Doesn’t studying in russell group really matter ?

How about, since I can't "analyze" statistics, you analyze QSgraduate employability rankings in Europe to show that they are wrong in suggesting Russell groups have a higher employment rate compared to non-Russell unis generally? I can't do it, so can you do it to prove why the QS employment statistics are wrong?

How about, since I can't "analyze" statistics, you analyze QSgraduate employability rankings in Europe to show that they are wrong in suggesting Russell groups have a higher employment rate compared to non-Russell unis generally? I can't do it, so can you do it to prove why the QS employment statistics are wrong?

It might be because RG students are, on average, more likely to go out and go job-hunting in lucrative fields more than those students who don't go to an RG. The correlation doesn't necessarily run the other way round.

Of course I know about target universities. However, they are different for IB and law, I don't know why you included ICL when they don't even offer law, and LSE isn't as highly represented in the Magic Circle compared to other universities. I will say also that I had people from City in Assessment Centres at a BB Bank for a front office role, so.

Universities don't provide internship opportunities, it's up to you to get them. Some universities may have an internship in some Department, but that's different.

What's funny about what I said regarding making the most out of university? I'm not disagreeing with you, what I said was that it doesn't matter if you go to a Russell Group university, if you're not going to take advantage of what they have to offer. A graduate from Nottingham with nothing but their degree is probably less competitive than a graduate from Plymouth with a slew of volunteering, internship, and society experience.

You're also being wilfully ignorant of very good non-RG universities, such as Bath, St Andrews, Lancaster, etc. Durham and York only became RG in 2012, does that mean that before 2012 that they were unserious institutions?

Your tone is misplaced in its arrogance. It's you who should realise the reality that we live in, that employers don't sit around a table and pull up rankings of what university is where. If you're a dunce of a candidate, then it wouldn't matter if you went to Cambridge or Oxford, you would fail in interviews and not be hired.

(Notice also how I didn't feel the need to include my university into my reply, because I'm not self-conscious or braggy - next time you should try it, instead of falling back on the "I go to the LSE, therefore I know better than you" argument).

It might be because RG students are, on average, more likely to go out and go job-hunting in lucrative fields more than those students who don't go to an RG. The correlation doesn't necessarily run the other way round.

Furthermore, you bragged quite heartedly about getting into 'IB', but said also that you were some HR intern? Getting into an IB is less impressive if you got into a back-office, which are much less competitive.

Also, no one calls them 'non-Russell', so stop doing it.

Oxford brookes doesn't offer medicine.

So if I go to a non-Russell university right now and try as hard as I am doing now, will I get the same life opportunities as I would be at a Russell university? This is what triggers me and makes me think that those at RG unis would have more life opportunities. Cuz then the meaning of education dissapears. Students ' efforts and perseverance are gone.

Guys just answer this and I will stop replying since everyone is disagreeing with my thoughts.

Just answer this question for me everyone: then what is the point of trying so hard in secondary school to get into more competitive universities? Someone could just go to a less competitive university and get the same opportunities as those who go to top universities right? What is the point of having high GCSE and A level grades to go to top universities when one could simply get a bit lower grades, go to less competitive universities but have the same life chances as those who go to top universities? This just seems very cruel and sad to me. I tried so hard to go to Russell university and hearing that I could go to less competitive universities and have the same life chance as those from the highly academic universities seems just self-defeating. I would like to apologize to everyone if I sounded arrogant, misleading, and wrong in my thoughts. But For this response above, I still do think that top RG universities generally open more doors for you (except Bath, St Andrew, and Lancaster). So if I go to a non-Russell university right now and try as hard as I am doing now, will I get the same life opportunities as I would be at a Russell university? This is what triggers me and makes me think that those at RG unis would have more life opportunities. Cuz then the meaning of education dissapears. Students ' efforts and perseverance are gone.

Yes, that's pretty much how it works.

I don't understand your last sentence. How are students' efforts and perseverance gone when you'd get the same life opportunities at a different university if you try as hard as you are doing now? Do you think effort and perseverance somehow don't count at universities which aren't in the Russell Group?

The meaning of education is only in your achievements. That's your personal achievements at the end of your time in university, not the fact you managed to get in somewhere "prestigious" three or four years earlier as a schoolchild. It's not 1950 any more - thank goodness.

