University choice

[IamtheDevilsAvocado]

A billion years ago when I attended university - it really mattered for post- degree jobs where you had earnt your degree. The general feeling appeared to be in terms of merit: it was Oxbridge, followed by Russell group /Redbridge, good (former polys) new universities, then old institute if HE with no hope of becoming universities..

My friend (non graduate) who are advising their teenagers for uni entry over next couple of yesrs, is that this is old fashioned and no one judges any more and 'a degree is a degree' ... I can't see that a first from say Bristol is thought of similarly to social science studies from an old HE at the bottom of the list?

So mumsnet jury what thoughts?

Depends on the job and the subject. There has been a move in some firms to not include uni info to interviewers to try and get more diversity.l in recruitment.

For myself several jobs I have got, I got because the MD went to the same uni, but I didn't know that at interview stage.

I would say it depends entirely on whose doing the judging. If you're applying for a hugely popular graduate job with a reputable business with a low intake then the first from Bristol is likely worth more, yes. In general life I don't think many people care. Depends entirely what the teenager wants to go on and do. If they genuinely enjoy the subject they should choose the university with the course content most suited to them.

I'm just finishing up at a top 10 uni and I think you and your friend both have points. Some of the jobs I've applied for just ask for what degree and where from, however a lot of grad schemes and, frankly, better paid grad jobs, want a good university and a 2.1 at least (or a 2.2 if you seem very suited for the job). At an interview I went to the interviewer told me they always place grads from better unis as first priority for interview as it shows dedication to the subject.
Then again, that isn't to say a 'worse' uni - e.g. a poly or one in the bottom half of the league table - couldn't still get you a good job. Especially if you're doing a more vocational course, like my friend who studies photojournalism who is at a poly but has a job lined up for when she finishes in August.

It absolutely matters still (I recruit people), not just from a snobbish perspective but because a degree from somewhere highly academically selective is going to be more rigorous and have higher standards than one from an ex-poly.

For some jobs, that wouldn't matter so much, but for a lot of the more traditional 'professions' it totally matters.

If you have one candidate with a first from Oxbridge and another with a first from, say, Oxford Brookes, it's a fair bet to say the Oxbridge candidate is brighter. That doesn't mean they'll automatically be better at the job, but given how competitive the graduate labour market is you'd be daft to ignore the leg-up a degree from a well-respected university will give you.

The only time this doesn't necessarily apply is for some niche subjects in which a particular university has a very strong reputation and is high up the league tables for.

'a degree is a degree'

If doing something vocational-ish, I would say course (i.e. course reputation within the industry) trumps institution.
If non-vocational (so any old academic subject leading to competitive grad-scheme) then institution/classification wins.
The only time that "one degree is the same as another" is in a job that probably isn't really graduate quality (i.e. not worth getting into £50k debt for!)

It matters very much. In my graduate jobs I couldn't move for Oxbridge candidates. Theses days it seems to have lessened as I've progressed in my career but I recall at the beginning it really mattered.

Someone with a first or 2.1 in History or English from Oxbridge is going to stand a much better chance at say the big 4 accountancy firms than someone with an actual accounting degree from say Birmingham etc.

If you're going into teaching, any old degree will do.

If you're aiming for a Magic Circle law career then Poppleton ex-Poly will absolutely NOT do.

General rule of thumb - go for the best you can given your grades. If your best is 2 x Ds, university may not be the right route.

I think in medicine it doesnt matter. I see british students with low a levels who have studied medicine in eastern europe and come back here and get jobs the same as uk trained doctors. But i do see the uk doctors look down on those doctors. But hey, they get jobs

'a degree is a degree'

Turn the argument back on her. Is there any other sphere of life where this attitude prevails: a dress is a dress; a house is a house; a car is a car; a job is a job?
Of course not! Normally, there is a difference of quality, value-for-money, fitness for purpose, enjoyment, etc.
If the DC can't engage that bit of analysis to find the best course for them then they are not University material.

I think there is a difference still yes. I know we only recruit from Russel group and above. Once you're in it makes little difference but for many large corporations yes it does make a difference, it's simply a filter due to the large amount of candidates.

I know a few people who have attended ex polys that were low down the leagues and they mostly were not impressed with their courses. Some ended up dropping out.

You will find at some places, they are known for a particular subject/area and that will be really highly regarded but there's no point doing any other course there IYSWIM. You should look at how the uni is rated for the subject you are doing.

I personally think it's a clever ploy to persuade people to part with the tens of thousands of pounds a degree costs these days.

I recruit as part of my role and I would consider it if I had two candidates who were otherwise pretty much the same. In that situation I probably would look more favourably on someone who had a traditional type degree from a prestigious university.

My advice to my dc is that if you are paying the same price for tuition regardless of university standings then you may as well opt for the one that gives you a better understanding of the subject.
If the crap course wants you they should drop the price or you find another option (apprenticeship ) as it may not be value for money.

OP:
Where you do your degree still matters. People who say otherwise are kidding themselves - perhaps because they did not attend a good university themselves? The older the better is a good rule of thumb. (The one I attended is over 500 years old.)

I know we only recruit from Russel group and above.

What's above RG?!

Very much depends on the subject and job. But then I would say that - I work at a non-Russell Group institution! But I ;have an Oxbridge degree and have worked at a range of RG and non-RG unis over the years and honestly I would stack the course here in my discipline up against almost any others in the country (and abroad!). It's better than the offerings by several RG institutions and it's recognised as such but - here's the catch - only by those 'in the know'. I encourage all our students to do the value-added stuff (volunteering, study trips abroad etc.) to stuff their CVs to compete against any recruitment people they might encounter who have the 'RG+ or bust' mindset.

Our office recruitment forms specifically exclude asking where you got your degree - pseudo civil service job.
I queried this and was told it was discriminatory.
I said that is stupid because universities discriminate based on ability and exam results. I was told not to be so silly.
Still fecking stupid, in my view.

Yes the comment re those in the know... My degree was from excellent ex poly... Stacks up against much more prestigious unis... Also reflected in the admission requirements.

Also the academic standards expected to get a 2:1 or above were much tougher than some of the Russell group unis. (much more breadth and depth of reading etc etc).
This fine analyses are lost in more global ratings. If i was recruiting for someone who needed subject knowledge I would choose people from that uni and course

Re favouring Oxbridge candidates for jobs - NB academic excellence and common sense do not go hand in hand.

a degree from somewhere highly academically selective is going to be more rigorous and have higher standards than one from an ex-poly.

Don't all universities have to comply with the QAA which assesses academic standards and ensure they meet agreed expectations?

Don't all universities have to comply with the QAA which assesses academic standards and ensure they meet agreed expectations?

Well yeah that's the theory... In reality do you really think a 2:1 from Cambridge is academically equal to a 2:1 from Anglia Ruskin?

Those who would recruite from RG unis over ex-polies- where does the OU fit?

Personally. I would rate an OU degree higher than most. It shows a person went back to education, presumably in their own time. This shows character and determination. When I was on interview panels, I always rated highly those who had gone back to education.

I tell 6th form to look at the "% employed in the field" column in the uni league table for their subject. It is noticeable that for traditional, academic subjects, the old unis top the tables.

And it does matter for teaching. They might let you do the training, but when I'm looking to employ a teacher, I want someone with good subject knowledge so I will look at your degree title, class and where you got it.