Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be upset about ‘university blind’ recruitment

788 replies

Newname576 · 17/05/2023 19:31

DS has overcome so many challenges and has an unconditional offer from Cambridge after achieving 4 A star last year. He has worked so hard and we are so proud of him! But I was upset to learn that so many companies are recruiting “university blind”now - what the hell is the point of going to a top Uni if no one will know about it! My younger child says she will apply to Manchester Met and have a ball even though she too is predicted stellar grades as there is no point going to a top Uni

AIBU to be sad that companies are recruiting blind?

OP posts:
AlmostGreenFingers · 21/05/2023 19:15

8roses · 21/05/2023 19:01

Cambridge graduates get an honorary masters to reflect the fact that their undergraduate degrees are much harder 😃

No, they don’t 😂

Horsetoday · 21/05/2023 19:15

8roses · 21/05/2023 19:01

Cambridge graduates get an honorary masters to reflect the fact that their undergraduate degrees are much harder 😃

They aren't the only ones - a few universities apart from Cambridge award a Masters for an undergrad degree, are you aware of that fact? and what makes you think that's to reflect the fact that their degrees are harder, Here's the real reason, stop spreading nonsense!

Why is a Scottish undergraduate Masters?
It's mainly because the University of Edinburgh is an ancient university which has a tradition of giving out a Bachelor's degree with honours with an “MA” preceding your degree. It's the same with other super-old universities like Oxford, Cambridge and Glasgow.

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 19:07

8roses · 21/05/2023 19:01

Cambridge graduates get an honorary masters to reflect the fact that their undergraduate degrees are much harder 😃

No, it’s honorary. It’s not indicative of the course itself being harder.

Parker231 · 21/05/2023 19:06

8roses · 21/05/2023 19:02

Plus you’d have to provide your degree cert - this blind recruitment is all a sham

I’ve spent years doing final round interviews for graduate students in global corporate finance roles. We don’t know the school, Uni or predicted grade during the numerous rounds of tests, group exercises and interviews. Only after the offer is made and degrees awarded will evidence be required.

8roses · 21/05/2023 19:02

Plus you’d have to provide your degree cert - this blind recruitment is all a sham

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 19:01

TheThinkingGoblin · 21/05/2023 18:56

I went to University in the 90s

We didn't have wishy-washy tutors or rampant grade inflation. A "1st" was quite rare (as it should be). I ended up with a 2.1 which was fine because Math degrees (masters) are supposed to be hard.

Now we have people in 3rd rate Universities claiming a "1st" in math makes them smart.

Do you know what happens to them when they start working?

They crumble. Because they are not prepared for just how much tougher work is vs school (which in their case was made far too easy).

This doesn't help society at all. And until you tighten academic standards in the UK, thw situation will likely continue due to the cost of student loans.

I achieved a first from a very well regarded university and wouldn’t begrudge someone a first from a low ranked university. This seems more of a class issue than anything else.

8roses · 21/05/2023 19:01

Cambridge graduates get an honorary masters to reflect the fact that their undergraduate degrees are much harder 😃

ImOutsid3 · 21/05/2023 18:59

@Horsetoday
Yes. You could have done that at literally any other university and gotten the same outcome. This wouldn't be a differentiator for Oxbridge or any other top university.

8roses · 21/05/2023 18:58

Just name drop the uni in the interview 😃

TheThinkingGoblin · 21/05/2023 18:56

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 18:48

If they got a first and you got a 2.2 - then they’re smarter. I know it hurts, but you’ll cope.

I went to University in the 90s

We didn't have wishy-washy tutors or rampant grade inflation. A "1st" was quite rare (as it should be). I ended up with a 2.1 which was fine because Math degrees (masters) are supposed to be hard.

Now we have people in 3rd rate Universities claiming a "1st" in math makes them smart.

Do you know what happens to them when they start working?

