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.

CripsSandwiches
I think it depends what judgements people are making as to whether it is actuall y snobby or not (in my opinion).
E.g. Do I believe the academic quality of a 1st is the same between course A with AAB entry and course B which asks for DDC at A level? No.
Do I believe that the scientific content of a science agree which doesn't have enough lab hours to be recognised by the relevant body is as robust as one that is? No.
Do I think some courses are ridiculous non-courses at universities who are happy to line their pockets taking money from studnets leaving them £50,000 in debt but are no further forward to getting where they want to be? Yes.

Does that mean I think people who've not gone to a RG university are going to have rubbish careers? Of course not.

I'd love to see high quality investment in a range of pathways with much bigger expansion of technical and vocational education rather than lifting the cap on undergraduate numbers.

Meh. I have a first degree and M-Phil from two of the top 10 universities in the country. 20 years ago my undergraduate degree got me a position that asked that you graduated from Russell Group Uni. Today my sister who left school at 16 earns more than me.

Skarossinkplungerridesagain

It's perfectly possible to think not all degrees are equal without thinking 'anyone who doesn't have a degree from a top university is going to have no hope in life'.

I think sometimes people take an opinion on the academic credentials of courses and somehow conclude that it's a snobby sweeping judgement on any future success of any human being who doesn't have a top degree. It's not. It's an opinion about courses.

SwedishEdith

Yes but even blinded there are a few univeristies that churn out most of the candidates that are successful at the fast stream. Last report I found showed 129 successful candidates from Cambridge, 148 Oxford out of 1245 total places. Unis like Durham 85, LSE 42, Bristol had 33, Warwick 35. Every university is listed and lots had no successful candidates and lots had the odd 1-2.

It shows that there should be norhinf stopping someone determined getting through whatever the institution but more people get through from the elite universities (although more also apply from those institutions too).

MaisyPops

I totally agree I don't think anyone would suggest that a 1st class maths degree form Cambridge is equivalent to a 1st from Scunthorpe Polytechnic (or the name of a university I didn't make up). I do think sometimes young people just trudge off to uni without thinking because they're on the treadmill and can't see a way off.

My point was more that if someone really does want to do their degree, has thought about it and made an informed decision it would be incredibly patronising and snobby of me to deride their choice just because I went to a more prestigious university. I feel like they have every right to their education as me (I chose my degree because I wanted to learn about that subject - the fact that it was highly employable was honestly just luck).

“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.”

Given that medical degrees are conferred by the GMC doesn’t that make where you take a medical degree more of an even playing field? Is a medical degree from Edinburgh significantly better than one from Leicester for example?

Why is there such a difference between universities? Why can’t degrees be marked externally like GCSEs and A levels so that they can be regarded as equal qualifications regardless of where you went to university? Or if this isn’t viable, have them more regulated so that there is not so much variation between the quality of degrees from different institutions.

And, yes, I agree there is more snobbery on MN about RG universities than anywhere else., but I think this is because there is a high proportion of parents on here with good university educations.

Interestingly, if RG universities are so good why don’t they occupy the top 24 places in every league table? Lancaster is not RG yet it is the Times university of the year and in the top 10 of 3 league tables. Bath, University of East Anglia or Surrey aren’t RG, but they are rated higher than Liverpool, Queen Mary, Queen’s and Sheffield. Also, a lot of ex polytechnics are rated higher than RG for vocational courses that are accredited by their governing bodies.

That said I do think that some degrees at some universities seem to be a waste of money, and it seems pointless to go into debt when you aren't even guaranteed a job after graduation.

My younger sister just graduated with a first from Oxford. She's about to do her Master's at the local university (very average reputation) as my parents are unable to financially assist her. Her attitude has really impressed me, I think it's all due to the fact that she is very secure in herself and does not feel the need to seek the approval of others- plus she knows in one year this degree will help her fulfill her childhood ambitions. She just ignores any bullshit comments that come her way.

Of course medical degrees are different!

There is a cohort advantage in that certain universities have their pick and expect and encourage skills that lend themselves to the sorts of assessments that are used for grad recruitment

You talk about these universities as though they are expensive private schools teaching soft skills. They don't teach anything other than academic work.

