to ask if DC shouldn't bother with university if they can't get into a Russell Group one?

[TuTuTilly]

I'd never heard of the ruddy things before I joined MN. Didn't even realise I'd been to one. I do recall when I had a tedious summer job in Human Resources which included "sifting" job applications for an international firm of accountants, being told to dump any that weren't from a handful of universities.

So my question is; if your child can't get into an RG university - should they accept that they will be unemployable oiks upon graduation and resign themselves to a life working in call centres?

I got a 2:1 from a RG university.

I then spent about 10 years working in a call centre before becoming a SAHM.

There are so many factors that dictate what you end up doing in life, I wouldn't worry about RG universities

word With mumsnet. With employers? Not so much. I agree with you that the 'best' regarded universities (taken in the round) are members of the RG but there are more than a few RG members who are not in the intersect between the 'best' and 'members of RG' circles in the Big Venn Diagram of Life. And there are a few universities who are in the 'best' circle outside that intersect.

For the poster above who said it was 'Oxbridge' 'red brick' and 'the rest' - actually, it's Cambridge and the rest. But shhh because some people get a bit upset about that

The fact is, as has been pointed out above, RG was established for perfectly sensible reasons at the time. It subsequently became an exercise in vanity tagging which doesn't fool most people but apparently a large proportion of those it does fool are on MN. It's become an exercise in trying to pretend that you're at 'sort of Oxbridge' too. S, we get people saying they went to an RG university or their kids are at an RG university as though that means something. Yet strangely - most people who went to Imperial or whose kids are there say 'Imperial'. Which, I think, speaks volumes. The people at the really good unis aren't afraid to name them.

I didn't go to a RG uni. In fact the uni I went to is pretty much in bottom 10% of uni's in the league tables.

But I am Head of Dept in a RG uni and virtually all my staff are RG grads :)

So, IME, YABU!

Durham and York became RG members in 2012 (along with two others). So was a degree there pointless in 2011 and magic in 2013? Course not.

Well I didn't go to a Russell Group university and I'm doing alright for myself.

By contract, I have a couple of friends who went to RG universities, and neither has set the working world alight like they assumed they would.

I work for a RG university. It's mainly to do with research rather than teaching. The important thing is to do your research and investigate the area you are interested in. Oxford is a world class university but not so good if you want to do marine biology. It doesn't offer it. Every Uni has its strengths and weaknesses in every subject area. Obviously a good research base feeds into the education of the students but there are some great universities that aren't RG. Durham for example, had long since been considered the the third Oxbridge, has only just become a Russell group member.

I turned down my firm, RG uni, on results day for the one I now go to. Very glad I did. No idea what the future holds for me jobwise, but I would be just as worried (which isn't hugely much) about jobhunting after graduation if I'd gone to the other one. I don't do anything "competitive" like law either.

To be honest, I just want to get a good degree!

I turned down places in two RG unis and went to a non-RG one because the course there was more attractive to me. Doesn't been to have hurt my prospects - 10 years continuous employment in management positions and steadily climbing the proverbial career ladder.

I'm not sure any employer ever actually cared which uni I went to actually, as long as I was qualified and had the right skill set...

what does Russel Group mean?

sorry, I didn't go to Uni in this country and have been meaning to ask...

There is so much conflicting advice about this its a nightmare. My husband and I talk about this all the time as our daughter is just starting A levels and thinking about different courses. He is a senior academic at at an RG university, but his view is that kids should apply to the place with the best course rating - there are many good non RG universities outperforming RG universities in some courses and to whom employers are more attracted. Some of the former Polys had much better reputations and employability outcomes than some of the RG universities, Manchester Met, Univ of Hertfordshire, Sheffield Hallam to name a few. These polys had brilliant sandwich course schemes and exceptional links with local businesses and employers, and to a large extent some Unis have spent time catching up with them.

Check the courses first - that should be the first port of call.

I think it depends on what you want to do in life tbh.
A lot of people would find the jobs that these unis tend to attract as dead boring. I know I would. Not everybody wants to be a grey accountant or solicitor, barrister or doctor.
Some new unis/ old polys specialise in subjects you just wouldn't find at a RG uni.
An example would be nursing and midwifery, the best courses being offered in the NW at a well respected uni/ ex poly for these subjects.

I went to a Russell Group university for my undergraduate degree then did a postgraduate course with the Open University. I found the OU much better - more support, more guidance, vastly improved online access to journals (and from home too; made writing assignments much easier).

I'd also never heard of RG before joining mumsnet. My uni was an ex-poly in the NW and I have met loads of people who went to the same uni as me in all walks of life as it has a pretty good reputation. Anyway, unless the course you're doing is vocational, I think there's not a lot of point going anyway. I'd definitely do things differently if I had my time again.

