being ignorate please its annoying. Anyways back to the argument
    I understand where your coming from but the point your trying to make is not back up with evidence.

    This survey has been done by 2000 of the MAJOR employers across the UK. This is based on what university their graduates went to

    1. Cambridge
    2. Warwick
    3. Manchester
    4. London (LSE, Imperial, UCL)
    5. Oxford
    Nottingham
    Bristol
    Bath
    Durham
    Leeds
    Edinburgh
    Birmingham
    Loughborough
    Sheffield
    Southampton
    16. Cardiff
    17. Aston
    18. Strathclyde
    19. Newcastle
    20. Exeter

    From the top 20 i think you can see that all the university mention are not all from the russell group!

    This has made your argument now invalid
    http://www.highfliers.co.uk/download/GMReport11.pdf
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FinalMH)
    Stop being ignorate please its annoying. Anyways back to the argument
    I understand where your coming from but the point your trying to make is not back up with evidence.

    This survey has been done by 2000 of the MAJOR employers across the UK. This is based on what university their graduates went to

    1. Cambridge
    2. Warwick
    3. Manchester
    4. London (LSE, Imperial, UCL)
    5. Oxford

    Nottingham
    Bristol
    Bath
    Durham
    Leeds
    Edinburgh
    Birmingham
    Loughborough
    Sheffield
    Southampton

    16. Cardiff
    17. Aston
    18. Strathclyde
    19. Newcastle
    20. Exeter

    From the top 20 i think you can see that all the university mention are not all from the russell group!

    This has made your argument now invalid
    http://www.highfliers.co.uk/download/GMReport11.pdf
    Congratulations on showing a disturbingly low level of comprehension.
    Don't make strawmen - my point never was that "IF U DONT GO TO RG UNI ULL LIKE NVAR GET A JOB!!!!"!1"
    12 of those 20 are Russell Group, ergo if you go for a RG university, you have a good chance of employment, over any other group.
    So thanks for providing evidence to back my point up :rofl:
    :goaway:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    Don't make strawmen - my point never was that "IF U DONT GO TO RG UNI ULL LIKE NVAR GET A JOB!!!!

    :goaway:
    You implied that if you didn't go to russell group you had no chance of a good job, which ain't true
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    What is wrong with you? How can you waffle 500 words from 3 lines?
    I'm special like that :awesome:

    RG = >% of higher ranking university than any other group.
    Why won't you recognise what you said (RG universities make up the majority of the top 20) is, according to this year's tables, complete nonsense?

    They are not "groups" in any real official sense other than being lobbying groups for research. I will say it again many employers (as well as the media) are unaware of the exact membership of the Russell Group anyway. This is shown time and time again, particularly when the media refer to Durham or York in the RG.

    I have already shown that slightly majority of the universities in the top 20 of the Independent table are not in the Russell Group. If you take the Indepedent table and look at the positions of all RG universities you'll have a mean average position of 18. The 1994 Group universities have a mean average of 20.

    There are, I think, 19 Russell Group universities in the Guardian's top 40 and 8 in the top 20. Again, universities not in the Russell Group are the majority.

    What's more if you actually think employers do take league tables into account, then wouldn't they favour some 1994 Group universities over some Russell Group universities? Using the Independent there's around 40 positions between Durham (highest ranking 1994 Group university in the RG and Cardiff (lowestranking RG university). Using the Guardian around 50 places between St Andrews and Queen's Belfast.

    Ergo, just for the ranking consideration, it makes sense to go to a RG university than any other group. Employers take ranking into consideration so say what you want, but you are simply convoluting something which is not nearly as complex as you think it is.
    Yes it is.

    I'm not saying it's to do precisely with the label of RG
    Yesterday you did. Something along the lines of "by being in the Russell Group they are the most prestigious".

    I'm not saying that Russell Group universities and certain 1994 Group universities can be favoured by some employers in certain areas. Just not for the reasons you mention and not to the same degree as you seem to think.

    (Original post by Good bloke)
    x
    Sorry for bothering you again but if you can provide some feedback it'll be appreciated.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FinalMH)
    You implied that if you didn't go to russell group you had no chance of a good job, which ain't true
    Quote me on that one bud.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    snip
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...9&postcount=85
    Done and dusted.
    Thanks brah, over and out.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    A few comments from the employers' perspective:

    The number of times the vast majority of employers look at university league tables can be counted on the fingers of one foot. Many employers will advertise for "top" or "Russell Group" graduates but they will only mean "a generally well respected university and not one of those nasty recent additions of dubious quality" and, since they don't look at league tables will have only a loose idea of what they mean. Very few employers will realise that the Russell Group excludes such a well respected university as Durham and, like most students, few will realise the significance of the organisation (which is just a lobbying cartel and nothing at all to do with teaching standards or graduate quality). A very few employers will filter by university but this is only really an issue in a few law firms and investment banks.

    Realistically, no candidate, having reached the testing/interview stage of a recruitment drive, will be judged on which university he went to. Having reached that stage it is all about the candidate, his abilities, the way he presents himself etc.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...9&postcount=85
    Done and dusted.
    Thanks brah, over and out.
    You still aren't admitting your mistakes; there are a smaller number of RG of univeristies in the current top 20 of at least two league tables and my main point - employers, by and large, are either unaware the Russell Group exists or the universities who make up the Russell Group.

    Anyway, no, it's not the strongest piece of evidence but it does show that you are incorrect actually.

    That is a table showing the universities a select number of employers targeted (through on campus advertising, presentations, that sort of thing). It is not, by itself, an accurate reflection of universities employers actually prefer to recruit from.

