Depends on what you consider as top 30 (which also varies greatly from course to course), as well as other factors. Every uni has its own strength. For some courses (take Maths for example), the course structure are almost identical to most of RG uni, though RG uni tend to get slightly into more depth but at the end of the degree you would have learnt almost the exact same thing. Most graduate employers do not take your university institution into consideration (e.g. big 4 accounting firms) and their application process is mostly strength based, so it seems pointless to just focus on top 30 for a career. There are numerous other factors such as bursaries and scholarship (which a lot of unis past the top 30 are generous to give), location (some do not want to leave their current location or do not want to travel), family reasons.
Some unis outside the top 30 have far more industrial links and opportunities than a select others within the top 30 for specific courses, take engineering at Heriot-Watt and Swansea for example. Both unis have a more practical course which prepares them very well for industrial jobs (hence why their employment rate is very high), as well as useful career modules (Swansea offers their engineering students to go to Tata Steels a few times a week to gain practical experience, as well as reimburse them... though space is very limited).
Last edited by kkboyk; 3 weeks ago
(Original post by BasicMistake)
I wasn't claiming anything beyond the idea that this top <multiple of ten> discussion is largely pointless. I wasn't arguing that doing Computer Science at Brighton is better than doing English at Durham, not that that choice is likely anyway. I put those numbers up there to address OP's claim that going to a uni outside the top 30 is worthless. If a degree at Brighton is so useless then aren't CompScis there earning £20k five years after graduating?
And as you said, it could be the case that inherent personality is the explanatory variable that leads to both subject choice and employment outcomes. In which case, the argument that university prestige or ranking is significant beyond the very top falls apart.
I generally agree with OP but only when talking about academic degrees that are open-ended with respect to career choice. CompSci is open-ended/academic but a large majority tend to self-select into a technical career that is (outside of the big top tech companies/VC-backed startups) largely institution agnostic.
There are some scenarios where the claim that "the value proposition of going to a non-top X uni is generally not worth it" holds but there are also cases where it doesn't. So it's not that OP is incorrect it's just that there's far more nuance behind these kinds of claims that it can't be boiled down to some universal statement.
Last edited by Princepieman; 3 weeks ago