The Student Room Group

A*A*A* and I refuse to go Russell Group uni

Scroll to see replies

Reply 80
Original post by BigYoSpeck
I deleted my post when I realised trying to be clever I got the post code wrong. Muggings are actually worse in Cambridge :colondollar:


Haha. :smile:

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 81
Original post by ♥Samantha♥
what's with the animosity towards the RG? They are just good universities with bright and happy students. If Oxbridge isn't for you there's a variety of universities such as Manchester, Liverpool, Exeter, KCL, Belfast etc. And there's lots of great choices outside of the RG, such as Bath, St Andrews, Surrey. These unis shouldn't be overwhelming for an A*A*A* student. I don't see why you would choose a poorly ranked uni (indicating poor teaching, facilities, respectability etc) unless you're looking for an easy ride or just want to be defiant for no good reason. is there actually anything special about the course at salford which would make it ur first choice?


She might want a job at the BBC, for one.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ♥Samantha♥
what's with the animosity towards the RG? They are just good universities with bright and happy students. If Oxbridge isn't for you there's a variety of universities such as Manchester, Liverpool, Exeter, KCL, Belfast etc. And there's lots of great choices outside of the RG, such as Bath, St Andrews, Surrey. These unis shouldn't be overwhelming for an A*A*A* student. I don't see why you would choose a poorly ranked uni (indicating poor teaching, facilities, respectability etc) unless you're looking for an easy ride or just want to be defiant for no good reason. is there actually anything special about the course at salford which would make it ur first choice?


A handful of careers have a sort of 'elitism'. Or perhaps a better way of putting it is 'picks from the top first'. Law is a pretty obvious example, as is Medicine from its selection process. Journalism is one of them, so if she wants to go into Journalism, Salford doesn't exactly help her as much as her grades are capable of getting her to. That's why people are shocked.

Edit: Realised I'm basically just agreeing with you.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Doonesbury
She might want a job at the BBC, for one.

Posted from TSR Mobile


How would going to Salford help with that? The majority of BBC executives come from Oxbridge or the RG.
Original post by ♥Samantha♥
How would going to Salford help with that? The majority of BBC executives come from Oxbridge or the RG.


MediaCityUK is based in Salford. The BBC have quite a few things going on there such as BBC Breakfast and BBC Watchdog to name a few.
Reply 85
Original post by ♥Samantha♥
How would going to Salford help with that? The majority of BBC executives come from Oxbridge or the RG.


Where is much of the BBC based?

Who is the 3rd highest employer of Salford alumni?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by MedicaAutomata
A handful of careers have a sort of 'elitism'. Or perhaps a better way of putting it is 'picks from the top first'. Law is a pretty obvious example, as is Medicine from its selection process. Journalism is one of them, so if she wants to go into Journalism, Salford doesn't exactly help her as much as her grades are capable of getting her to. That's why people are shocked.

Edit: Realised I'm basically just agreeing with you.


Agree completely! Except with Medicine, as no matter where you study you are pretty much guaranteed a job (though going to elite institutions may help get you a more prestigious placement, the pay grades are all the same). This Guardian article is pretty telling:

Graduates of Oxford and Cambridge universities also continue to dominate the field, though they educate less than 1% of the population. In law, nearly three quarters (74%) of the top judiciary went to Oxbridge; 54% of the country’s leading journalists went to Oxbridge, and just under half (47%) of the cabinet attended Oxbridge, compared with 32% of the shadow cabinet.


Though in a sense 'Oxbridge' is partly a proxy for privately-educated as only a 7% of the population are privately educated but make up half of Oxbridge students. Similar statistics show that all these professions with high Oxbridge %ages also have high private school %ages. Even more these private schooled people are dominated by a small number of public schools e.g. Eton, Westminster. It'd be interesting to see statistics which show what %ages of the professions are dominated by just a handful of these schools, considering they educate only a fraction of a percent of the public! I remember seeing that something like 20-30% of oxbridge grads come from just 5 secondary schools so i'd expect that would carry through into the professions.
Reply 87
Original post by ♥Samantha♥
Agree completely! Except with Medicine, as no matter where you study you are pretty much guaranteed a job (though going to elite institutions may help get you a more prestigious placement, the pay grades are all the same). This Guardian article is pretty telling:



Though in a sense 'Oxbridge' is partly a proxy for privately-educated as only a 7% of the population are privately educated but make up half of Oxbridge students. Similar statistics show that all these professions with high Oxbridge %ages also have high private school %ages. Even more these private schooled people are dominated by a small number of public schools e.g. Eton, Westminster. It'd be interesting to see statistics which show what %ages of the professions are dominated by just a handful of these schools, considering they educate only a fraction of a percent of the public! I remember seeing that something like 20-30% of oxbridge grads come from just 5 secondary schools so i'd expect that would carry through into the professions.


