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

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Toxic Tears)
    Sir Alan Sugar is not exactly representative of most employers...
    Really? Oh. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Toxic Tears)
    I seriously doubt the poster meant the exact top 30 at this exact time. There will always be a group of unis that will be seen as roughly in the top 30 regardless of random league tables. For example if Bristol dropped to position 40 on some league tables and Man Met rose to position 22, do you seriously think that the majority of intelligent people or the general public with knowledge of unis will consider Man Met to be better than Bristol? I thought it was quite clear from the OP's post that that was what she meant.
    Well, name these 30 then- it has to end somewhere. Russell and 1994 group is 38 or so universities, and doesn't include some pretty good ones which are arguably as strong (if less research intensive) as their rivals in that group. I find most of the people willing to talk about this notion of prestige either do it to big up their own university or have just about no experience of higher education. I don't think its all important- there's no evidence (and those last three words are worth remembering) that university name is a defining factor in employment of graduates. Even when comparing the ex-polys with the RG, research shows its only had a very limited effect. People seem obsessed with this top 10/20- but this misses the point about education and what people want from it. Plenty of intelligent people choose Liverpool over Bristol, Reading over Bath, Aberdeen over St Andrews, and realise 20 places or so in a league table isn't a worthwhile factor when it comes to spending lots of money and living in a place for four years. Top 10s have been outside the top 30 in the space of a decade, and will be again. It'd be ironic (and entirely deserved) if the people who bragged of this found themselves on the receiving end of league table bias (if they're unlucky enough to find it in graduate employment) in several years time.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PoliticalNonsense)
    It does matter if you go to one because when Labour set up the Post 1992 Uni's they wanted Uni's for the sake of having kids in school and not because they were outstanding educational establishments. Some of the Uni's which gained status in 1992 or even 2006 are just a joke. Im sorry I dont go to a better uni. Don't forget we all pay the same amount, we might aswell get a real education and the post 92s dont do that properly.
    You're forgetting that some of the post 92s have been doing their job since the early 1800s - take Winchester and Chichester (both founded in the 1840s). They're just now doing it under a different name and STILL have their reputation for their original teaching colleges. Oh and Chichester was started by the first principal of King's in London - somewhere everyone raves about.

    I went to a post 92 and am now studying at a 94 research group for postgrad. Which one has the better teaching, facilities, resources, attitudes towards its students and general all round good university experience? The post 92.

    This thread is so full of utter bull**** it's not even funny anymore.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    If a more prestigious uni, say oxbridge, called me today and offered me the opportunity to finish my course with them, would I change? Im not sure tbh and this is obviously theoretical but I think its an interesting question regardless. :confused:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0404343m)
    Correct. On TSR university rankings is another way kids try to prove they're somehow 'better' than their peers, as if such a hierarchy exists. Of course certain places have better links with certain industries than others, and the quality of education some institutions are renowned for might arguably better prepare their graduates for various things, but its not the case that theres some sliding scale based on university name.

    Entry requirements are a product of popularity, and little else. You might feel (and be entitled to) that going to a specific university will give you a head start over others when it comes to the crunch in later life- but all the evidence available shows it doesn't follow the league table trends, and at the best of times, is only partially useful at gaining you an interview. If you don't want to be kicked back out of the door you've found has been opened for you, it comes down to much more than that.

    It's like talking to a brick wall trying to tell TSR that though.
    Why are you so high and mighty about league tables and University? Not everyone on TSR thinks like that and if you're insinuating that the rest of TSR is thick well, wahey, look where you are.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by La Esmerelda)
    Why are you so high and mighty about league tables and University? Not everyone on TSR thinks like that and if you're insinuating that the rest of TSR is thick well, wahey, look where you are.
    Because I've seen people be miserable and hate where they are because they believed the hype and followed the league tables. I've seen parents spend thousands of pounds and not be able to put their child through university again after they realised they'd made a horrible mistake- only after the rent, living expenses and tuition money had been blown. Because I've been as naive myself when I was 17, but thankfully grew up and tried to pass on what most graduates know and shown that university is about more than a newspaper. Because I've seen dozens of the same threads with the same rubbish being spouted by people with a few A-Levels and a place at university that they've yet to start. If people need to convince themselves that they'll be smarter, more employable, or have a better life because they've got into somewhere that their peers think is 'prestigious', then they're obviously not yet mature enough to realise that it isn't everything and trading potentially more money and three of arguably the best years of your life so that your degree says X rather than Y (if indeed you make it to the end) is utter madness.

