new RG uni's

@yellowtip Indeed. Both are well known for being the way they are and we know what we will get from them. Some people want that, some don't.

Oh theta that makes me smile, and my degree stopped being important years ago!

From a recruitment perspective, in a 'traditional' profession, nobody would ever think York was anything other than fantastic.

Speaking from the coal face I see very little confusion from students aiming for top universities. They couldn't care less whether Durham and Exeter are 1994 or RG. Nor could the more discerning employers.

When I applied to university in 1992, the only distinctions I knew of were between old polys, and old unis (and Oxbridge I suppose). I went to York because I was told by my lecturer it was the best place to do my course, and I saw a fantastic York lecturer at a conference who inspired me.

I didn't realise at the time that York was actually one of the best universities in the country. I remember when my friends were applying for jobs in our final year in accounting, business etc, that York was always on the list of "accepted unis".

When I did find out about the Russel Group, it surprised me that my old uni may not have been seen to be on a par with them. So I'm glad that it is now being added because I think it deserves that recogition. Although as I say it always seemed to be seen in the same light anyway.

AFAIR the 1994 universities were simply smaller than the RG ones. York is certainly tiny compared to Birmingham etc. So academically they were on a par, just on a smaller scale. I'm not sure if research has a bearing too, York has (or did have) a larger post-grad population than undergrad and was very research heavy.

I'm not normally snobbish about this type of thing, but I just can't help myself with this as I'm still very proud that I was able to attend such a wonderful place and admit it's always got my back up that people may have looked at it less favourably as it was in the wrong "group"!

yy, senua.

And yy Doom. I do think it might be interesting to get per capita res income stats bandied about, because that changes the picture again, but it would, I suppose, just lead to another layer of confusion for the poor damn students. Games are played constantly to make these stats and tables look good. The pre-REF transfer window is well and truly open at the moment...

Yes, true. You're right habbibu, and more charitable than me.

I think it's nasty for students though, who end up feeling they were fools for falling for the initial stance when (as you say), I think it was accurate.

Part of the problem is that no-one really knows what Universities are for. (I have consulted Fowler. He says that it is fine to end a sentence with a preposition.)

If you want to study seriously and have a career in , then employers will know that you have been on the best course and choose recruits from that course, irrespective of the general reputation of the University.
However, if an employer wants to recruit a 'good brain' then they are more likely to look at the Institution (read: RG) and class of degree, and not really care which subject was studied. It is these sort of employers who have perpetuated the hype about RG.

They're stuck, though, aren't they, Doom? If denied entry (for volume reasons alone) they can't very well say how they're not as good as RG and it really matters etc (because actually, their initial stance is more accurate - RG does not directly indicate quality) but RG is so powerful and so much as part of media reporting that the 1994 gp type universities probably are missing out. It's really bloody stupid in so many ways.

Do you not think students still choose in the same way, lily?

It's not that long ago I helped my cousin apply and she had never heard the terms 'Russell Group' or 'post-1992 Group', let alone 'redbrick' or 'plate glass'. She just looked at the course reputations and the syllabus and so on.

Incidentally, I find it really funny that for ages some of these universities have been insisting the RG is really unimportant, they're proud to be just who they are, etc. etc. ... singing a different song now I notice!

Yes, they were Yorkshire universities, having some sort of pooling resources agreement. Similar to what happened in Scotland - creating critical mass to compete with very big and well-resourced institutions, but falling well short of actual merger. I couldn't remember if it had stretched the definition of Yorkshure as far as Durham.

Nice to know that I am now (overnight) an alumna of a Russell Group University - a grouping that didn't exist when I was a student and when you chose your universities by academic reputation within your subject rather than whether they were members of a self selecting group that set itself up at the Russell Hotel.

White Rose = Yorkshire, surely? (which would make sense if York, Sheffield & Leeds are in it. whatever it is. assume not the shopping centre at Leeds...)

Aye, Strop. It's quite a good description too, isn't it?

theta, the prestige attached to a university may rub off on a particular course, but it isn't necessarily justified, and conversely a not terribly well thought of institution may have a couple of really cracking courses. I really don't see how you can say definitively that it never happens.

Doom - I can't remember! I was working at York when white rose was starting up, but it's all a bit hazy now.

Ah habbibu, your post on the older thread reminded me of the term "plateglass universities". Never hear that one now..

habbibu - York is, I thought Durham was not? Sheffield and Leeds are.

IM limited E good employers know.

@Jenai It never happens. 'Good' 'better' and 'best' are determined in the eye of the beholder but the prestige attached to a university and a course is essentially determined by an awful lot of well qualified beholders. Therefore you may disagree with their assessment but that doesn't make it wrong.

Jenai. good ex-polys will still do the courses they did better than unis better, I suspect (if you can get through the vile syntax. Why don't we have syntax police on MN?). And some niche courses are really very good in institutions that aren't always rated as highly. It's a bugger, as you have to hope that employers in the field are also aware of what's actually good, as opposed to always buying into perceived prestige, but I doubt it.

I am happy to admit I have lots of limitations. I also have a sense of humour and most importantly I believe, a sense of perspective

I don't think that necessarily follows or that there's any particular internal evidence for that Doom, though I'm very happy to be corrected.

I knew I'd posted on this before.

Back to the OP - I suspect it's a combination of increase in relative res income volumes, due to increasing size and collaborations - are York and Durham both in White Rose? - plus pressure to be in the RG because of misconceptions that the RG represents the "best" universities. Which is a pretty rife misconception.

Back when I was at university, the course I was doing was far better than some in the same subject being run at more presitigous universities.

Does that still happen a lot?

Shouldn't that be polies, Yellow?