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.

Blaa
In RL no one, well not to Ds's mates anyway.
But reading the full thread as I did his evening before posting at least 3 posters questioned OP nephew doing a English degree at an "ex poly".
There's your problem University of Hull is a redbrick been a university since 1924, it's our local university. People think highly of it around here. But it is 94th in league tables, Ds university which origins are Hull's teacher training college and High College of education, we never got a polytechnic, is now 43th. So Hull's old non university, by moving 57 miles as over taken it's redbrick neighbour and is only 2 places below the lowest RG.
Then people tell not to believe league tables, how do kids like mine know what's best. I know we as parents are bewildered

maisy
I no finance expert, or a someone who understands universities. The last 2 years have been the steepest learning curve in our lifes.
But we have listened to the Government Minister's Sam Gyimah and Jo Johnson and also Martin Lewis about student Debt.
All say you shouldn't treat it as debt, but as a form of graduate tax.
In the end us as taxpayers will pick up any unpaid bills.
I think I would rather see my tax spent on paying of student debts then many of the other things the government spends it on
Better still I'd pay more tax and fund state schools and university for all, but that's pie in the sky or for most English voters to close to communism.

And again... Its just not true to say that someone doing an English degree at a lower ranked university is setting themselves up for a lifetime of low earnings, and even if that means he will earn less than a lawyer or doctor - so what? Plenty of people earn less than that - he will be educated, he will have read widely, hopefully he will have taken full advantage of all the opportunities and clubs that his uni offers (crucial). Perhaps it will buy him time to decide what he really wants to do with his life. Amazingly lots of people don't follow the mumsnet proscribed path of grammar school, straight A*s, top uni, law firm (nervous breakdown). Education is never wasted and I am getting really fed up with people suggesting it's a complete waste of time for some teens.

@user I'm still not 100% sure I understand your question.
It is difficult to know where to look to make an informed decision - in fact there has been huge criticism in relation to this.

My advice , as an ex careers adviser and someone who worked in student recruitment for 12 years, is this;

• league tables. Take with a pinch of salt. There are more than one and each have different metrics. They are useful but need to be looked at in conjunction with other sources of information.

-unistats.com . Really useful as it pulls together a wealth of comparable information allowing you to compare institutions and individual courses.

• university websites/prospectuses. Obviously marketing tools but they are bound by CMA regulations do aren't allowed to lie to you. Really useful to find out course details , information on placements, industry links etc.

-open days. So important. Sounds a bit cheesy but you need to visit to see if you get 'that feeling ' could you study there for 3 years? Could you live there? What's the surrounding area like? Speak to student ambassadors about their experiences.

I stand by statement that no degree is worthless providing the student makes the most of the opportunity. Every university has structures in place that allow students to get involved in a wealth of extra curricular activities. Things that some students may not find it that easy to access on their own. Essentially, it's the same as other aspects of our lives. You get out what you put in.

There were paragraphs there I promise!

@jillcrewe talks sense.

I got a degree in psychology from a low ranking university ( it's actually much better now but it wasn't great back then)
I was first in my family to attend university and chose to stay local. It hasn't held me back in the slightest....
I've had numerous professional roles and I'm now a senior academic at a university. I've achieved a masters, a PhD and numerous professional qualifications.
But according to MN my degree isn't worth the paper isn't written on 🙄

Polytechnics were universities in all but name (and often funding) and most have kept their vocational heritage.

So the poor relations...

And if they have still 'kept their vocational heritage' why not call them polytechnics or technical colleges?

...the idea that we should have kept the previous system is incredibly elitest. Under the old system, university was out of reach for many students simply due to their socioeconomic status.

This is laughable.
You are in effect saying that the term 'university' had more cachet than 'polytechnic' or technical FE in general. What you are implying is that the advent of the 92 Us was an exercise in plastering a new label on institutions that had been underfunded, fooling people who knew no better that they were universities.

It's only 'elitist' if you think the university/polytechnic divide represented a comparison of likes. They were in fact apples and oranges, and if the ex-polys have retained their vocational heritage and universities have retained theirs, they are still apples and oranges.

There is nothing wrong with apples. There is nothing wrong with oranges. They each have their place in the fruit bowl. Technical/vocational education is perfectly fine education and in fact no modern economy can develop without institutions that are turning out the sort of trained grads that technical colleges produce.

Unfortunately, Britain is in such thrall to the class system that 'university' was more desirable as a label and as an experience, and academic graduates more highly esteemed, with technical grads and technical education correspondingly devalued.

There are huge issues with vocational education in this country which needs to be addressed but that should be through a properly funded and resourced apprenticeship system.