    You'll agree one day, of that I am entirely sure, but I don't expect it to be any time soon.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Coroar)
    I've seen countless threads on here discussing how prestigious a university is as if it's the most important factor in choosing your course. Trust me, it isn't.

    If you go to Cambridge or Oxford, then that will look superb on your CV and will make it very easy to get an interview. It's a similar situation if you study economics at LSE.

    However, the amount of people here who believe going to a uni like Edinburgh or Manchester is going to be an open door to employment is amazing. It really isn't. Red-brick or not employers look straight at your qualifications when they recieve a C.V from a graduate. If they're good enough and relevant to the job then 99% of the time you will get an interview and then it's up to you to present yourself as an ideal candidate.

    For the people here who think they're something special because they're going to a good but not quite excellent uni; you are not. Likewise if you're going to one of the smaller, less fashionable unis ignore the tripe on here about the importance of the uni's reputation. If you pick the right course and work hard enough you will get the degree and the grades you deserve and your employer will not care less whether you attended Birmingham or Brighton, it's irrelevant.
    Hooray! A sensible poster :adore: [/THREAD]
    (Although I think even Cambridge, Oxford and LSE are blown way out of proportion on TSR :sigh:)
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Craghyrax)
    Hooray! A sensible poster :adore: [/THREAD]
    (Although I think even Cambridge, Oxford and LSE are blown way out of proportion on TSR :sigh:)
    Seconded. :yes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0404343m)
    Because I've seen people be miserable and hate where they are because they believed the hype and followed the league tables. I've seen parents spend thousands of pounds and not be able to put their child through university again after they realised they'd made a horrible mistake- only after the rent, living expenses and tuition money had been blown. Because I've been as naive myself when I was 17, but thankfully grew up and tried to pass on what most graduates know and shown that university is about more than a newspaper. Because I've seen dozens of the same threads with the same rubbish being spouted by people with a few A-Levels and a place at university that they've yet to start. If people need to convince themselves that they'll be smarter, more employable, or have a better life because they've got into somewhere that their peers think is 'prestigious', then they're obviously not yet mature enough to realise that it isn't everything and trading potentially more money and three of arguably the best years of your life so that your degree says X rather than Y (if indeed you make it to the end) is utter madness.

    You'll agree one day, of that I am entirely sure, but I don't expect it to be any time soon.
    I didn't disagree. Its just when you generalise about TSRians, assuming that they are all about the prestige and blindly put so much stock into league tables:

    (Original post by X)
    Shocking generalisation, but sadly, no less than I've come to expect on GUD. This thread is a mircocosm of the wider TSR problem, full of teenagers who have virtually no experience of higher education or graduate employment, professing to know it all without the first clue of what they're talking about, beyond a table printed in a newspaper. Reading threads like this, its a wonder how TSR got the reputation of being a haven for confused students to get answers to their problems, as some of the drivel on here misleads much more than it helps.
    And my personal favourite:

    (Original post by X)
    GUD is populated for the most part by those aged 18 and under, who have very little experience of higher education. They know what a newspaper tells them.

