to laugh at the reverence with which some people on mn write about universities?

[Pickgo]

I've seen Russell Group universities written about as though their students have a passport to success and that their standards are so much higher than the rest of the HE offering.

The only difference I can see between a RG and ordinary university is that they focus on research and get extra funding to do so. That does not necessarily benefit students, in fact it could be argued it is to the students' disadvantage as teaching is not a RG uni's priority.

Also altho their admission requirements are ostensibly higher, many students who actually get a place obtain it in clearing with much lower points - which makes a nonsense of the 'RG snobbery' being trotted out.

Another thing I've seen suggested is that potential students will have their FB accounts checked before they are offered a place. I've never known anyone who would have the time or inclination to look up an 18 yr old on FB as part of admissions.

Potential students are the paying customer now and will be a sought after commodity.

Can I also just point out that average contact time in HE is 6-8 hours and most of what students achieve in their 3-4 years at uni is down to their own motivation and a good library imho.

Basically there are four phases of university development in the UK/Ireland.

1. Ancient Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh and Trinity College, Dublin. These are known as the elite universities and have reciprocal recognition of each others' degrees. They were all founded before the 19th century.

1. Civic universities also known as 'red brick'. Founded when large cities in the north expanded in the 19th century and in the aftermath of the industrial revolution. Often funded by philanthropists, who had made their money in trade. Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, Nottingham, London, etc. Sometimes converted from existing regional medical schools. Founded 19th/early 20th century. Russell Group predominates in this sector.

1. Plate glass universities Founded in the 1960s and 1970s during mass expansion of HE for baby boomer generation. Called plate glass because they use lots of it in their architecture. UEA, Sussex, Essex, York, etc. 1994 group predominates in this sector.

1. Post 1992 universities John Major's government basically waved a wand and overnight converted a lot of polytechnics and colleges of higher education to universities, to save having to build new ones as a way of expanding the sector. Million+ group and GuildHE group predominate here.

In order to calculate the relative snob value of the university you attended, you need to find out the date of its foundation and see which of the four categories it fits into. The older the institution, the more snob value is attached to your degree, unless there is a particular vocational aspect to your degree (eg Harper Adams for farming, Rose Bruford for drama) in which case the snob value is higher.

Has no one else observed that it depends, too, exactly which subject? Geography or Law or whatever. And within subjects, the emphasis? There was a girl in local rag who turned down a place at Cambridge opting for a Scottish Uni instead, because she felt Scottish version of her degree (Vet Science) would be more robust, more what she wanted, at the Scottish Uni.

Plus I love the fact that Oxbridge are not RG.

Sorry :) thought you were having a pop

But I am agreeing with the OP that RG is treated with almost mythical status on here and that is misguided. I was only praising York as I loved it (and at the time of my post thought it was non RG)

But yes saying I fink York uni woz gud (as I pretty much did) is fairly ironic and perhaps not a great advert for them

Russell Group is actually a registered company, by the way.

ragged Oxbridge are RG

ragged - absolutely agree.

It also depends on the emphasis you want. If you want to be a working politician, doing English at Cambridge might work well. But if you want to be an academic studying English, it might actually be a rather poor course in terms of information given, even if it's exciting.

TBH so much depends on whether researchers are teaching you, or whether they outsource all the teaching to PGs. There's no point in following big names in choosing a university if you never see them.

The only way to choose a university IMO is to look around, ask lots of questions, and read the prospectus properly.

Ultimately it comes down to vibe (although my DD picked her Cambridge college on the basis that it was near an excellent Drum n' Bass club, but we won't go into that).

bunny - no, I love York! I am there now. I am slightly, well, sceptical of its new Russell Group status. But I think it is wonderful. In fact, I have degrees from Oxford and Cambridge, and I got an offer from Oxford to do my DPhil there, which I turned down in favour of York - and I am by no means the only person to do that! There are lots of us. York is just so good, and such a brilliant place. I would always recommend it.

I just hope it won't change now it is 'Russell Group'.

Both my children want to do vocational degrees (teaching and dentistry), where I am hoping the PG as lecturer issue will not arise. But if they were doing a non-vocational degree, I would be concerned about which university they went to. But there seems to be no way of telling which universities or which departments run a lot of courses taught by postgrads.

:) say hi to the geese for me Doomcats - I do miss them :)

I turned down Oxford for a master's course at one stage. They just didn't seem to have a proper handle on how the course was designed and examined. It all seemed a bit ad hoc.

SeaHouses, ask the current crop of students.

I'd never even heard of the Russell group universities, but having looked them up it seems I went to one. LOL Never made any difference to me.

Rushelle, quite!

BTW I did my MA at York, loved it!

Oh dear ... can I say hi to them while I wish death to them for crapping all over my shoes?!

But yes, I will!

I have just got back from a conference where so many delegates had been to York - I think it really punches above its weight. And my students gave very high ratings for all of the undergrad courses, too - it is a good place to go. I think it's the perfect size - small enough to suit the undergraduates, but large enough (for my subject, anyway) to have a good research centre, and near to Leeds and Sheffield for chatting.

I can't recommend it highly enough.

(They don't pay me, honest! I wish they did! )

Such happy memories :)

I loved it - really rated it about the other unis I went to

It is so good, isn't it? I felt as if they really cared about students in a way that I just didn't find to the same extend anywhere else.

They do! In mt first year I started dropping out and not going to lectures and the actual VC took me into his office and had a nice fatherly chat with me which I dont think you'd get at many places (I might be wrong but it always stuck with me)

(mind you he had had my mother on the phone which may have had something to do with it)

I did my post-grad at the LSE and my undergraduate degree at an ex polytechnic. I found the teaching and support to be far better there than at the LSE.

BOFmum your categorization of HE demonstrates (and perpetuates) the superficial, snobbish attitudes that contribute to the lack of any meaningful measure being made by students and their families and employers.

Why would the date of foundation have any impact whatsoever on the abilities of the institution's students or the experience it offers for that matter? More ridiculous snobbery imho - just said in a less ignorant way.

And yes, taught at several different unis!! Incl RG!!