And in the real world, for the vast majority of graduates

1501870117014.jpg

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ♥Samantha♥
Agree completely! Except with Medicine, as no matter where you study you are pretty much guaranteed a job (though going to elite institutions may help get you a more prestigious placement, the pay grades are all the same). This Guardian article is pretty telling:



Though in a sense 'Oxbridge' is partly a proxy for privately-educated as only a 7% of the population are privately educated but make up half of Oxbridge students. Similar statistics show that all these professions with high Oxbridge %ages also have high private school %ages. Even more these private schooled people are dominated by a small number of public schools e.g. Eton, Westminster. It'd be interesting to see statistics which show what %ages of the professions are dominated by just a handful of these schools, considering they educate only a fraction of a percent of the public! I remember seeing that something like 20-30% of oxbridge grads come from just 5 secondary schools so i'd expect that would carry through into the professions.


Only thing I'd say is that while Oxbridge is great, you get less opportunity to actually get involved with work experiences and such. Which isn't so bad when you can put "Cambridge University" on your CV, but a lesser uni might give you 10+ relevant things to actually put on your CV. Salford is probably like that if there's as much BBC/Media influence as Doones and the others are saying. I'd imagine either has its advantages at least somewhere.

I mean, I don't really know. I just picked a RG cause it had my course, never really thought about it until now.
Original post by Doonesbury
Where is much of the BBC based?

Who is the 3rd highest employer of Salford alumni?

Posted from TSR Mobile


They do have some of the most qualified people in the world to fetch coffee I'll grant you that :smile:
Original post by Doonesbury
And in the real world, for the vast majority of graduates

1501870117014.jpg

Posted from TSR Mobile


the 'real world' means average jobs. The average job pays like 22k so if that's what you want with your life then ok. The elite professions do care where you studied. I'm not saying this is a good thing or how it should be but it is how it is. Obviously those things on the graphic such as aptitude and experience should be whats important but reality is that it's not a meritocracy and how far you get in life is still to a large extent determined by who you know, where you studied, who your parents are, where you're from, what you look like and how much money you have.
Reply 91
Original post by ♥Samantha♥
the 'real world' means average jobs. The average job pays like 22k so if that's what you want with your life then ok. The elite professions do care where you studied. I'm not saying this is a good thing or how it should be but it is how it is. Obviously those things on the graphic such as aptitude and experience should be whats important but reality is that it's not a meritocracy and how far you get in life is still to a large extent determined by who you know, where you studied, who your parents are, where you're from, what you look like and how much money you have.


Oh of course, indeed you must go to an RG to earn more than £22k.

Sorry. You're quite right.

(Checks payslip... oh there must have been a mistake.)

Posted from TSR Mobile
'If that's what you want with your life then ok'. I think in that sentence you have your answer really. If she wants to earn a salary that allows her to afford average rent and food (a salary which may of course rise or be higher than average), whilst working in journalism and the course at Salford has something that tickles her fancy, why not?
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Doonesbury
Oh of course, indeed you must go to an RG to earn more than £22k.

Sorry. You're quite right.

(Checks payslip... oh there must have been a mistake.)


Doones you're too good - I've been upvoting so many posts I think I can only hit PRSOM at this point
Reply 94
Original post by auburnstar
'If that's what you want with your life then ok'. I think in that sentence you have your answer really. If she wants to earn a salary that allows her to afford average rent and food (a salary which may of course rise or be higher than average), whilst working in journalism and the course at Salford has something that tickles her fancy, why not?