Although not externally marked I’m pretty sure university marking is externally adjudicated and grade boundaries are supposed to be equivalent.

CripsSandwiches
I agree.

It would be fair to be of the opinion thay Sprouts poly now rebranded as the university of middleware Mordor is a bit of a crap institution and It doesnt come close to the quality of higher ranking places, buy would be totally rude to be dismissive of their choices and belittle their choices.

No. I have strong degrees from decent rg unis which maintain their value.
The standard of a uni makes the difference, i would want my kids to go to the best possible.

Aibu to think this sort of snobbery about unis is terrible and needs to stop
Ok go around saying that Anglia Ruskin is as good as Cambridge and it will surely become true.

Interested that the comparisons being made are not between RG and ex-polys, but are always between RG and "ex-poly in a small town in the middle of nowhere" or "degree in disney studies from ex-poly". The "ex-poly" always has have appended to it a sneering descriptor.

To all the people saying they think ex-polys are shit but they’d be too polite to tell the poor sods (or their parents) going to one that to their face... you realise how extremely patronising that is right?

(although more also apply from those institutions too).

I suspect that's part of the problem. Introduced in 2015 so will be interesting to watch to see if anything changes.

civilservice.blog.gov.uk/2015/11/05/name-blind-recruitment-a-commitment-to-diversity/

I think it's absolutely barking mad to still prat on about "ex-polys" and "Disney studies"

This is exclusively a mumsnet attitude, thank god.

As a borderline member of the ‘snowflake’ generation. I hate to say it’s things like this ‘university snobbery must end’ that’s causing the ‘snowflake generation’ what you’re really saying is ‘everyone should be equal and nobody should be made to feel bad for achieving less’.

University rankings exist for a reason, competition to get onto the best courses is like a race and you can argue until you’re blue in the face that seventh place is as good as first but all you’re doing is refusing to accept the achievement of the person who came first.

I go to a uni that’s distinctly middle ground and don’t consider myself equal to someone who goes to Cambridge.

Your friend shouldn’t have driven it home to you but sounds like she’s just proud of her daughter (who has achieved more highly than your nephew by the sounds of it)

Please don’t take away my generations competitive ability to do better/ worse than each other- it’s not good for us!!!

I've told DH to his face about DSD.
And it isn't solely MN attitude. I've experienced it before MN was even thought of.

I think it's absolutely barking mad to still prat on about "ex-polys" and "Disney studies"
Is It?
I'm personally concerned and annoyed that some teenagers are being encouraged to get in £50,000 of debt for some course that are crap, that don't open doors for them, thay don't qualify them to do anything. I think it's immoral and would happily push for an expansion of technical and vocational education rather than the current system of universities lining their pockets with undergrad tuition fees so they can do a BA in knitting (true course found in the UCAS directory a few years ago).

Someone at my husbands work (he didn’t go to oxbridge) said when they’re sifting cvs they throw away anything that doesn’t have oxford or Cambridge on it.

It’s their loss really.

I go to a uni that’s distinctly middle ground and don’t consider myself equal to someone who goes to Cambridge.

Equal in what? Dignity? Intelligence? Conscientiousness? Ambition?

Also, there is the assumption on here that everyone's DC wants to do law/work for a big city firm in London.

No they don't. I work in Sheffield. We have a lot of graduates, but I know for a fact that my boss doesn't care where new recruits were educated to degree level, as long as thay have the right qulaities and qualifications to do the job.

But entry requirements are also subject to supply and demand, the quality is not necessarily course led.

You talk about these universities as though they are expensive private schools teaching soft skills. They don't teach anything other than academic work.

Well I vividly recall (ancient RG) us all being critiqued, one by one, by a whole room of peers and professor, on our interview technique, handshake, lecturing/public speaking style etc. Some people (mainly men) were criticised for 'over-confidence bordering on arrogance'!

We were also, due to the nature of the course, expected to travel abroad, survive independently, and work alone, outdoors, in a high risk environment for one summer. Lightening strikes, cliff falls, and food shortages are very character building. My bosses have always been impressed at my ability to travel, jump into a difficult situation and survive and I'm pretty sure this soft (!) training had a lot to do with it. Very few courses still insist on this part of the training, but I feel you can tell the difference between those who have been through it, and those who were shepherded and supervised in a massive group.