The Student Room Group

is a first from Oxford better than a first from say Swansea?

Hey guys I was just wondering if you could help me with a question that seems obvious yet nobody I've spoken to really has the answer to!

Is the degree you gain at university relative to the uni you've gone to? Like for example is a first from Oxford better than a first from a different uni like say Swansea or Keele.

I only ask because my english lit teacher was saying the other day that the reason he didn't get a first is because to get a girst at Oxford you need to either be a genius or have no social life, does that mean it's easier to get a first at other places because it's worth less there?

If anyone could enlighten me to this little thing I'd be very greatful cus it's been bugging me for ages now! thanks

by the way these are my offers for English:
sussex AAB (firm)
Kent 320 (insurance)
Exeter ABB (declined)
Keele 320 (declined)
Swansea 300(declined)
Aberyswyth 300 (declined)

Scroll to see replies

A first from Oxbridge >>>>>> First from MOST other unis unless they are specialist in that area...

E.g. some would say that a 1st in LSE Economics >>>>>>>> 1st in Cambridge Economics...
Reply 2
It can be harder to get firsts at certain universities. This is because:

(a) some universities mark competitively, so only the top 20% say will get 1sts (numbers plucked out of thin air), if say one of these universities has an average A-Level intake of BCC and the other of AAB then there's going to be a difference in the calibre of the students;

and (b) universities are going to set exams at a degree of difficulty depending on their intake, say if you have a maths course with an AAA intake against one of a CCC intake then the exams are going to be set at different levels.

Disclaimer : Before someone jums down my throat, I know intake grades aren't everything, but they are just a factor I've used to illustrate my point. And my advice to the OP would be to go the place where they'd enjoy the course and university most and not to base their decision solely on prestige.
The reputation that Oxford has for excellence and high academic standards does give your CV that extra edge, despite there being no formal difference between Oxon and other unis in final honours... it's a lot of work anywhere to get a first, but perhaps more in Oxford because they have tutorials while other uni's just have lectures/seminars etc, but how much you work is not connected to how much a degree is worth - future employers will still be impressed by a first from Sussex etc and it's better to get that rather than a third from Oxford, because it shows your OWN capabilities rather than the inherent status of the university! Hope this helps!
Reply 4
A 1st or 2:1 from a respected uni will be impressive to employers! No employer would reject someone because they went to Warwick, York, Durham, LSE, UCL or Swansea if they were better suited to the job than an Oxbridge graduate. IMO the Oxbridge thing is over rated.
Reply 5
I imagine it is in (rough) correlation to the university tiers; a first from Oxbridge or UCL or LSE will be judged evenly. However, I don't think a blanket generalisation is correct, because it depends entirely on the particular subject and department.

I have absolutely nothing to back this up, but it seems to be a reasonable answer:p: .
Reply 6
Let's be realistic here people - all other things being equal someone with a first from Oxford or Cambridge will probably get a job over anyone else - the next tier down would be UCL, LSE, Imperial, Kings, Durham, Bristol, Bath, Warwick, York, Manchester and the next tier Newcastle, Leeds etc and so on and so forth. To give a simple answer - yes a 1st from Oxford would be worth more than a 1st from Keele, as would a 2:1 from Oxford (Though 2:2 and 3rd wouldn't be) - however there is more that employers look for than just the degree. Unfortunately Oxbridge types often have everything else employers look for (The bastards!:biggrin: ) but not always:smile:
Reply 7
Within the top universities, a first from one beats a 2.1 in another.

For example a first in UCL's L100 trumps a 2.1 in LSE's L101.

