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

If you don't go to Oxbridge or a Russel group you've wasted over £30'000 Watch

    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by liquidconfidence)
    I've heard a lot of people, especially teachers, slyly voice this opinion.

    Usually in year 12 everyone swears that they're definitely going to a Russel Group or Oxbridge. Then the reality of mock exams hits home and most people end up going to London Met.

    Is it true that you're doomed if you don't go to a prestigious institution and will people look down on you eek

    I don't think it matters really what people think of your uni if you're enjoying it, but personally I think if you don't go to the top Unis you might miss out on chances with the big 4/5 employers in industries since they have tie-ups or preferences for students from the specific Unis so grad program or internship search might be a little easier for them(studying and having gone through this experience being at a Russell Uni).

    Otherwise if you don't really care about any top employers but want to get good grades and go to a SME or smaller size company then non-Russell group Uni should be fine dw.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doonesbury)
    17 recent grads. 50% are RG (including Cambridge).


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    8.5?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by liquidconfidence)
    I've heard a lot of people, especially teachers, slyly voice this opinion.

    Usually in year 12 everyone swears that they're definitely going to a Russel Group or Oxbridge. Then the reality of mock exams hits home and most people end up going to London Met.

    Is it true that you're doomed if you don't go to a prestigious institution and will people look down on you eek
    And TSR snobbery rears it's ugly head again.
    • Very Important Poster
    • PS Reviewer
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Most of the people interviewing graduates went to university in the late 90s/early 00s. At that time the RG hadn't done it's marketing spin and noone knew what it was. We were all encouraged to study at "red bricks" not RG universities. Ask some 40 year olds who aren't university staff what the russell group is and they'll look at you blankly.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by liquidconfidence)
    I've heard a lot of people, especially teachers, slyly voice this opinion.

    Usually in year 12 everyone swears that they're definitely going to a Russel Group or Oxbridge. Then the reality of mock exams hits home and most people end up going to London Met.

    Is it true that you're doomed if you don't go to a prestigious institution and will people look down on you eek
    This show just one of the faults in our education system. This is a load of rubbish.

    1) Plenty of people will have highly successful careers having not attending a RG university

    2) Plenty of RG graduates will struggle to get into graduate level employment and could be classed as "wasting over £30k".

    There are a minute number of highly prestigious jobs (less than 1% of graduate level jobs) where the uni you go to will be important, and even then there are exception to the "rules".
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samendra)
    employers only heavily recruit from oxbridge for law/MBB consulting, for IB its a mix between oxbridge, lse, ucl, warwick, imperial
    Even with law and consulting, the idea that they come from a small group of unis is just a poor myth that is constantly perpetuated.

    Law and Consulting (and even IB) are actually really broad sectors within themselves. It might be true of a small fraction of employers at the very top end of the profession, but they are a minority within a sector, and then are a minority because of the wider set of sectors they sit within.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    I think i have defended my position and taken in criticisms. Mind you, the idea of the Ivy League started from one person.

    Feel free to bash me, I am used to it. When you see an anomaly, people should challenge it rather than just accept it as part of life.
    The Ivy League is related to the time at which these schools were established and it not a group of excellence. Therefore, it is much closer to the Red Brick or Plateglass categorisations. Many excellent unis are not within it, such as Stanford, MIT, Caltech, UCLA. Plus Dartmouth is really the weakest in that group, according to the international rankings (your sole criterion for the Big 8), and there is little sense is placing it on an equal footing with Harvard and Yale.

    So the Ivy League is not really a "our best" vs "their best", and there is no reason to be beholden to the number 8. Firstly, theirs is a much larger country with many more universities and so it makes sense for them to have more better universities than us. Secondly, the only true comparison to the best Ivy League schools, or more sensibly their best 8 schools, are Oxbridge (+LSE and UCL, depending on the course). Really, it should be the Big 2. As people constantly remark, owing to your obsession with Manchester, there is no way in hell an economics or law degree is in the same world as an econ degree from Oxford or Yale.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    The Ivy League is related to the time at which these schools were established and it not a group of excellence. Therefore, it is much closer to the Red Brick or Plateglass categorisations. Many excellent unis are not within it, such as Stanford, MIT, Caltech, UCLA. Plus Dartmouth is really the weakest in that group, according to the international rankings (your sole criterion for the Big 8), and there is little sense is placing it on an equal footing with Harvard and Yale.

    So the Ivy League is not really a "our best" vs "their best", and there is no reason to be beholden to the number 8. Firstly, theirs is a much larger country with many more universities and so it makes sense for them to have more better universities than us. Secondly, the only true comparison to the best Ivy League schools, or more sensibly their best 8 schools, are Oxbridge (+LSE and UCL, depending on the course). Really, it should be the Big 2. As people constantly remark, owing to your obsession with Manchester, there is no way in hell an economics or law degree is in the same world as an econ degree from Oxford or Yale.
    I never said that and you seem to be hurt by this idea of Manchester.