Apprenticeships are only feasible in areas where a wide range of employment options is available. This is not the case in wide swathes of the country. A network of technical colleges is far preferable because students can actually make a choice as to what course they pursue regardless of location, and flexible scheduling can allow students to work and study at the same time. Technical colleges are also not dependent on the fortunes of businesses for the fate of their courses, and they can be partners with government in providing courses in areas that dovetail with development policy.

@math the 1992 act paved the way for them to no longer be the poor relations. So many polytechnics that became universities have built themselves up to be excellent higher education institutions.

The HE sector has moved from and elite system to a system that allows people from all backgrounds to access higher education, providing they have the potential to study at university.

You may think this is laughable but I can assure you that for those students who under previous systems may not have had the opportunity to attend university, this is serious business. And often life changing. I'm not sure you understand or appreciate that.

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.
MaisyPops

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.
Blaa

Let's talk about these two statements.

Blaa, you seem to assume that on the one hand graduating from a university will increase your earning potential to a level far above that of someone who does not graduate. Yet you also seem to assume that graduates will not earn above the threshold so debt can be ignored as a factor in planning your life once you graduate.

If graduates are never going to earn over £25k, then in all seriousness why go to university? I realise how utilitarian this sounds, but what is it about three years living in grotty accommodation and studying anthropology that makes it worthwhile, and do the taxpayers owe 18-19-20 year olds that experience?

MaisyPops is absolutely correct that some day all this kicking the debt can down the road will have to stop, and also correct that for those earning above the threshold, interest becomes a big issue. Student debt can become a life-plan limiting issue for many. Can you save for a house when you owe the equivalent of the sticker price of a really nice Audi? Can you plan to have children? Can you consider starting your own business?

But why not continue to call them polytechnics, Blaa?

They could have been properly funded and still called polytechnics. They could be excellent polytechnics, and the concept of excellence could have been enlarged to include technical education.

Perceptions matter, and what the label 'university' did was create a much larger field for the traditional universities to dominate.

"but what is it about three years living in grotty accommodation and studying anthropology that makes it worthwhile, and do the taxpayers owe 18-19-20 year olds that experience?"

I think there is a significant minority of young people who just want to experience university life. I remember feeling a little when DD's boyfriend was more interested in the cost of a pint of beer in the student union bar than the course itself. He is bright enough to get a good degree if he applies himself, but I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up with a "drinkers degree". (A new expression I learned from MN the other day )

I went to Leeds Polytechnic back in the day. I suspect it had a better reputation in 1980 than it does as Leeds Beckett University now.

The HE sector has moved from and elite system to a system that allows people from all backgrounds to access higher education, providing they have the potential to study at university.

Yes, but this transformation isn’t/wasn’t necessarily contingent on relabelling the post-92s as “universities”, that’s the point I think math is making.

The success of the ITs in Ireland, where there’s an equally high rate of school leavers going onto post18 education as in the UK, shows that “higher education” needn’t be solely equated with the label of university.

You may think this is laughable but I can assure you that for those students who under previous systems may not have had the opportunity to attend university, this is serious business. And often life changing. I'm not sure you understand or appreciate that.

What is wrong with students having the opportunity to attend a polytechnic? Would this not have been a great aspiration, something to promote?

I don't think you appreciate the difference the Regional Techs had in Ireland, or their successors, the Institutes of Technology. I don't think you understand the need that they fill, or the life-changing impact they have had and continue to have, despite the fact that they do not carry the label 'university'.

@ math I don't assume. Research and data tells me that. Understanding that data forms a huge part of my job and my research so I know it inside out.

Did you go to university? The student experience itself can be transformative. I run regular student panels where potential students get to quiz current students or recent graduates and while they will talk about their course and the academic side of university what always shines through is the 'student experience' ....meeting new friends from all over the world, living independently, having the opportunity to volunteer, broaden their horizons etc.

Oh and accommodation isn't grotty anymore. It's positively luxurious!

Calling student finance a loan is actually a misnomer. A more accurate description is a graduate tax. If you earn more due to university you pay more back. If you don't then it doesn't get paid back. I know some people don't agree but unless you can find a way of funding HE more effectively ( that doesn't disadvantage lower income families) this is what we have .

Incidentally, it's only not call a graduate tax because of the repayment terms but even student finance England talk about it as though it's a tax.

Not sure that's actually correct but even if it is, 70% of what?

Are you unfamiliar with the word percentage and what it means? I believe it means out of 100....

There may be one exception to the grade boundaries, which is the Open University. Otherwise, all universities operate the following boundaries:
70%+- First
60-69%- 2.1
50-59%- 2.2
40-49%- 3rd
Below 40% -fail

And, no, the ex-polys don't let people graduate if they have in fact failed, and the RG does not require you to get 90%. The people saying this shit and then in the same breath saying they have an RG degree are just showing themselves up.