Of course a first from Oxbridge trumps a first at another top university, except arguably for specialist subjects (e.g. economics at LSE). The distinction is extremely marginal anyway. A first in pretty much any degree programme at Oxbridge = passport to life!
A first from oxbridge or the redbrick uni's such as UCL and Manchester is absolutely better than a first from other unis. This is because the standard of work you have to adhere to is extremely high, and employers do recognise this. For example, exams in the same degree at lancaster uni involved a seen paper (so easy) and 2 pieces of coursework each semester. Whereas at oxford it involved 16 pieces of coursework and obviously regular essay question exams.
If you get the opportunity, and you feel that you wuld enjoy it- go to oxbridge! I can guarantee that your education would be better and you would be a hundred more times employable with even a 2.2 from oxford compared to a 1st from say swansea, southhampton, lancaster etc.

no offence is intended to anyone attending those universities!
Reply 9
EamonnHF
Let's be realistic here people - all other things being equal someone with a first from Oxford or Cambridge will probably get a job over anyone else - the next tier down would be UCL, LSE, Imperial, Kings, Durham, Bristol, Bath, Warwick, York, Manchester and the next tier Newcastle, Leeds etc and so on and so forth. To give a simple answer - yes a 1st from Oxford would be worth more than a 1st from Keele, as would a 2:1 from Oxford (Though 2:2 and 3rd wouldn't be) - however there is more that employers look for than just the degree. Unfortunately Oxbridge types often have everything else employers look for (The bastards!:biggrin: ) but not always:smile:


not really the case in most scenarios, the degree gets you the interview and the interview gets you the job (and no two different people interviewing are gonna be the same...)
There is susbstance to many of these claims, but I agree with superalex - it's very naive to assume that "all other things being equal" then a first from one university will clinch a job. These unrealistic scenarios are not the greatest method for debating such issues. In my experience, if employers dont find an ideal employee then they either invite the candidates back for another interview or they readvertise the post. There isnt really going to be a debate over whether a KCL first is better than a UCL. Having a first from most universities is impressive, and yes, Oxbridge degrees look good on a CV, but so do postgraduate qualifications, life experience, previous employment etc. And dont forget - universities have external examiners which are supposed to level things out to a certain extent.
Reply 11
amierauk
A first from oxbridge or the redbrick uni's such as UCL and Manchester is absolutely better than a first from other unis. This is because the standard of work you have to adhere to is extremely high, and employers do recognise this. For example, exams in the same degree at lancaster uni involved a seen paper (so easy) and 2 pieces of coursework each semester. Whereas at oxford it involved 16 pieces of coursework and obviously regular essay question exams.
If you get the opportunity, and you feel that you wuld enjoy it- go to oxbridge! I can guarantee that your education would be better and you would be a hundred more times employable with even a 2.2 from oxford compared to a 1st from say swansea, southhampton, lancaster etc.

no offence is intended to anyone attending those universities!


:rolleyes: Just the redbrick unis? What about Durham, St. Andrews, Nottingham, Edinburgh, Warwick, York, etc?

Its worth noting that a higher proportion of students at the top unis get 1sts and 2:1s - which is how its supposed to work, as there is supposed to be a certain amount of comparison possible between degrees at different institutions. The relative status of the universities is always going to have an impact as well, though, and in some cases will far outweigh the classification - a 2:1 in maths from Cambridge is more impressive than a 1st from say, Aberdeen.
It's really all about where it gets you and that is, for the most part, and individual thing. Reputation of degree matters to so few employers that it really doesn't make much difference in the grand scheme of a CV for most jobs and certainly not for most postgraduate study programmes. A first, from whatever university, shows you have real potential in that subject - whether you go onto realise that potential is another matter. Many lower ranking institutions still offer excellence in certain fields and so should their graduates should be dismissed at an employer's peril.
Reply 13
ChemistBoy
It's really all about where it gets you and that is, for the most part, and individual thing. Reputation of degree matters to so few employers that it really doesn't make much difference in the grand scheme of a CV for most jobs and certainly not for most postgraduate study programmes. A first, from whatever university, shows you have real potential in that subject - whether you go onto realise that potential is another matter. Many lower ranking institutions still offer excellence in certain fields and so should their graduates should be dismissed at an employer's peril.