    I understand the premise of the Ivy League, but it has been classed for its inherently prestigious brand, just like the Russell Group. Of course, not all members of the League are good or better than universities outside like I mentioned before, it still does not remove the prestige that comes with being a student at the University.

    If you have read my posts from objective lens, you will see that I clearly followed the idea of the Ivy League to be replicated in the UK. If there are 8 members of the Ivy League, it makes logical sense to have 8 members of the UK version of the Ivy League. Now the entries of the UK version is up to debate (such as we are having now).

    The Ivy League may not be "their best" vs "our best", but the Big 8 are consistently ranked as the top 8 universities in world rankings (please see my previous posts).

    In the end, people have to decide what is best for them. If they choose to go to Warwick because they feel that it is good, then so be it. The idea that one makes a proposition and backs it up with some evidence should not start a war on TSR.

    If I had mentioned the Big 8 and added certain TSR-loving universities like Warwick, Bristol or St. Andrews, there would be applause. Now these universities are not among, there is anger that the metrics might be wrong.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    I never said that and you seem to be hurt by this idea of Manchester.

    I understand the premise of the Ivy League, but it has been classed for its inherently prestigious brand, just like the Russell Group. Of course, not all members of the League are good or better than universities outside like I mentioned before, it still does not remove the prestige that comes with being a student at the University.

    If you have read my posts from objective lens, you will see that I clearly followed the idea of the Ivy League to be replicated in the UK. If there are 8 members of the Ivy League, it makes logical sense to have 8 members of the UK version of the Ivy League. Now the entries of the UK version is up to debate (such as we are having now).

    The Ivy League may not be "their best" vs "our best", but the Big 8 are consistently ranked as the top 8 universities in world rankings (please see my previous posts).

    In the end, people have to decide what is best for them. If they choose to go to Warwick because they feel that it is good, then so be it. The idea that one makes a proposition and backs it up with some evidence should not start a war on TSR.

    If I had mentioned the Big 8 and added certain TSR-loving universities like Warwick, Bristol or St. Andrews, there would be applause. Now these universities are not among, there is anger that the metrics might be wrong.
    But you've not really addressed my point. The US Big 8, using the same criteria as you're using for the UK Big 8, would not be the same 8 who make up the Ivy League. So forget about the Ivy League and the 8, and instead focus on the universities in the UK which can meaningfully compete with Yale, Harvard and MIT. The only ones which come close are Oxbridge, maybe Imperial, maybe LSE and less likely UCL.

    And no, there is no reason that we should try to replicate our best 8, against the Ivy League, as we are a much smaller country. You wouldn't expect Austria or Liechtenstein to present its best 8 to compete with the US best 8, or the Ivies. It would be synthetic and contrived.

    Lastly, this is what I mean. I am giving you reasonable criticism and you're responding with some pish about TSR being biased against Manchester. I don't give a **** about Manchester or Bristol or Warwick. Again, they wouldn't compete against the Ivies or the US Big 8 either, as only Oxbridge really comes close.
    Online

    14
    ReputationRep:
    IMO I would agree with the CUG rankings for a 'big 8'
    -Cambridge, Oxford, St Andrews, LSE, Imperial, Durham, UCL and Warwick.
    (Although Warwick is a fair bit weaker than the others overall).
    The problem with international rankings is they use lots of irrelevant metrics like % of international students, while CUG is mostly based on research quality/graduate prospects.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    But you've not really addressed my point. The US Big 8, using the same criteria as you're using for the UK Big 8, would not be the same 8 who make up the Ivy League. So forget about the Ivy League and the 8, and instead focus on the universities in the UK which can meaningfully compete with Yale, Harvard and MIT. The only ones which come close are Oxbridge, maybe Imperial, maybe LSE and less likely UCL.

    Lastly, this is what I mean. I am giving you reasonable criticism and you're responding with some pish about TSR being biased against Manchester. I don't give a **** about Manchester or Bristol or Warwick. Again, they wouldn't compete against the Ivies or the US Big 8 either, as only Oxbridge really comes close.
    We are discussing about two completely different points.

    My idea of the Big 8 stemmed from another thread that stated whether it was possible to form a UK version of the Ivy League. I said "Yes" and the metric to measure that will be the global rankings that show UK universities.

    The number 8 is a completely arbitrary number because the Ivy League has 8 members. If the Ivy League decided to reduce to 4, I would have translated it to be the Big 4 in the UK. I don't care whether it is 4, 5, or 6. We can also use other metrics to decide which universities will be classified as being members of another group.


    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    And no, there is no reason that we should try to replicate our best 8, against the Ivy League, as we are a much smaller country. You wouldn't expect Austria or Liechtenstein to present its best 8 to compete with the US best 8, or the Ivies. It would synthetic and contrived.
    That is your opinion. If the 8 universities mentioned decided to form a separate union outside the Russell Group and named it the Big 8, you cannot do anything to stop it.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GovernmentEarner)
    IMO I would agree with the CUG rankings for a 'big 8'
    -Cambridge, Oxford, St Andrews, LSE, Imperial, Durham, UCL and Warwick.
    (Although Warwick is a fair bit weaker than the others overall).
    The problem with international rankings is they use lots of irrelevant metrics like % of international students, while CUG is mostly based on research quality/graduate prospects.
    You are completely right and that is the main point.

