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.

There are a lot of really rubbish unis out there praying on young people who are desperate to get a degree. The fact of the matter is that a lot of degrees from britizh universities have little to no value. That isn't to say that a university has to be a russel group to be good. Your DNs university may have an excellent English department and many russel group universities are only carried by one of two faculties. But you do have to be careful when choosing a degree.

True racecar
There’s one near me that lets students I’m with the equivalent of a D at A level.
To my mind that’s not right: those are not university calibre students and should be doing something else.

A lot of people replying seem to think OP said all universities are equal in reputation and standing, which she never did. I can't imagine anyone who went to an RG university having such difficulty reading a simple paragraph.

Then show us the evidence...

DH only had PhD students for small tutorial groups.

I didn’t even know what a Russell Group uni was before I’d graduated and worked for a few years. I’m from a working class background, my parents we’re clueless.

I don’t see the point in an English degree from a less respected uni, the debt is eye watering and graduate employment prospects rubbish, even for Russell Group grads. I don’t need my degree for my career but it has helped because of the status of the university. I’d advise my kids the same. These universities are great for vocational courses and my sister is doing well in her field after attending one.

This is why my husband's colleague who went to Cambridge couldn't fathom that my husband was better than him at solving problems. They had an obvious rivalry (my husband is a proud man), then one day (when drunk) the guy admitted he didn't expect that someone who had gone to such a lowly uni would have knowledge enough to challenge (and surpass) him in their area of expertise. They are good friends now. But of course, because he went to Cambridge he gets all the job offers. He's really helped my husband to further his own career, since he keeps my husband well- connected .

My husband could never have gone to Oxbridge, he isn't 'academic' enough to get 9 straight A's but is a brilliant problem solver. Nevermind the fact he lived in a different country until he was 15 and started his journey in a below bog standard city college.

A degree is not the end of the story, don't ignore the person or story behind it. A person with a degree from Oxbridge might not always present themselves better at an interview than others. Many people I know who do work for these big companies look for experience more than anything, and its more important for a person have confidence and know what they're talking about. My husband's break came from bagging a degree that had a year's work experience. He smashed that opportunity, was given the best reference his tutor had ever seen, and then got a job with a highly respected, international organisation. Where he had the audacity to work at the same level as that dude. The OP isn't being unreasonable, I've seen people who had degrees from low ranking universities do better than most.

I did Engineering at a Russell group - some of the lecturers were so shit at teaching that they cheated - everyone knew, there was no secret - exams were held at the library, results were falsified and grade boundaries were on the floor. Quality and red brick do not go hand on hand.

Pearl

DH is a senior lecturer at an RG university and they definitely do the teaching! Postgrads occasionally do marking and run labs for first years but remember that they are years ahead of them

A degree from a Russel Group university is worth far more than one from the ex-poly-of-small-town-in-the-middle-of-nowhere.

She was rude, though.

Russell

Of course some students aren't able to get into the better universities. However, if the alternative is to go to a much less good university I would argue that those students might be better off not going to university at all, and doing some sort of vocational training instead. Why get into all of that debt for nothing?

I find MN full of uni snobbery. I went to a poly. Got a first and onto one of the top 10 grad schemes in the country, average of 150 applicants per role for it. Plenty of intelligent people choose not to go to top unis, I don't think it's a decent guide as to what an individual is like at all.

20 years ago the teaching at my 2 RG universities was by academics (usually professors, often famous not just in their fields but also beyond that), very often we were learning of the very latest cutting edge research. PhD students were teaching assistants in the labs, but didn't lecture.

However even within the RG universities there were differences - at my second (post grad) we were taught by lecturers reading from the books that my previous university's professors had written and lectured to us directly. Really annoying as I could have just read them myself (and in many cases already had) and saved a ton of money and time. I was also slightly shocked in my first professional job to find the difference in quality and thoroughness of technical training, from supposedly the same course, from different universities. Some courses were really technical, thorough, theoretical, and others were a sort of dip into different subjects without ever mastering them, and with the most difficult (read mathematical) parts of the discipline not having being taught at all.

I currently mentor high potential students from under-priviledged backgrounds. We look at courses on a course by course basis, making sure we don't just push them towards the RG. In some specialist areas you will find that a course from a specific old poly has higher status with employers in that field. However, for students in more traditional science and engineering fields, or those who are likely to end up at PwC, E&Y etc, we tend to encourage them towards RG because, whether you agree with it or not, a good degree from an RG is considered as a shorthand for quality by some employers, and many people recruit people like them, i.e. people from RG universities, and so the cycle continues. The students I'm mentoring aren't naturally going to have the connections and presentation skills to easily access top jobs, and they are fighting a lot of disadvantages, therefore in many cases an RG university will be a short-cut to social advancement.