They crumble. Because they are not prepared for just how much tougher work is vs school (which in their case was made far too easy).

This doesn't help society at all. And until you tighten academic standards in the UK, thw situation will likely continue due to the cost of student loans.

SmartHome · 21/05/2023 18:52

I'm also for it even though it would negate my 2 degrees being from top 5 RG universities by this year's rankings. Graduates should be selected on their skill set, aptitude, achievements and attitude, and organisations should carekfulky test and interview to assess this - rather than judging people on what they were like 5 years ago when they were 17 and whether or not they had pushy parents and were at good schools. Ok proportionally more people of a certain calibre will ahve ended up atvteb harder to get I to unis but I don't want potentially very good people discriminated against for going to Manchester Met because that's what happened when they were 17/18.

Horsetoday · 21/05/2023 18:48

TheThinkingGoblin · 21/05/2023 18:40

Its cute that you actually believe this.

Some of you seem to not understamd much about how the world actually works, or how much tougher courses are at more elite schools.

Grade inflation is rampant right now in the UK for tertiary education, and many of the older polytechnics are driving this. A "1st" has become almost meaningless now (vs 20 years ago), so hiring companies focus on the school and how rigorous it actually is.

In this situation, Oxbridge is far superior.

Full stop.

The figures uniformly document the same upwards trend. Among the most striking cases of ‘inflation’ were the universities of Bradford (a rise from 48 per cent to 76 per cent), Huddersfield (58 per cent to 81 per cent), and East Anglia (73 per cent to 92 per cent). But top of the list for 2016-17 is Oxford (94.6 per cent); Cambridge, Bristol, Durham, Imperial and UCL also awarded firsts and 2.1s to over 90 per cent of graduating students.

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 18:48

If they got a first and you got a 2.2 - then they’re smarter. I know it hurts, but you’ll cope.

TheThinkingGoblin · 21/05/2023 18:46

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 18:42

Oh shut up. A first isn’t harder to achieve at Oxbridge than it is anywhere else. But it’s “cute” you’re this deluded.

Keep telling yourself that. You don't have a clue about the UKs tertiary institutions.

My siblings and I went to four of them.

Comparing a "1st" from Manchester Met (for example) to a "1st" from Oxbridge is absolutely ludicrous.

Your peers at Oxbridge are the best from all over the world, and that materially raises the bar.

Are you seriously implying that the polytechnic folks are as smart as them?

TheThinkingGoblin · 21/05/2023 18:43

ImOutsid3 · 21/05/2023 18:22

Additionally, I don't think blind recruitment is a bad idea (even as someone who would be relatively disadvantaged by it).

I ended up starting off in Big 4 accountancy and the difference made by level of academic achievement (or whatever they use it as a proxy for) is negligible. The work really doesn't require much in regards to independent thought so I don't think you'd see much difference in output from two people with the same skillset, but one with an IQ of 90 and another with 120.

It's almost more of a prestige marker for the company for them to be seen as a sought-after recruiter of grads from certain institutions.

Big 4 audit is the go to career when other avenues fail if you go to an elite school.

Lots of hours, repetition, and Taylor-esque work.

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 18:42

Oh shut up. A first isn’t harder to achieve at Oxbridge than it is anywhere else. But it’s “cute” you’re this deluded.

TheThinkingGoblin · 21/05/2023 18:40

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 18:10

No. I’m saying a university grade is a grade regardless. A first at Oxford isn’t better than a first at UWE.

Its cute that you actually believe this.

Some of you seem to not understamd much about how the world actually works, or how much tougher courses are at more elite schools.

Grade inflation is rampant right now in the UK for tertiary education, and many of the older polytechnics are driving this. A "1st" has become almost meaningless now (vs 20 years ago), so hiring companies focus on the school and how rigorous it actually is.

In this situation, Oxbridge is far superior.

Full stop.