    Lets have a look at those universities...London, Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, Edinburgh, Leeds, Sheffield, Bristol....oh, wait, the country's major cities and conurbations then? This isn't surpising as these will have larger populations, good transport facilities (easy to get to), high number of students...

    It is true that, to a certain extent, the larger universities will be targeted to a greater extent. It's all about getting the message out to the largest audience, isn't it? But you ignore the high number of non-Russell Group (particularly the 94 Group universities) on the list. This, on its own, is not evidence that they disciminate according to university name and prefer RG universities.

    (Original post by Good bloke)
    A few comments from the employers' perspective:

    The number of times the vast majority of employers look at university league tables can be counted on the fingers of one foot. Many employers will advertise for "top" or "Russell Group" graduates but they will only mean "a generally well respected university and not one of those nasty recent additions of dubious quality" and, since they don't look at league tables will have only a loose idea of what they mean. Very few employers will realise that the Russell Group excludes such a well respected university as Durham and, like most students, few will realise the significance of the organisation (which is just a lobbying cartel and nothing at all to do with teaching standards or graduate quality). A very few employers will filter by university but this is only really an issue in a few law firms and investment banks.

    Realistically, no candidate, having reached the testing/interview stage of a recruitment drive, will be judged on which university he went to. Having reached that stage it is all about the candidate, his abilities, the way he presents himself etc.
    Exactly what I've said (albeit more concisely). Thanks :hat2:

    Anyway I've said what I have to say. If you still believe this then, fine, your choice. But don't spout it on this website as if it is fact.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think there fine, call the unis to make sure
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Maths and biology are fairly strong subjects, just depends what course and at which university, but remember not all good universities are in the Russell Group, for example Durham University
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)
    You still aren't admitting your mistakes; there are a smaller number of RG of univeristies in the current top 20 of at least two league tables and my main point - employers, by and large, are either unaware the Russell Group exists or the universities who make up the Russell Group.

    Anyway, no, it's not the strongest piece of evidence but it does show that you are incorrect actually.

    That is a table showing the universities a select number of employers targeted (through on campus advertising, presentations, that sort of thing). It is not, by itself, an accurate reflection of universities employers actually prefer to recruit from.

    Lets have a look at those universities...London, Manchester, Newcastle, Birmingham, Edinburgh, Leeds, Sheffield, Bristol....oh, wait, the country's major cities and conurbations then? This isn't surpising as these will have larger populations, good transport facilities (easy to get to), high number of students...

    It is true that, to a certain extent, the larger universities will be targeted to a greater extent. It's all about getting the message out to the largest audience, isn't it? But you ignore the high number of non-Russell Group (particularly the 94 Group universities) on the list. This, on its own, is not evidence that they disciminate according to university name and prefer RG universities.



    Exactly what I've said (albeit more concisely). Thanks :hat2:

    Anyway I've said what I have to say. If you still believe this then, fine, your choice. But don't spout it on this website as if it is fact.
    Look at the list - over 50% of 2000 companies focus on RG universities. How does that show I'm incorrect?
    The reasoning for targeting the universities is utterly arbitrary. What we know is that out of the top 20 universities targeted, over 50% are RG universities.
    As I have always stated, this then makes it statistically logical to then focus on going to a RG university.
    It is a fact - if you go to a RG university, you are more likely to be targeted by graduate employers. Surely it then makes sense to conclude that if you are being targeted by employers, your chance of employment is higher?
    Please keep your answer concise if you reply.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    .
    Your making out that every other uni thats not in the russell group has 0% graduate employment

    :rolleyes: which we both no ain't true?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FinalMH)
    Your making out that every other uni thats not in the russell group has 0% graduate employment

    :rolleyes: which we both no ain't true?
    Any evidence or just a nice strawman brah? Come back when you aren't spewing inane bull****.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Don't prioritise subjects you like for some guy called Russell, go to whatever uni you want. This group thing looks like total bawlz anyway.. I don't believe Universities are top because someone says so, they're top to you personally and what you want to do.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by River85)

    The second assumption is that they place high focus on university name. This can vary significantly from employer to employer and by sector/job role. By and large it plays a minor role (if any at all) and, when it does, is usually only of consequence in the early stages of an application. An employer will not reject a person who has enviable experience and impresses in interview just because he or she went to a universities outside the top 20.
    Does this apply for my case? :confused:
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=1567689

    Thank you
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazty)
    Any evidence or just a nice strawman brah? Come back when you aren't spewing inane bull****.
    What are you on about? your misleading everyone on this thread, its not just me who is saying it. i said your "making it out to be". If you cba to read what i said don't quote me!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FinalMH)
    What are you on about? your misleading everyone on this thread, its not just me who is saying it. i said your "making it out to be". If you cba to read what i said don't quote me!
    "Making it out to be " is merely you interpreting what I am saying completely incorrectly. Nice. One. Brah.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 13, 2011
Poll
Cats or dogs?
Applying to uni

All the essentials

The adventure begins mug

Student life: what to expect

What it's really like going to uni

Graduates celebrate

How to write a good personal statement

Expert PS advice from the people who will read it

Uni match

Uni match

Can't decide where to apply? Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Two students working together

A-Z of universities

Read our guides to unis and colleges from around the UK

A student working on a computer

Personal statement help

Use our tool to get your ideal PS quickly!

Hands typing

Degrees without fees

Discover more about degree-level apprenticeships.

A student looking down a microscope

Planning open days

Find upcoming open days and get advice on preparing.

Help out other students

These questions still need an answer

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.