To think university snobbery must stop

[Staceystace]

I was telling a friend about my nephew who is off to University. I said to her he is off to x uni to study English, she said oh I didn’t even realise that was even a uni. She then went on to emphasise how her daughter is off to a top 20 uni, she went on to say how she wouldn’t have gone if it was not a Russell or 1994 group as she does not think it is worth the debt. I just got the vibe she was looking down on my nephews uni. Aibu to think this sort of snobbery about unis is terrible and needs to stop. My nephew is not the most academic, but surely not everyone is capable of going to a russell group.

Lonicera
Just looked at RG group rankings on the complete university guide, there are 25 RG universities?
There are 7 outside top 25, lowest ranked is 41st and 4 others are in the top 30. Also 10 have dropped places in table, one by 9 places.

I agree with your friend but probably wouldn't have told you so quite as bluntly or boasted about my daughter. I think it's wrong that so many are encouraged to go to poor universities to study non vocational subjects and that degrees are now required for low level entry jobs.
Nursing, banking, accountancy, the police all used to take school leavers and train them on the job, all Tony Blair's fault.

Why shouldn't a CCC student go and study English Lit if they want? Why on earth would anyone look down on someone who did this?

I had 4 As at A level and turned down an Oxford place and a number of what would be considered ‘top’ universities to go to a ‘new’ university whose course was interesting, exciting and innovative. I felt instantly at home when I went to visit so decided I’d go there. A number of my family had previously been to Cambridge and I couldn’t help but think I was looked down on a little.

@math wrong again. Those with a degree of financial literacy will not be put off by student loans as they will understand them to be what they actually are - a graduate tax.

I didn't say the 1992 act would address snobbery what I said was it was one way of starting to address the elitest HE system....two very different things.

You seem to have made some huge sweeping generalisations regarding the quality of post 92 universities.

I think YABU about university courses but YANBU with regards to be upset by your friend.

Your friend was very rude in the way she made her point- it but she does have a point about some courses not being worth the huge student debt. I wouldn't have said it to someone who had just said their DNephew was going to x university though. It's unnecessary to pass an opinion like that- she could have just said well done" or something and kept her thoughts private.

As regards to university snobbery, I think some of it is justified. Some universities aren't as good as others, especially in terms of graduate employment prospects. Some universities are outstanding (even world class) in a particular field, but not great in others. Some courses are absolutely not worth the huge debt and I do worry about some students being mislead into thinking all degrees are equal.

During my first degree, I was doing the same subject as a friend who went to a different university in the same city. I looked at her past papers and couldn't believe the difference in difficulty between the two. A 1st class mark in one would absolutely not have equalled a 1st from the other. Employers do know this and in the real world it can make a difference. There will always be those who are hugely successful not having gone to Oxbridge or an RG university etc and obviously many, many people have perfectly good careers without having gone to one of the top Universities- so I'm not saying they are all bad/disastrous for your career. Studying in and of itself can be rewarding too. Just that students should go into it all with their eyes wide open as to the cost vs benefit of their chosen degree at any given university.

Nobody has said all degrees are equal....what has been said is that no degree is worthless. Providing the student makes the most of their time.

Also , knowing there are differences in quality is not snobbery. Its common sense. Looking down on people for attending an 'ex-poly' is.

Blaa
I agree with your 21:10 post
We know Ds's university can't complete with Oxford or Cambridge nor St Andrews or Durham. But of all the universities offering his tariff points it was highest ranked, had Gold standard, and was highest ranked for his degree.
He has chosen his degree, because he wants to join the Police, will need degree by 2020, but his degree also allows career paths into the prison service, security services, youth and adult offenders and crime policy areas. Yes he has CCCD, but he loves his course, did A level in 1 year.
3 of his classmates all with A* and A's are off to study degrees at RG, but don't have a clue what career they are aiming for. they say "well I could do law or finance or become a teacher?"
Surely that's worse then kids choosing lower ranked universities and degrees which they have researched and know will lead them to a career they want to do?
That's only my opinion, I don't have a degree so should properly shut up.
Maths Thank you honestly never heard of adjustment.

How can any sort of snobbery be justified? We know that universities have different levels of prestige; that's why they have different entry requirements. If someone really wants to do a course, has the appropriate grades and accepts the cost implications, they have the right to go and experience all that university life has to offer. It's the one big time in life you get to really immerse yourself in a subject.
Of course people should be well informed about their choices, but that's not a justification for sneering (as OP's friend seems to have done) at some young people, dressing it up as concern about employment prospects when it's actually bitchy competitiveness.

@user I don't think it's necessarily and thing that your son's friends don't have a clear career ideas at 18. Not many do at that age ( in fact many are being pressured into choosing a career path purely to inform degree choice - but that's a whole other thread!!)
I had no idea what I wanted to do at 18 so chose a traditional degree subject as that would keep my options open. Ended up becoming a careers adviser...

Many graduate positions don't specify a subject and some careers require PG study anyway so choosing a traditional subject because you enjoy it is often an excellent decision.

*necessarily a bad thing

Sorry, I bet I incredibly late in the day, but 'Could you name one RG university where PhD students are allowed to do any teaching outside small-group tutorial work? I'm calling bullshit.'

@KeneftYakimoski, how about those shite universities of Oxford and Cambridge?