Oh I meant for me, my perseverance would be less at secondary school if I was just trying to go to less competitive university. Sorry I am writing this whilst watching "the apprentice".

I do think that efforts and achievements do count wherever you are. But it just seems self defeating now for me to think that, if that is true, then I could have went to less competitive university. I get so much work at LSE and there are too many international students (no offence but too many). Maybe I should have just went to university of brookes which is near my house, I wouldn't have to try as much hard in the secondary school, and my first year would have been more fun. If I would receive same life opportunities at brookes then why did I come here lol. It now just seems self defeating and it upsets me

I'm not being funny but given your grammar I thought you were an International student!

It all depends on what you see as "life opportunities". Maybe having gone to a certain university will get you the toe in the door for certain job applications but it'll require a lot more to get the door fully open. And yes as you have said certain professions target certain universities, but that doesn't mean that the professions are closed to other applicants. But outside of these job roles, the really successful and sometimes wealthy, have rarely followed a standardised educational route. They are just EXceptional and EXtraordinary people who have taken advantage of opportunities that have presented themselves, and there is absolutely nothing that says that these opportunities are going to be more prevalent in a RG school as opposed to another.

Yeah so I think we should conclude here that if you don't go to RG universities (except like Bath Lancaster and St Andrew- which are basically russell) you still get the opportunities as much as those who go to Russell unis. But sometimes, going to certain Russell universities might help you get you in front of the door. But opening the door is which you have to do it for yourself and whatever the university you go to doesn't matter. Agree?

This is a very good conclusion - especially the last sentence

There’s only one girl that I personally know who goes to a Russel group uni, and she’s all over the place. Not that I don’t think she’s smart, but I know far more intelligent people that got Cs in their A-Levels lol
And I know that many people I know who are studying in lower ranking unis have a much better chance at actually being good at their courses and future jobs than she does. I can’t generalise off of one person, but from my experience, Russel group doesn’t mean **** to me. It might have when the percentage of the population of British people going to uni was 5-10%, but now around 50% of people are going to uni and collectively we are getting a lot more academically smarter than generations before us
Enough of my waffle, no it doesn’t matter

Guys just answer this and I will stop replying since everyone is disagreeing with my thoughts.

Just answer this question for me everyone: then what is the point of trying so hard in secondary school to get into more competitive universities? Someone could just go to a less competitive university and get the same opportunities as those who go to top universities right? What is the point of having high GCSE and A level grades to go to top universities when one could simply get a bit lower grades, go to less competitive universities but have the same life chances as those who go to top universities? This just seems very cruel and sad to me. I tried so hard to go to Russell university and hearing that I could go to less competitive universities and have the same life chance as those from the highly academic universities seems just self-defeating. I would like to apologize to everyone if I sounded arrogant, misleading, and wrong in my thoughts. But For this response above, I still do think that top RG universities generally open more doors for you (except Bath, St Andrew, and Lancaster). So if I go to a non-Russell university right now and try as hard as I am doing now, will I get the same life opportunities as I would be at a Russell university? This is what triggers me and makes me think that those at RG unis would have more life opportunities. Cuz then the meaning of education dissapears. Students ' efforts and perseverance are gone.

The thing is, yes you will have a huge advantage, but if you don’t go to a Russel group like the majority of us, you’re not f***ed, get what I mean? There are sooo many people who don’t have the accessibility to a strong education in this country, with unsupportive or destructive family lives, the list could go on forever. If those people had no chance at working towards a successful life for themselves, then our country would be a failure. There are also many kids who are privately educated and tutored and funded into great educations and basically have their whole lives handed on a silver plate, and yeah it still takes hard work to get into a Russel group, but not nearly as much work as it would take that same kid to get there if he was born into a poor family living in a council estate.
don’t feel like it’s a slap in the face for your efforts, you will of course be given unique opportunities for going to a Russel group, and will most likely be favoured when applying to jobs in the future, but for people that haven’t got that, there isn’t a reason why they can’t work hard to be extremely successful in a uni that isn’t a Russel group.

Guys just answer this and I will stop replying since everyone is disagreeing with my thoughts.

Just answer this question for me everyone: then what is the point of trying so hard in secondary school to get into more competitive universities?