    So in your opinion Oxford was....bad/not for you? (I saw on your profile that you went there)
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by La Esmerelda)
    I didn't disagree. Its just when you generalise about TSRians, assuming that they are all about the prestige and blindly put so much stock into league tables:

    So in your opinion Oxford was....bad/not for you? (I saw on your profile that you went there)
    Well, to give an example, there was a recent thread on reputation, of which there was a choice between Durham/Leicester etc. I think I may have been the only one to openly suggest that its not the be all and end all to pick one of the other options. If you look at the profiles of those who said Durham with little or no explanation, what do you see? Virtually everyone is a teenager who claims to either be at school or starting university this autumn. Scaling this up, for every graduate on here, we seem to have a dozen or so who haven't yet got as far as university- which backs up TSR's own research which reckons the average user is about 18-19 years old. When you have such a high proportion of people so early in their academic experiences, is it any wonder we get so much crap posted? Its the arrogant attitude of looking down their nose at those from lower down a league table which gets me, if only once in a while people would admit they didn't know everything (which is why Im reluctant to say one place is unequivocally 'better' than another), we'd be getting somewhere...

    As for Oxford, I'm currently there, but have only recently started. I originally wasn't wanted down until early September, but I've been back and forth on and off for approaching three months now. It's basically been meetings with academics and airing some research ideas. Thus far, its been perfectly pleasant- but it's not the different world its made out to be. My previous institution, where I spent five years, another old, Russell Group university, felt incredibly similar to Oxford in a lot of ways, but again, some on TSR (who've in all probability been to neither) would have you believe the chasm is vast- and its anything but.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You can't just narrow it down to a simple motto like "which uni doesn't mean anything, it's just about how hard you work" or "prestigeous universities will always help you getting better chances".
    It depends on many things how successful you are. In fact, we can't define "successful". What does it mean? Studying at Oxbridge, getting a nice job and earning much money? A life like this for one may be somebody else's definition of not having understood anything at all.

    Salman Rushdie studied History @ Cambridge (BA) and became full-time author. When 'the satanic verses' was published, he spent nearly a decade largely underground because of the controversy around his book- but at least he studied in Cambridge- heyyy! :woo:

    I think many people who would like to go to Oxbridge (desperately) would be suprised if they realized how satisfied they can actually be without having visited any of those universities.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Out of interest, would people say that going to Edinburgh to study Economics over LSE would be a big mistake. Is the difference in opportunity worth a probable £20-25,000 deposit at LSE? I can probably afford both but LSE is certainly much more of a strain on my finances.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Lachlan)
    Out of interest, would people say that going to Edinburgh to study Economics over LSE would be a big mistake. Is the difference in opportunity worth a probable £20-25,000 deposit at LSE? I can probably afford both but LSE is certainly much more of a strain on my finances.
    They are both excellent universities, but LSE certainly does have the edge in economics, and will certainly do so if you have any intention of going into investment banking.

    The question is: do you want to work and live in Scotland or England? I think Edinburgh would hold more weight in Scotland whereas LSE would in England/London.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .ACS.)
    They are both excellent universities, but LSE certainly does have the edge in economics, and will certainly do so if you have any intention of going into investment banking.

    The question is: do you want to work and live in Scotland or England? I think Edinburgh would hold more weight in Scotland whereas LSE would in England/London.
    Is the advantage of LSE in England worth being 25k less well off upon graduation? Also the intention is currently to emigrate to the States, higher salary, less taxes, win-win :p: .
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by apotoftea)
    You're forgetting that some of the post 92s have been doing their job since the early 1800s - take Winchester and Chichester (both founded in the 1840s). They're just now doing it under a different name and STILL have their reputation for their original teaching colleges. Oh and Chichester was started by the first principal of King's in London - somewhere everyone raves about.

    I went to a post 92 and am now studying at a 94 research group for postgrad. Which one has the better teaching, facilities, resources, attitudes towards its students and general all round good university experience? The post 92.