Original post by auburnstar
Doones you're too good - I've been upvoting so many posts I think I can only hit PRSOM at this point


Too kind. :smile:

And as I noted earlier, she's already a paid journalist with a byline at The Daily Telegraph. So I doubt she will be living off pot noodles for the rest of her life.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Blue_Cow
MediaCityUK is based in Salford. The BBC have quite a few things going on there such as BBC Breakfast and BBC Watchdog to name a few.


Original post by Doonesbury
Where is much of the BBC based?

Who is the 3rd highest employer of Salford alumni?

Posted from TSR Mobile


Ah, I see. Though most of the people in high-ranking positions at the BBC do still come from Oxbridge. I guess that could be partially explained by the fact that the average Oxbridge graduate is likely better qualified than an average applicant, but the discrepancy is pretty large. I guess in her case, going to Salford and being in a good position, as well as being a cut above the majority of her fellow students may help her get a place at the BBC. Combined with the fact that she finds top universities "culturally deplorable" maybe she made the right choice for her. But she didn't explain any of that reasoning in her article and just had some pretentious talk about the superiority of salford to the so-called elite universities, and she just seemed really smug about 'rejecting' these places, and appears to have some twisted ideas about what its really like at an RG uni. She just seems to have animus towards RG unis for no reason other than the fact that society deems them desirable, like she needs to go against the mainstream or something.
Tbh it would be better and even helpful/educational for people if she explained how some universities/courses are better suited for what your future goals are and encouraged people on how/why to investigate a range of options before assuming that RG or Oxbridge = better, rather than her article that she calls a "rejection of the elite."
Original post by auburnstar
'If that's what you want with your life then ok'. I think in that sentence you have your answer really. If she wants to earn a salary that allows her to afford average rent and food (a salary which may of course rise or be higher than average), whilst working in journalism and the course at Salford has something that tickles her fancy, why not?


I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that which is why I said 'then ok.' It wasn't sarcastic.
Reply 97
Original post by ♥Samantha♥
Ah, I see. Though most of the people in high-ranking positions at the BBC do still come from Oxbridge. I guess that could be partially explained by the fact that the average Oxbridge graduate is likely better qualified than an average applicant, but the discrepancy is pretty large. I guess in her case, going to Salford and being in a good position, as well as being a cut above the majority of her fellow students may help her get a place at the BBC. Combined with the fact that she finds top universities "culturally deplorable" maybe she made the right choice for her. But she didn't explain any of that reasoning in her article and just had some pretentious talk about the superiority of salford to the so-called elite universities, and she just seemed really smug about 'rejecting' these places, and appears to have some twisted ideas about what its really like at an RG uni. She just seems to have animus towards RG unis for no reason other than the fact that society deems them desirable, like she needs to go against the mainstream or something.
Tbh it would be better and even helpful/educational for people if she explained how some universities/courses are better suited for what your future goals are and encouraged people on how/why to investigate a range of options before assuming that RG or Oxbridge = better, rather than her article that she calls a "rejection of the elite."


And yet you basically said if you don't go to Oxbridge/RG you're going to have an average job and earn £22k.

That's exactly the tune that she is trying to counter (badly, but that's not the point).

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Doonesbury
Oh of course, indeed you must go to an RG to earn more than £22k.

Sorry. You're quite right.

(Checks payslip... oh there must have been a mistake.)

Posted from TSR Mobile


You know that's not what I mean. But your graph was to be representative of all employers but what I'm arguing is that in many of the top jobs it's not the same. If you want to be a politician, senior civil servant, supreme court justice etc. then all the stuff I mentioned does hold weight. And you know I didn't say you must go to an RG to get a good job. That's not any more true than you must go to private school to go to Oxbridge. Doesn't change the fact that it's does improve your chances and gives you a foot on the ladder.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Doonesbury
And yet you basically said if you don't go to Oxbridge/RG you're going to have an average job and earn £22k.

That's exactly the tune that she is trying to counter (badly, but that's not the point).

Posted from TSR Mobile


that's not what I'm saying at all. I was referring to the fact that the graph refers to employers in general, so on average its referring to an average job, whereas previously i had been referring to how oxbridge/RG dominates the elite top jobs in society. idk if i'm being very unclear or if you're purposefully misinterpreting what i'm saying. it is a fact that these top jobs are dominated by a small number of universities.

And I agree with the idea that where you go shouldn't decide your future. Doesn't change the fact that her article wasn't convincing.
(edited 6 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending