AIBU to think going to an RG university means absolutely nothing

Ok however as it’s been stated there are other extremely well thought of non RG unis rated higher with excellent courses. So you will clearly be aware of this and how “Russell Group” was set up, as such the term Russell Group will be pretty meaningless unless you’re buying into pure snobbery.

Research has nothing to do with teaching quality, particularly when those whose priority is research have little interest in teaching. Also league tables don’t just depend on student experience but entry standards, research quality and graduate prospects. Several non Russel groups score higher in these things than Russel groups.

Some really are deluded and letting snobbery guide what they perceive as knowledge.

Recruiting blind, as we do, is based on looking at a persons Skills, qualifications and Experience.
Our blind element is
without name, address, age, photo, school names,

So we aren’t aware of a persons ethnicity or background.
However education post18 isn’t blind and we will know Uni, College, Degree etc.

In my Industry the University is crucial

I went to St Andrews which is not Russel Group but still very prestigious and highly though of all the same.

Why?????

It’s a self set up group based on very little, other unis are harder to get into and rated higher in league tables than many RG unis.

The method of grading Unis though depends on student experience amongst other things so is not necessarily linked to the quality of teaching at all.

RGs are highly renowned research Universities that many other Unis aren’t whether they are high up the Times list ( or any other one) or not.

I disagree
RGs are highly regarded in some industries.

But they're not necessarily rated the best unis, many come consistently quite a way below some non Russel group unis.

Many large organisations recruit blind so don’t know which university the candidate went to.

So she’s ignoring extremely well regarded unis that are rated higher than many Russel group unis- that isn’t really sensible.

But there are loads of them- why are they going to comment? It’s not exceptional getting into one and they want the same Alevels or less than many non Russel groups. It actually means nothing.

I couldn't agree more. Vive la revolution.

Well for someone who thinks it is it would be like anything but for normal people no

I think of it lie designer label handbags if you are obsessed with labels ir means something to those people only

Agree
In the long term
It does help in some careers just to get your foot in the door in the first instance.

Interviewers are unlikely to comment that you went to a RG Uni at an Interview or at any time. They will however see it on your CV.

Depends what career you’re going to. Going to a top uni helped my son get his graduate job. My DD is only looking at russell group. Obviously not everyone who goes to one will succeed in live, but it can give a leg up in some industries.

Yet one of my sons had his lowest A level offer from Warwick for his degree.
All the others wanted higher including non RGs.
The reason was simply it was a well known terrible course that struggles to fill the places.
In my sons study area anyone with a Warwick degree of the same subject wouldn’t actually be able to do the job, just talk and report on it.

So there’s not necessarily a career advantage for all subjects at all

I have just found out that I went to a RG university from this thread! I thought RG was just Oxford / Cambridge and a few London universities. It has never been mentioned in any of my interviews/ job so no I don’t think it matters in the long term. The most important thing is proving you can do your job well, that is what really counts and not what university you went to.

Some employers rate a degree from an RG Uni higher

It does depend on the job though. As Architects we look at the Uni by design reputation which definitely has nothing to do with whether it’s part of the Russell Group.

A little further down the career path for other careers and employers will be concerned more with your experience.

There are certain courses that are particularly prized by some employers, which is why some courses at the same university are hard to get on whilst others are easier. Some of these are at Russell Group universities and some are not.

If the fees for Oxford / Cambridge / Imperial etc are the same as a random ex poly, why would you NOT want to aim higher if you have the grades?

The 'Russell Group' is branding. It was invented when HE was expanded in the early 90s to include polytechnics and specialist HEIs. Existing universities were horrified at the idea of polys autonomously awarding degrees but particularly that they might get money from the funding councils. They needed to keep their 'high end' status and so the RG lobby was formed to distinguish them from 'new universities'.

Courses vary hugely within an institution, going to a particular HEI doesn't say much about your actual course: some are taught by specialists, highly resourced with limited places and some are there to provide bulk fees to finance the highly-resources etc. courses. 'Research' is practically independent of courses and teaching, going to a 'research-led' institution doesn't reflect your course.

Because RG is all about distinction, though, you can get extra value from certain courses because of who else will be studying on them. A good example is the famous PPE (Philosophy, Politics & Economics), signature degree of the old, high-end unis. The unremarkable content of the degree is easily studied at an ex-poly but the whole point is to study at an institution where you will meet influential people in a place where they have an arcane name for the canteen: cultural and social capital is what you get.

I remember the RG being invented but it's designed to make you think it's always been there.

It means absolutely zero.

@RedCrochetedWigFace Exactly that.

I don’t know.. a young person in my family has a first in law but from a non RG uni, and has struggled to find a graduate job or traineeship. I hate to think that the institution they chose to attend plays a role, but who knows 🤷‍♀️ I wonder what the stats are on employment destinations and degree classification when making the comparison?

Self-annointed does not mean the clever marketing does not create a virtuous circle in which the uni gets the better students and better funding which in turn leads to better facilities and teaching and in turn better students and higher entry requirements.

That is how companies succeed and grow. Universities are not dissimilar in seeking to exploit a brand.