    This thread is so full of utter bull**** it's not even funny anymore.
    Your one experience doesn't prove anything as your case could just be an exception. :rolleyes: Also undergrad is vastly different from post grad - I'm sure some post 92 unis have better resources for certain post grad courses than 94 research unis but it doesn't mean that the post 92 is a better uni for undergrad or overall than the 94 research group. A better comparision would be experience between undergrad for the same subject at both the post 92 and the 94 research group.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0404343m)
    Well, to give an example, there was a recent thread on reputation, of which there was a choice between Durham/Leicester etc. I think I may have been the only one to openly suggest that its not the be all and end all to pick one of the other options. If you look at the profiles of those who said Durham with little or no explanation, what do you see? Virtually everyone is a teenager who claims to either be at school or starting university this autumn. Scaling this up, for every graduate on here, we seem to have a dozen or so who haven't yet got as far as university- which backs up TSR's own research which reckons the average user is about 18-19 years old. When you have such a high proportion of people so early in their academic experiences, is it any wonder we get so much crap posted? Its the arrogant attitude of looking down their nose at those from lower down a league table which gets me, if only once in a while people would admit they didn't know everything (which is why Im reluctant to say one place is unequivocally 'better' than another), we'd be getting somewhere...

    As for Oxford, I'm currently there, but have only recently started. I originally wasn't wanted down until early September, but I've been back and forth on and off for approaching three months now. It's basically been meetings with academics and airing some research ideas. Thus far, its been perfectly pleasant- but it's not the different world its made out to be. My previous institution, where I spent five years, another old, Russell Group university, felt incredibly similar to Oxford in a lot of ways, but again, some on TSR (who've in all probability been to neither) would have you believe the chasm is vast- and its anything but.
    Which university did you go to before?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Melancholy)
    If there's one thing as equally misleading as generalising university "reputations", it's generalising an employer's motives. Ironically, the same error has been produced in this thread.

    Take a look at Sir Alan Sugar, for instance.
    Please don't use Sir Alan Sugar as a template for graduate recruiters. That's like stating Big Brother is a good model for what your housemates will be like in university halls
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smtn)
    Please don't use Sir Alan Sugar as a template for graduate recruiters. That's like stating Big Brother is a good model for what your housemates will be like in university halls
    Or like saying that what the Magic Circle Law firms look for or the Big 4 Accountancy firms are enough to say you won't get anywhere in life unless you attend one of about six universities. I mean, you'd never find daft statements like that on TSR, would you?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smtn)
    Please don't use Sir Alan Sugar as a template for graduate recruiters. That's like stating Big Brother is a good model for what your housemates will be like in university halls
    You've grossly misunderstood my point. Well done . In fact, my point rather argued that Sir Alan Sugar couldn't be used as a template for graduate recruiters because that, in itself, would be to generalise graduate recruiters (or, indeed, any employer).

    I'll repeat:

    "If there's one thing as equally misleading as generalising university "reputations", it's generalising an employer's motives. Ironically, the same error has been produced in this thread."

    You've misinterpreted the throwaway comment about Sir Alan Sugar. Once again, be proud of yourself and of the error you've committed :wink2: Evidently the sarcastic reply I gave to the other poster who made the same mistake didn't deter you from reproducing the error.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0404343m)
    Or like saying that what the Magic Circle Law firms look for or the Big 4 Accountancy firms are enough to say you won't get anywhere in life unless you attend one of about six universities. I mean, you'd never find daft statements like that on TSR, would you?
    See my earlier point - it's very important but ultimately forms part of the mix.


    (Original post by Melancholy)
    You've grossly misunderstood my point. Well done. In fact, my point rather argued that Sir Alan Sugar couldn't be used as a template for graduate recruiters because that, in itself, would be to generalise graduate recruiters (or, indeed, any employer).

    I'll repeat:

    "If there's one thing as equally misleading as generalising university "reputations", it's generalising an employer's motives. Ironically, the same error has been produced in this thread."

    You've misinterpreted the throwaway comment about Sir Alan Sugar. Once again, be proud of yourself :wink2: Evidently the sarcastic reply I gave to the other poster who made the same mistake didn't deter you from reproducing the error.
    I agree, but also I think there are some rough 'templates' that graduate recruiters may use. Also, sarcasm on the internet doesn't often work so great
 
 
 
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: July 23, 2009
  • 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
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    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.