Also, I know for a fact that Bristol was letting people in on their law degree via clearing this year with BBC. Their official entry requirements are AAA. Now that there is no cap on numbers, the RG unis are going low with their entry standards to attract students. And trust me re grade inflation in the RG. It's just as real there as in the post-92s. It's basically becoming more and more of a free-for-all.

I will advise DD not to bother applying to Oxford then, to study Archeology and Anthropology. Clearly not worth it .

Did you go to university? The student experience itself can be transformative. I run regular student panels where potential students get to quiz current students or recent graduates and while they will talk about their course and the academic side of university what always shines through is the 'student experience' ....meeting new friends from all over the world, living independently, having the opportunity to volunteer, broaden their horizons etc.

All of those things happen at the technical colleges in Ireland, I’m not sure why you think they are the unique preserve of an institution with the title of “university”.

But aspiring to attend a polytechnic wasn't what was happening. People were pushed towards a vocational education because university wasn't for the likes of them. In some areas this attitude still prevails.

I fully agree that vocational education in this country is severely lacking but suggesting we return to a system that has been obsolete for nearly 30 years isn't the answer as it suggests those former polytechnics would be better of reverting back to their previous forms. This is insulting to those that have worked hard to build a reputation as an academically rigourous and research intensive university.

@dr I don't. I think the Irish system works well. Im also very envious of some of the systems you have in place around careers education and guidance.

That wasn't the argument. The argument was why bother attending a university/higher ed at all.

My issue isn't about the Irish system at all. It about people assuming degrees from 'ex-polys' are worthless and we should revert to a system that was changed nearly 30 years ago.

@dr I'm well aware that higher ed doesn't have to be equated with university. That has never been my argument.

As mentioned many, many times my issue is with the snobbery around 'ex-polys' when quite frankly, the majority of people on here don't have a clue about the HE sector outside their own little bubble.

I think the whole idea that unless you are academic you’ve failed needs to stop. There’s a place for everyone and lots of successful people aren’t academic. People find there own way.

^

This. I work with some very clever extremely successful people that do not have a degree. I have also interviewed graduates from good universities that on paper seem amazing but in person lack communication skills, business knowledge, the ability to think for themselves and work under pressure. These are the skills that employers want and they are the ones that get hired regardless of which university they went to.

@lini Leeds Beckett is still recovering from having a vice chancellor that almost bankrupted them!
Still excellent for sports and early years though and always benefits from the 'leeds' effect.

It was rude of OP's friend to pass comment, although I agree that degrees from certain universities clearly carry more weight and are likely to provide a headstart to one's career. I was lucky enough to go to a good university (consistently Top 10, but not RG as no Medical School), and I now work at the same University in Student Experience since having my son, so have a good understanding of the system. Our students are specifically targeted by some of the best employers and biggest companies, as they can be assured of high calibre students due to our tough entry requirements. To my mind, a good placement is what makes graduates stand out from the crowd, and whilst this is possible for students from universities further down in the rankings, it may be harder for them to secure the better roles when in competition with students from Top 10 HE institutions.

My son is only young, but pretty academic, and I will certainly encourage him to aim high and apply for universities higher up in the rankings and we will research each one thoroughly and visit as many as we can. I can't imagine him not going to University, and I think I'd be disappointed if he didn't, as it's such a wonderful experience, but I would want him to study something worthwhile, which will open up career opportunities. It goes without saying that I'd obviously want him to study somewhere where he'll be happy, but it would need to be a sensible choice from an academic perspective.

I think the reality is that, rightly or wrongly, there is undoubtedly snobbery within HE. There are some great courses at former polytechnics (and some utterly ridiculous ones!), but I agree that the marking systems at many seem pretty flimsy, and therefore students obtaining firsts from these institutions are often not as capable as those awarded 2:1s from top universities.

But you’re spending a lot of time defending the post-92 transformation when it has clearly flooded and confused the higher education environment for students, would-be students and parents. For employers as well, I suspect. Couple this with the rampant marketisation over the last 10 years and you end up in this mess that U.K. higher ed is in (I am Irish but work at a UK RG institution, used to work at Oxbridge and my DH works at a post92 so I do have a bit of experience across the sector).

There is another way that isn’t merely turning the clock back 30 years (why do you think this is what is being proposed?) and we all should be looking to find it, rather than just defending the status quo.

Also, many post-92s are not research-intensive across the board - pockets of excellence yes, in particular subject areas - but not in the same way that the older institutions are. That’s not a value judgement. However you seem to equate an institution’s merit as linked to its research reputation.