Ok, now I have read skimmed the thread. IMO the problem is that snobbery is misdirected. People have very little idea of how universities run, or should run. The PhD candidates I know who lectured in English before/ instead of getting their doctorates were excellent. They had gone through a lot to get to where they were. In some cases, they were better than the established lecturers, because they were able to work on their own special subjects - and the whole point of a PhD is to make you an expert in a certain area. The claim that PhD students are inferior teachers is unfair. And, having taught at Cambridge and studied at Oxford (and taught at York pre-PhD, during the period York topped the tables for English), I do have some idea what I'm talking about!

I agree the OP's friend was rude but accurate.

I think if your DCs are academic and would do well at university, then don't settle for anything other than a reputable university. If they're not though, I would try and think outside the box.

In my city there is a large area of million pound plus homes, and it's a well known fact that the majority of people living in them didn't go near a university and are mostly self-made.

For example, market traders who went on to have a chain of stores; builders who ended up with large development companies; surprisingly loads of hairdressers with more than one salon; plumbers who ended up running big firms and a lot of car dealers, to name a few.

A friend of mine is deputy head at a secondary school and she said she sees so many students who she would love to persuade to follow a path other than university, but the system doesn't allow her to do so.

Blaa
You are correct of course, but many on here would say if studying History at a post 1992 or English Literature at an lower ranked university (that's what Ds's friends are doing) isn't worth the debt
Honest question why is it okay to do that at those RG universities, but pointless for his friends doing history at Huddersfield and English Literature at Hull and Bangor?
Or are we back to snobbery.

I should add to my previous post that using clever tax loop holes is a major factor too!

Xenia
In Ds second tier university, his degree has 8 hours contact, 4 hours lectures and 4 hour seminars/group work. But they where told on offer's day and in all the joining instructions, that they are required to do at least 2, preferably 3 hours of own study/research for each contact hour.
No spoonfeeding, also library and study room usage is monitored, plus how they use the resources required for the degree.
I guessing it must be very different at RG, if these lower universities are hand holding students like Ds.

user all degrees are not created equal, the quality of teaching, access to research, the challenge you get from your peers in seminars, the size of teaching groups all vary. This isn't snobbery. I don't know anything about the examples you have given but courses are ranked for a reason.

@kaybush your anecdotal story isn't representative of the country as a whole. It's actually a well known fact ( backed up with data ) that going to university increases your earning potential, means you are less likely to be unemployed and more likely to progress up the career ladder quicker and often further ( non- graduates often just a career ceiling)

Yes there are successful people without degrees but they aren't as common as you describe.

Thinking outside the box.....in what respect? How many of your 'self made millionaires' truly came from nothing?

Of course university isn't for everyone but it's a good option for a large number of people.

@user to be fair not many people on here know much about the HE sector or the graduate labour market.

Who said it was pointless to do history at Huddersfield or English at Bangor? I don't understand your question.

I know someone who is doing an education degree through a college who is hoping to go on to do a PGCE. She struggles with basic spelling (no learning difficulties or SEN) and has very low grades from school and college (Cs and Ds at GCSE, Es at A Level.) This degree will not get her where she wants to be, it is giving her false hope. I personally would not want someone teaching my child who can't spell simple words.

A lot of the universities down the league table are doing a good job though, I know someone who studied at Huddersfield and now has a great job in the area that they studied.

I personally would never say anything to anyone about their choice of university, even in the case I mentioned above I haven't said anything, other people can make their own decisions.

redcarbluecar
Well said.
Although my initial question is that arouns £50,000 is a hell of a lot of money for the 'university experience'.

And part of me thinks it's a financial time bomb waiting to happen. What's going to happen when all these students have gone to university only to never earn above the threshold to pay it back/barely enough to pay it back? It's all supposed to get written off. Then what?

One of my younger colleagues came through the new £9000 system. They've just finished their newly qualified teacher year so earning just above the threshold to pay. Their loan balance is growing significantly in interest more than they paid off last year. What's 3 x £9,000 fees plus another £12/15,000 in maintenance quickly starts growing out the other end.

It really irritates me hearing people say 'just go to uni if you want to. Don't worry about the debt. It'll get written off anyway. It's really irresponsible to encourage funding a 3 year lifestyle choice on the grounds of the debt isn't your problem and you'll probably never have to pay it off. With the cap lifted on undergraduate numbers it would seem undergraduate studnet loans are a cash cow being milked and at some point there will be a collapse or crisis.

I'm with those that think, while she was rude to express it the way she did, this isn't snobbery but realism. Our current system means some degrees will be not be worthwhile from a financial perspective. The institution is one part of it and the subject another. If you and your son haven't considered this you might want to take a few days to really consider what his choice means for his future. If he has a realistic career path or if you are really well off and can provide for his Dottie, a full time English degree from a Uni with no particular reputation isn't much of a problem. But in most other situations it's probably setting him up for a lifetime of lower earnings that will likely have a negative impact on his life. That's not something to bury your head in the sand about pretending other people's concern is snobbery.

future not Dottie!

When everyone says not all universities are equal that's tru, but in some cases it's a blessing as employers know that some courses have eg more practical work and therefore provide more skilled employees. Some of the larger unis are more theoretical. Plus it's down to the particular student. A person who flunks out of a top uni isn't going to beat someone who excelled in a college/uni that isn't on the list of prestigious colleges.