However, she was very rude, and it's far more nuanced than she is presenting it. Unfortunately I do think some lower ranking universities have some not great courses, and I am not convinced that these are worth the tuition fees. I think it's unfortunate that less than academic children are pushed towards university-any university, when they might be better doing apprenticeships or technical college courses and coming out with well paid jobs and lower debt.

People relate the RG/league table status to how good a university is, I am guilty as charged. However the difference between me and your SIL is that I keep my mouth shut and just say that they've done well/got good grades/hope it works well for them or whatever.

There is a difference between, say, PPE at Oxbridge and Electronic Music at Anglia Ruskin but people need to recognise that it's horses for courses - I'd fail miserable at electronic music.

The people who teach at RG universities are pathway 1 lecturers who are engaged in the research of the subjects they teach and are at the top of their field. Pathway 3 lecturers can spend more time with their students because they are teaching other people’s work!

Isn’t no snobbery just another wonder for discernment? I wouldn’t buy a pair of walking boots from primark unless I couldn’t afford better. They won’t stand up to the use I need from them. I’ll start my hike but may not get so far up the mountain unless I’m lucky or use other techniques to help me. However primark are great for other things and do it better than the more expensive shops - fleece lined leggings, which will help with the climb.

Although it is partly just a short cut way of judging candidates. Some English courses may be well respected within the field but the graduate recruiter at a big company isn’t going to know that.

My husband and a number of his university friends taught as new post docs, at Oxbridge. The elbow patched dons were certainly not to be found in morning tutorials.

There are always going to be people who are late developers/more practical/did terribly at school and exams, and it's right that there should be opportunities for these people to progress. The HNC, HND, then university path is one way and open learning is another. In yet another, my friend's husband has a postgraduate qualification without a degree because his apprenticeship, work courses and experience brought him to the same level as a graduate in software engineering and was accepted as such.

I don't agree that an RG uni is better than any other uni. I think that really you have to look at each uni individually and go to the one that is strong in the subject you want to do.

For example, if you want to do computer gaming, the only uni in the UK that you should be looking at is abertay uni. And yet that uni has only been a uni since 1994. Does its youth make it bad? No, it's the best in Europe actually for computer games design. And if you go anywhere else, you won't be favoured over an Abertay student. Same as say medicine, great place to go is Edinburgh. You could go to Aberdeen uni as well, but it's not as good as Edinburgh.

Just two examples. I go by if it has a good reputation for the subject, do they conduct a lot of research that is relevant and has a use in society, do they have a large amount of success in getting people into jobs for that subject etc. If I wanted to study law, I probably would choose Oxford or Cambridge.

I just wanted to add that you should be (and I have no doubt that you are) very proud of your DS. Ignore the friend, please. It really has no bearing on anything. You could go to a RG and obtain a 2:2, if someone from an ex poly is sitting facing you having obtained a first they are more likely to get the job.

English is a great choice too, I’m sure he will enjoy it .

I had a lot of this as my husband and I went to an ex poly. He was offered a graduate job before his degree was confirmed. I wasn’t so lucky but worked my way up and got there in the end.

It’s not just about job prospects, either - we had a great 3 years.

2 of my friends have Oxbridge degrees and PhDs and and are struggling to get jobs.

Not everyone can be a high flyer! YANBU

MsJudgemental
My teaching is directly informed by my own research, and by my own publications. This is typical in my subject, at my institution. I think you need to revisit your assumptions.

It's snobbish and wrong.

And I think ex polys will become more and more popular and well respected as research isn't relevant for the majority of undergraduates.

There is a difference between, say, PPE at Oxbridge and Electronic Music at Anglia Ruskin

No shit Sherlock. I doubt either graduates would be applying for jobs in the others field.

Surely there's room for both? And both are good fits for different people. Tbh I'd rather sit next to the electronic music grad at a dinner party

There's a snobbery in the workplace though. A 2:2 in Disney Studies from the University of South Chorley isn't going to carry as much weight. Not that many degrees do if there's no experience, direction or vocation.
It's a shame we place so much emphasis on it. Getting into a ton of debt for not a lot of recognition.

I do think people who blart on about 'ex-polys' still, really do need to move on. They have been universities for over 25 years now. It was a tad silly snobbiness to go on about iy in the 2000s, now it just seems daft.

I don't know how I missed all the Russell Group harping on when I was in university. It seems to be hot topic in the last few years. Close to obsessive on these boards, so much so I looked it up and was suprised to see it started in the 90s. Obvious it may well be my circumstances (age of my children and their education), but I just do not recall the term when I was in my university epoch. It was all 'red brick' and 'ex-poly' snobbery then.

Universities are different. Different ones are better for different things. There's a few that rank high overall, where just attending stands out as impressive.

A 2:2 in Disney Studies from the University of South Chorley this type of stupid bollocks annoys me.

Actually when you are in the workplace, a boring nerd with a First from a RG university can often sink without trace.