    You can use CUG, I can use QS/THE world rankings, while another person can use Guardian rankings. With all these tables, there would not be 100% acceptance of the attributes that made up the measurement which put certain universities above other universities.

    For example, the Guardian places Surrey University in the top 10 of UK's best universities.

    https://www.theguardian.com/educatio...ue-tables-2018

    Some people will go to war with that idea and ask why or how Surrey is better that UCL and LSE. Or Bath better than Imperial.

    In the end, many people would not want you to rank universities at all, if the tables don't favour their university.

    To me, I think QS/THE are more objective because they dont seem to be influenced by internal UK "squabbles". Although some attributes are debatable, they probably show a better picture of the top 8 Universities in the UK.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    We are discussing about two completely different points.

    My idea of the Big 8 stemmed from another thread that stated whether it was possible to form a UK version of the Ivy League. I said "Yes" and the metric to measure that will be the global rankings that show UK universities.

    The number 8 is a completely arbitrary number because the Ivy League has 8 members. If the Ivy League decided to reduce to 4, I would have translated it to be the Big 4 in the UK. I don't care whether it is 4, 5, or 6. We can also use other metrics to decide which universities will be classified as being members of another group.
    If I were responding to your post in that thread, then I would accept your point. However, I am responding to it in this thread after you repeated the 8 listing incessantly in countless threads. Hence, it is fair to assume you think the 8 listing is meaningful and I am right to challenge the supposed meaningfulness of it.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    If I were responding to your post in that thread, then I would accept your point. However, I am responding to it in this thread after you repeated the 8 listing incessantly in countless threads. Hence, it is fair to assume you think the 8 listing is meaningful and I am right to challenge the supposed meaningfulness of it.
    You are free to challenge the premise or idea surrounding an opinion. I welcome debate.

    I maintain my opinion on the Big 8 because I have evidence to back them up. Whether you are happy with my evidence or not is up to you. I think the rankings used appear to be without perceived significant biases when compared to local ranking tables.

    When I mention the Big 8 Universities, I state the Overall universities. It annoys me when a mug comes back and states that "Warwick is better than Manchester in Economics and so should be in the Big 8" or "Southampton is better than Edinburgh in Electronic Engineering and so should be in the Big 8".

    You are correct to state that outside of Oxford and Cambridge, everything becomes a blur. However, if we were to rank the top 8 universities and use a more reputable and less biased table, it would probably be a world ranking than a local one.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    There is a Russell group uni next door which seems to bleed students over to us like a dripping tap. They quote the unapproachable or unsupportive nature of the tutors, who are too busy trying to further their reputation with other academics than bother with real people. They feel isolated, cut off, and not part of a community, so be careful with the whole fetishised Russell Group wannabee thing. Be careful what you wish for.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    You are free to challenge the premise or idea surrounding an opinion. I welcome debate.

    I maintain my opinion on the Big 8 because I have evidence to back them up. Whether you are happy with my evidence or not is up to you. I think the rankings used appear to be without perceived significant biases when compared to local ranking tables.

    When I mention the Big 8 Universities, I state the Overall universities. It annoys me when a mug comes back and states that "Warwick is better than Manchester in Economics and so should be in the Big 8" or "Southampton is better than Edinburgh in Electronic Engineering and so should be in the Big 8".

    You are correct to state that outside of Oxford and Cambridge, everything becomes a blur. However, if we were to rank the top 8 universities and use a more reputable and less biased table, it would probably be a world ranking than a local one.
    Once again, I am not interested in the Southampton or Manchester debate. I am asking you why you place such meaning on a contrived group of universities which have very little in common. To use your word, which are "a blur" after Oxbridge? Because it is fun to wind first years up and hide behind this hyper-logical retort, "yes, but I have evidence to back this up"? It is totally pointless, man. I refer to my first post, you don't take criticism on board. Instead, you start talking about silly things other people have said to you.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    Big 8
    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    xxx
    Can we take this elsewhere please - it's derailing the thread
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    Once again, I am not interested in the Southampton or Manchester debate. I am asking you why you place such meaning on a contrived group of universities which have very little in common. To use your word, which are "a blur" after Oxbridge? Because it is fun to wind first years up and hide behind this hyper-logical retort, "yes, but I have evidence to back this up"? It is totally pointless, man. I refer to my first post, you don't take criticism on board. Instead, you start talking about silly things other people have said to you.
    Ok
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doonesbury)
    Can we take this elsewhere please - it's derailing the thread
    Ok. I have stopped debating with the other kid.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    Ok. I have stopped debating with the other kid.
    My love to the family.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
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: November 9, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    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
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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