Actually that's not true, in some fields where you graduate from can matter a lot (I'm not saying this is right, or wrong!) say in IB and Law, where top firms certainly and other firms as well operate a tiering system for recruitment.
Casey
Actually that's not true, in some fields where you graduate from can matter a lot (I'm not saying this is right, or wrong!) say in IB and Law, where top firms certainly and other firms as well operate a tiering system for recruitment.


For most jobs it doesn't matter, as I said. IB is not most jobs, Law is a difficult one, I can't honestly agree that the institution of your first degree is that decisive for the entire field of law (remember there are many graduates from a wide variety of subject disciplines and institutions who enter the profession of law), CPE/LPC study is just as, if not more, important. Both Nottingham Trent and UEA (both arguably not top-flight institutions) have highly successful law schools who place graduates with top city firms with regularity.
I agree with Chemist Boy - but still, the magic circle only employ graduates from particular law firms. That's not to say that other law firms are pants, or that other degrees are worse - its just the criteria/beliefs system of one group of law firms. In a way its a bit like the Russell Group claiming they are the best and valuing themselves more than other universities when obviously there are other very good universities not in the group.
Reply 16
Oh! As someone who has degrees from both Swansea and Oxford (schpooky!), I would say that there is probably no actual difference outside of that perceived by the general public, and the snobbery of the Magic Circle et al!

For my degree at Swansea, 1sts were awarded competatively in my department, so for example, despite the fact I have a 76% average I have a 2i (2 firsts per subject per year - not sure if that is still the case, but they bought it in the year I graduated as the year before got a shed load of firsts).

However, there were infinitely more oportunities at Oxford - not only to meet the 'right' people, but in terms of facilities etc. Of course there's also the fact that it's Oxford!
Reply 17
ChemistBoy
For most jobs it doesn't matter, as I said. IB is not most jobs, Law is a difficult one, I can't honestly agree that the institution of your first degree is that decisive for the entire field of law (remember there are many graduates from a wide variety of subject disciplines and institutions who enter the profession of law), CPE/LPC study is just as, if not more, important.

And I only quoted them as examples, if you read my post. There's plenty of career paths that are selective in this way, a large part of the financial world, a lot of law firms do this (there was a discussion about it in the law forum some time ago, try having a look at top firms' websites and see how many non-oxbridge people they have, let alone non-redbrick grads), goverment agencies and think-tanks, top engineering firms (especially in things like motorsports) and those are just ones that I've had personal experience with :smile: .
Reply 18
Fluffy
Oh! As someone who has degrees from both Swansea and Oxford (schpooky!), I would say that there is probably no actual difference outside of that perceived by the general public, and the snobbery of the Magic Circle et al!

For my degree at Swansea, 1sts were awarded competatively in my department, so for example, despite the fact I have a 76% average I have a 2i (2 firsts per subject per year - not sure if that is still the case, but they bought it in the year I graduated as the year before got a shed load of firsts).

However, there were infinitely more oportunities at Oxford - not only to meet the 'right' people, but in terms of facilities etc. Of course there's also the fact that it's Oxford!


But there is snobbery from the Magic Circle et al, which is what I was saying, I never said that an Oxbridge degree was better than one from a different university, I'm just pointing out that some employers do think that way.
Reply 19
Casey
But there is snobbery from the Magic Circle et al, which is what I was saying, I never said that an Oxbridge degree was better than one from a different university, I'm just pointing out that some employers do think that way.


I'd actually say that that is becoming debatable. Sure the words Oxford and that other one make people take note, but if you can't follow through then you're doomed! It's probably easier to make an impact from elsewhere as the expectation is generally lower, so it's relatively easier to blow people away.

The whole Magic Circle/OxBridge relationship is mostly based on the Old Boys Network, which is slowly dying out...

Most employees look at the course you do, not the uni you go to, as there are many 'average' universities that have the odd stellar course that can outstrip OxBridge... Also, OxBridge do not offer every degree known to man... for example - if you want to be a dentist, you are not going to do it through OxBridge...