Horsetoday · 21/05/2023 18:39

ImOutsid3 · 21/05/2023 18:15

Universities do not make you a fundamentally different person. If you were intelligent and/or conscientious enough to get into a top university, you will still have those traits in 3 years, regardless of where you studied.
I went to Imperial and I can't really point to any magic the institution performed.

They filter for highly academic A-level students and spit highly academic degree-holders out at the other end. I imagine they are a bit less generous with grading to maintain a decent distribution of degree grades.

I probably would have studied elsewhere, if I had known better, on cost alone.

University changed me, I entered it from small town life. I learned to live independently, and whilst there I took opportunities, lived and studied abroad for a year - I was incredibly homesick but I saw it through - makes you feel you can tolerate anything. I met a huge variety of people - from all walks of life with a wide variety of interests and political persuasions, we debated and laughed to the wee hours in the morning - I learned so much more than just the subject I studied, I learned who I was away from the influence of home - it's an experience I am so glad I had the opportunity to have and I wanted the same for my kids and from what they have told me they have felt the same way. I emerged a much more worldly person, more resilient, more independent - yes I think I was fundamentally different.

ImOutsid3 · 21/05/2023 18:22

Additionally, I don't think blind recruitment is a bad idea (even as someone who would be relatively disadvantaged by it).

I ended up starting off in Big 4 accountancy and the difference made by level of academic achievement (or whatever they use it as a proxy for) is negligible. The work really doesn't require much in regards to independent thought so I don't think you'd see much difference in output from two people with the same skillset, but one with an IQ of 90 and another with 120.

It's almost more of a prestige marker for the company for them to be seen as a sought-after recruiter of grads from certain institutions.

ImOutsid3 · 21/05/2023 18:15

Universities do not make you a fundamentally different person. If you were intelligent and/or conscientious enough to get into a top university, you will still have those traits in 3 years, regardless of where you studied.
I went to Imperial and I can't really point to any magic the institution performed.

They filter for highly academic A-level students and spit highly academic degree-holders out at the other end. I imagine they are a bit less generous with grading to maintain a decent distribution of degree grades.

I probably would have studied elsewhere, if I had known better, on cost alone.

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 18:10

No. I’m saying a university grade is a grade regardless. A first at Oxford isn’t better than a first at UWE.

fdgdfgdfgdfg · 21/05/2023 18:10

Why do you think that a companies decisions about hiring has anything to do with fairness? They're just looking to find someone suitable for the role, they don't care whether it's fair to the candidates or not.

Most interview processes aren't even about finding the best person, they're about finding someone good enough, quick enough and with the minimum amount of effort. If a company decides to do university blind hiring, then it's because they don't think that that information is important to them. It's just noise.

I've worked for companies that specifically don't want to hire the very best candidates. If they need someone in a not particularly prestigious role that they've struggled to fill, then they don't want some rising star who's going to look to rise up the career ladder and bugger off if that doesn't happen, they want someone who's grateful for the job and is likely stick around.

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 21/05/2023 18:05

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 17:58

Yes you’re being unreasonable. A 2.II from a polytechnic is the same as a 2.II from Oxford. You can still brag, don’t worry 🙄

And those of us who got a 2.1 in a subject not taught at red bricks? Like art and design? Are we less worthy?

Segway16 · 21/05/2023 17:58

Yes you’re being unreasonable. A 2.II from a polytechnic is the same as a 2.II from Oxford. You can still brag, don’t worry 🙄

lieselotte · 21/05/2023 16:11

Newname576 · 17/05/2023 19:39

But all degrees aren’t equal @NeverDropYourMooncup - someone who gets a 1st from Cambridge has covered a lot more than the equivalent degree from uni of Hertfordshire!

How do you know?

Actually degree courses are not always better at Oxbridge. My DH did history at Oxford but he often says he would have enjoyed his insurance course at Southampton more. He enjoyed the Oxford experience, but the actual degree was meh.

Swipe left for the next trending thread