This is a Premium feature
To use this feature subscribe to Mumsnet Premium - get first access to new features see fewer ads, and support Mumsnet.Start using Mumsnet Premium
Bath, not a Russell group uni, is this a problem for employers?(185 Posts)
DD has an offer for biochemistry at Bath but is probably going to find a job outside the science sector once she graduates, probably in a well paid City/tech job. She feels that alot of employers, or rather people in charge of recruiting for their department are biased towards recruiting from Russell groups and hence going to Bath would place her at a disadvantage. This is probably due to the significant competition for jobs. What has been the experience of people on the forum with respect to Russell and non Russell Group universities? I'm certainly not saying that Bath is not a great university, just that people show bias towards Russell group graduates.
There will be an instinctive understanding of hierarchy in universities and Bath is a newer university so will rank lower - if the job is available and two applicants are otherwise the same it could make a difference...
otherwise it is more likely to be down to the overall candidate and what they have done - e.g. outside uni / work experience / approach / how they write their CV / etc. etc.
The term Russell Group seems to be used far more on Mumsnet than in real life. I don't believe that employers value a degree from Bath as worth less than a degree from a RG university with similar entrance requirements and similar position in league tables.
As an academic and as an employer, I would rank Bath as considerably higher than many of the lower ranking RG universities for some subjects.
I do agree that there is some instinctive ranking of hierarchy in UK society, which is often out of date (Bristol, Exeter and Durham seem consistently over-valued on here) but I don't believe that the ranking is so out of date/wrong that Bath would be less valued than comparable RG institutions.
From the calibre of people I know going off to Bath to do sciences or economics I get the feeling that Bath is a very competitive university to get into these days and very well regarded.
Bath is one of the top universities in the country! It shouldn't be a problem.
My employer deliberately doesn’t ask where you got your degree from only the grade. Discrimination apparently. I think this is wrong but it may be the trend
I think there is a heirarchy of universities but Bath is very well respected and certainly up there with some RG universities, if not better than.
I think it is wrong for an employer not to ask about the institution. There are huge differences in degrees from different institutions. What was the competition like to get onto the course? Did it want an A*AA or would BBC do? How many firsts are awarded - given out like sweeties, or really tough to get and a very high pass mark? Is it a local former college of higher education or a university of world ranking? If all degrees are the same, then why is there stiff competition to get into some courses/universities and others you can virtually walk into? The university attended should be part of the selection process, but other skills and attributes should be considered. Would an employer really not want to know if someone had been to Oxford or New Bucks?
I am sure plenty of Bath students get jobs in the City but the well paid city jobs will look for lots of other attributes besides university attended and the selection process is pretty ruthles requiring multiple skills not just a favoured university.
Some people may not be aware that Bath is as highly regarded as Russell Group unis. Its just one of those things, if you are paying for it, you would rather make choices that make life a bit easier after you leave even if it is a great institution. I imagine graduate jobs are very highly sought after and you need every advantage you can get to take them.
Bath often does sandwich courses ( or used to) - worth doing as employers love them.
I work partly in education and IME the following are seen as on a par with the RG unis: Bath, Lancaster, Surrey, Sussex, Loughborough, Royal Holloway, Reading and St Andrew's. Possibly others but these spring to mind.
Would you be at all concerned op if the offer was from St Andrews? Ranked in the top 5 (overall) is all 3 of the league tables. And yet not RG.
I was just going to say I went to St. Andrews which isn't RG and I can promise that the high paid city firms were definitely not put off my fellow graduates (I went into arts/culture so voluntarily get crap pay )
I did biochem, Bath is very well thought of.
Biochem at Dundee, for example, is one of the top courses in Europe and graduates are highly sought after in all fields. My friends year group all had jobs lined up well before graduation. They aren't RG.
As an employer, RG is meaningless. It's just a marketing ploy to recruit undergrads.
Hope the link works. Bath university has some of the best employability prospects of any university in the country. It's has a very vocational focus and most of the courses offer a year in industry. I went to bath so obviously am biased but my university friends have had successful careers in a range of fields including in the city/banking/law/consultancy etc etc not just the ultra vocational eg engineering
Why on earth is St Andrews not in the RG?
Why on earth is St Andrews not in the RG?
From the basics I understand about RG, it was set up to provide research funding for uni's. Some marketing bods got their hands on it and very successfully turned it into an apparent marker for quality.
Uni's like Dundee and St Andrews attract a lot of research funding and/or are already very prestigious. There is no need for them to join RG.
There are quite a few outstanding Uni's not in RG.
RG is just a club who got together to declare themselves the best. It's not an objective measure of quality in any way.
I've only ever heard an obsession with it on MN.
I just couldn't imagine St Andrews not wanting to be in any prestigious club going!
Oh dear - MN and its RG obsession!
RG was founded as a lobby group - "self selected" is a clue. That explains the lack of RG status Betrand. Indeed, quite a few Universities decided not to join the group. Unfortunately the RG have been very successful in its mission objectives and this has really distorted the market. Perceptions may well change when TEF (teaching excellence framework) becomes more prominent.
There has been some discussion in graduate employment about omitting the names of school/college/university names from applications. I really hope that happens
Its not really prestigious though bertrand, just very good at making your average joe think it is!
It may well be that St Andrews don't want to sign-up to the RG mission group and toe that "party line".
But oops. The Russell Group rejects the mission group label. "We tend to use the phrase 'representative/membership organisation' to describe ourselves," a spokesman says. snigger
Can I just add (last point - honest). I really don't understand differential measurement in respect of degrees. I have been an external examiner for RG and non-RG Universities. The whole examination process does aim for a common standard across the sector, and it is very rare for me to find the marking in the wrong classification regardless of institution. In other words, a 2.1 from Leeds (RG group) in English will be comparable to the same from Bradford (University Alliance group) and Bath Spa (Million + group) and Cumbria (GuildHE group) and Essex (1994 group) and Aberdeen (unaffiliated).
I think Bath is extremely highly regarded. It also scores very highly for student satisfaction. Your DD should go with her own preference and not worry about snobbish perceptions.
The price of joining would have been several million. That's what QueenMarys, York etc paid. St Andrews had no need to spend this!
and given the diabolical state of university funding in Scotland good job they didn't join
I believe Bertrand went to St A...?
Seems good, no 61 globally according to TES.