To get into certain jobs at the top firms (eg accounting, law, banking) you have to go to a RG university and you have to get a 2:1. Same with certain professions like medicine, vetinary science.

You won't even get an interview if you dont have RG and a 2:1. In fact, even within the RG there is an upper layer. Some City firms will only interview at Oxford, Cambridge, London and maybe Durham. They may consider an outstanding candidate from another RG university but they dont do a 'milk round' there and you have to take the initiative.

Outside of those firms and professions then obviously it matters less but if you are doing a traditional subject and want to enter one of those professions you need to go to a top RG. Obvioulsy that closes off those profesisons to people that can't get the required A Level grades but that is life.

guineapiglet - I agree with your DH that doing a degree course at a former poly which is widely regarded by recruiters in is better than doing a mediocre course in that same subject at a RG university.

The only advice anyone needs when looking at which university to go to is...

1. Does it do the course you want?
2. Is it well regarded for the course you want to do?
3. What is the employability for students from that course at that university. (DLHE stats show this).
4. Is the university somewhere you want to live or close to home if you need to keep costs down?

If the answer to these is yes, then that is more important than whether or not its a RG x a million!

NicknameTaken - the fact that York and Durham decided to join RG rather points to the fact that they want to differentiate themselves from The Post 1992 universities (ie mostly the former polys).

MoreBeta That is certainly not true regarding Accounting. It may be true regarding law. But even then I do not believe that any of the magic circle would dismiss a St Andrews grad out of hand if that person had a first, say, and decent A levels.

Speaking as an accountant who got a third from before the RG existed

the RG sure as heck have done a good job of persuading people how important they are.

Yes a grad from St Andrews would certainly be looked at if they had a First but St Andrews woudl not be on the 'milk round'.

I went to an ex poly which languishes towards the bottom of the league tables (in spite of actually getting pretty good grades at A Level though just missing my first choice by one grade) and managed to get a training contract in a city law firm- eventually, after reams and reams of applications, two years working as a paralegal and working part time in an investment bank while taking a gamble taking out a further loan to do the LPC. I got the tc half way through the LPC and the firm amaing agreed to pay the fees (so therefore pay off the loan) retrospectively so I was very lucky with that, though I worked damned hard to get it. I think the firm thought if I could work that hard to actually get a job I'd be a hard worker once I got there.

With something vocational like Law surely a 2:1 should be a 2:1 - You have to study certain core subjects for it to be a qualifying law degree - and arguably ex polys are better at delivering vocational subjects being as they were set up for that purpose. Plus I did French as well which meant I had twice as many lectures and classes as someone doing single honours law.

I would say (to make the path into the job you want easier) try to go to the university that has a reputation of being good for the subject you want to study. If I had done fine art, ceramics or design at the university I went to I would have had a positive advantage in getting a job in those subjects as the university was well regarded there. But if you go to a university that isn't as well regarded, it doesn't necessarily mean the teaching will be poor - I didn't think mine was, and we had excellent brand new resources. And it doesn't necessarily mean you won't get the job you want, it will probably mean you won't walk straight into it (but who does anyway) and you will have to build up some years of experience first.

I think my university is actually affecting me getting jobs now though after a career break as law firms are always interested in education no matter how many years experience you have. Especially in the current market when they can be picky.

I think personality plays a part. One of mine has just finished at Cambridge and is expected to get one of those double first things. She does not have a job. She is still poncing around with her friends making arty films. Another has finished his second year at an ex-poly. He went to a jobs fair last thursday and was offered a job on a the spot due to his enthusiasm about, of all things, statistics (yep, the dept of Govt statistics) with a great starting salary. He starts next July. I'm still open mouthed to be honest.
And its down to drive and enthusiasm. He'll do that for a bit then he's planning a PhD. Meanwhile I expect arty child will still be writing bad poetry in Notting Hill with Trustafarians
It had bugger all to do with the university and everything to do with their differing drives and enthusiasm for work.

No it is all nonsense really.

My old university sometimes gets ranked above some RG universities, sometimes it doesn't. What does it actually mean to go to a RG university if they aren't consistently better than all the rest which clearly they aren't. It is just another thing to be snobby about.

Plenty of my university friends have very good jobs in senior positions, even some of those with a lowly 2.2. It really doesn't make that much difference for most jobs and employers. Granted if you wanted to do something high flying in the city it might make life easier but most of don't want to do that anyway.

gimme the Dept of Govt Statistics offers a 'great starting salary'? .

How will the DD with no job afford to live in Notting Hill to write her bad poetry?

Huh, turns out my university is a Russell Group...hated every minute.