To be upset about ‘university blind’ recruitment

I havent heard of this at all in London

Dont go on tittle tattle / tik tok gossip for such a big decision!

A job should be given on merit and suitability, not which university someone went to. Just look at the current crop of useless MP's with Oxbridge educations 🙄 You are rightly proud of your son, but your attitude is pretty snobbish.

I think you're right to be upset about this.

I see above that your family is underprivileged. Wait until he's got the degree and everyone hates him for being an "elitist bastard". That really sucks!

Can't you just be pleased for him? He has done so well. A University education is so much more than a gateway to a job.

I haven’t read the whole thread, but I can see why you’re upset. A good undergraduate honours degree from Cambridge will have involved and required hell of a lot more than the equivalent from a low ranking uni (I found there was less difference at postgrad). I guess you can just take comfort in the additional skills your son will develop alongside to achieve this, which will hopefully set him apart from others at interview.

@Mirabai relying on sophistry?

Highdays, I didn't know that!

Thanks for the explanation because I have often wondered! 🙂

@bottleofbeer the grade boundaries are different but they are marked differently, in the OU they try to use all the marks including up to 100%, whereas in trad unis the marks tend to cluster between 40-75%. This does not mean that in the OU it's harder to get a first, it means they have a different marking scheme.

I've not done an OU degree but their classification boundaries are way higher. A first is 80%

Putting people down because you've got it into your head that an Oxford education should automatically mean that doors are opened is going to piss people off.

You're basically saying that no matter what their achievements, they'll never be as good as those who went to Oxford. That's absolute bullshit.

It is ridiculous to think that spending 3 years studying a period of history or physics or English literature somehow makes you a more valuable candidate for most jobs than someone who has spent the same 3 years working or committing to some endeavour. It's become so skewed. I say this as someone with a masters degree, an Oxford grad dh and 2 dc who are graduates. The older I get the more ridiculous I find the whole thing. 3 years from 18-21 is so insignificant over a lifetime of experience

You know what? I'm not at all surprised that you're very proud and rightly so.

But you're letting that pride blinker you.

Let's see if he can even hack it yet, before worrying about blind recruitment.

You're literally looking down your nose at people who achieved at 'lesser' universities and wonder why we're not all gnashing our teeth in empathy.

Those who have ALREADY done it.

University league tables include factors that consider course quality but also things like employability that might be based on recruiter bias. So they're scientific, but only to a point.

Besides which, that is not the argument I'm making at all. I would actually claim something closer to "you can't really prove which university is more academic and arguing about it will leave you going round and round in circles."

I would then finish by pointing out that how academic someone is can be quite a poor indicator of what they are like in the workplace.

I think going to a top university is a fantastic experience for someone but anyone who thinks it should be a meal ticket for life or who prioritises what they did aged 18-21 rather than their last project needs to get a grip.

So - none.

What are you saying? I responded to a post on quantum mechanics with a post on quantum mechanics and then a poster decided this was comparable to reading Romeo and Juliet.

Quantum mechanics= Quantum mechanics

I am amused that the very posters who have said any old Uni is just as academically good and difficult as Oxbridge with justification being on how hard their courses were to them, and “yes it is” are now criticising posters who are using the same type of argument as unscientific, and really really stupid. I suppose it was ok to use anecdotes when it was arguing your opinion, but not when it’s arguing the opposite opinion, hey?

And meanwhile we are all ignoring the Uni league tables and Uni rankings like these arguably far more scientifically robust assessments compared to “my course was hard” “and it really is the same” mean absolutely nothing.

The entire context of this thread, set probably inevitably by the contents of the OP, is that 'top universities' equal Oxbridge (occasionally Durham gets a name check, or the phrase 'other leading universities' or the evergreen 'RG universities). In reality, the fight back against institution blind recruiting tends to be a much wider one, very broadly drawn as old universities > new universities. This sits within the wider common MN trope that Oxbridge is the ambition of all the most able students.

But to meet your request, examples of Oxbridge exceptionalism (and these are drawn from posts from people on either side of the debate):

All degrees are not equal, especially when you consider and compare eg the tutorial system at Oxford or the similar system at Cambridge vs other universities etc,

My firm recruits university-blind and have people on the graduate scheme from many different universities. The ones from Oxbridge often stand out academically

I don’t think that many posters realise that Cambridge and Oxbridge produce fantastic graduates because they demand much more of students, particularly in humanities subjects

I think academic types choose Oxford and Cambridge for the challenge and the cache not the job prospects

nothing compares to the preparation provided by engaging with the Oxbridge tutorial system for three or four years

Oxford and Cambridge students tend to stand out anyway....

Actually what you're saying here is incredibly stupid to the point that I too much question how on earth you got a first in a science subject. You're basically expecting to go into and out of degrees without improving your knowledge or your mind?

Doing a science degree, getting a third and then doing another one and getting a first proves absolutely nothing because there's a glaring variable! When you went to the OU you had studied science at that level before!

And it rather begs the question why on earth you would go and study a degree at university again if you just expected to come out the same, with the same result?

Honestly, I read some stupid things sometimes, but this is going straight into my top 10.

Presumably you didn’t do either in research methods since you’ve glossed over all of the other variables that potentially contribute to differences in grades, such as subject, life circumstances, tutor variables, health situations, presentation of materials vs individual strengths of comprehension etc.

Not all companies do this though

Perhaps you could quote the ‘repeated’ posts claiming Oxbridge contains all the 'best' academic brains even, let alone all the best future workforce.

Agree, there are far woker universities than Oxford and Cambridge. Edinburgh for example, and Brighton.

Agree with last 2. As a manager, I have found that the people who got 1sts st top unis tend to be nightmare perfectionists who can't just cracked on and do a good enough job. Much prefer someone who has fitted a degree in amongst other things and can take a more pragmatic approach. I also have staff supporting me who went to RG unis when I got a 2:2 from OU! It doesn't matter

Yeah and all “science” is the same right. Molecular biology, quantum mechanics, organic chemistry - same, same. 🤔

*Lots of graduate scheme recruitment for big companies or civil service involves doing tests or assessments so if he is really bright, he will do well at those and get the job.

If someone from Wolverhampton does better than him at the test then they deserve to get the job.*

Exactly.

As a recruiter by the way, if I'm not operating institution blind, I am always drawn to OU candidates as to be able to do a degree in that way demonstrates fantastic skills in time management, resource, drive and initiative. All hugely useful skills to take into the workplace.

Thank god for common sense.
Once again employers employ people not the unis they went to.