Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think you don’t go to University just for the University experience

311 replies

CovidSmart · 14/05/2021 15:38

Many many discussions in our house on university atm.

Two dcs who are convinced (I imagine from what school is telling them) that what is important is to find the Uni where you will get the best experience. Somehow the rest doesn’t seem to matter as

  • companies will train you
  • you can do whatever you want after that as long as you have a degree/master.

I see university as a way to learn about a subject so you can work after so the subject is important (eg important to learn economic if you want to work in business related fields, engineering to be an engineer etc..).

Both dcs are so adamant I’m wrong that I’m starting to question myself. Not having the experience of the British system doesn’t help (went to uni and started to work in a different country).

Any experience?

OP posts:
Dustyhedge · 15/05/2021 10:29

Of my cohort (arts degree) we have journalists, senior civil servants, magic circle lawyers, management consultants, policy makers in charities, pr/events people, teachers and a few dossers who haven’t done a lot.

As others have said, the key is for them to get to as high ranking university as possible and then throw themselves into things like volunteering, societies, work experience to have as much to talk about at interviews. I’ve done a lot of grad recruitment and I just don’t look at people who only have the degree.

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing · 15/05/2021 10:32

I kind of agree with your kids, and think the opposing view is a bit joyless!

OccaChocca · 15/05/2021 10:45

@GOODCAT

I don't get the idea of going purely for the experience. They are at a stage of their life where they need the training to get a career.

In my experience a greater proportion of those who do a non-vocational degree end up without the skills needed to get started in the world of work and struggle more than their peers who went into apprenticeships or onto vocational degree courses.

I did a vocational degree and work in that field, my sister is a scientist and she did a degree followed by a masters to get the knowledge she needed for her career my other sister did a more general degree and never got established in a career so has worked in various unskilled roles. The two of us who did vocational courses earn a lot more than my sister who did not and enjoy our work more.

That said my sister did marry someone more wealthy so is actually better off financially than me or my sister who earn more than her but chose less wealthy husbands.

This is my experience. My first degree was design. When I left I did a couple of unpaid internships for a week or so but couldn't afford to commit for longer than that as I had already left home. I turned down a couple of jobs early on because they weren't really what I wanted to do and I struggled to find the right opportunity. I ended up going down another career route and although I did okay it was never a glittering career.

I've worked in various environments and have seen quite a few graduates in the same position. A degree doesn't necessarily guarantee an amazing career. My daughter is doing an apprenticeship and I suspect she will do far better than her brother who has a degree.

TheLastLotus · 15/05/2021 10:55

@JeanClaudeVanDammit the content of those degrees vary depending on the institutions. Accounting and Finance at higher ranking unis involve a variety of modules (such as economics, regulatory history, politics) etc. At lower ranking unis modules are more practical. However those with placement schemes have a high rate of employment. Ex-polys are also especially good for vocational courses as they have strong employer links.

For academic subjects (such as History) the standard of academic debate and discussion in ex-poly's is noticeably lower. However even then the vast majority of jobs don't require academic ability. A student with an ex-poly and decent extracurricular/work experience will do ok. provided they do their research.

Knowledge is unlimited... I work with lots of apprentices whose degrees are paid for by the company (the uni is an ex-poly). Their depth of understanding and ability to grapple with nuances puts half the people on the grad scheme to shame.

tensmum1964 · 15/05/2021 11:03

@CovidSmart

One of dcs wants to study history. I have no issue with that tbh. But I’m worried. They know they will never be a teacher. There are so many students doing a degree to end up with a MW job because what they learnt isn’t valued by companies. What company will need someone who knows it all about Henry VIII?

My background is engineering (so is dh) so the idea that they will end up with £40k debt for studying a subject just for the sake of it doesn’t sit well.
However, as someone pointed out, engineering is vocational so probably different.

All the rest (becoming independant, meeting new people) will happen regardless of the subject.

History is one of the hardest degrees that you can do. The level of intellect and study needed to get a good degree is very high. The skills needed are very transferable. Lots of people in top jobs have a History degree and are often very sought after. I wouldn't discount History, I would encourage it.
ChristmasFluff · 15/05/2021 11:04

My son is doing history, because he doesn't know what he wants to do in future, and history is his passion. As others have pointed out, so loong as it is at a respected university, it can open soa many doors. He may well go into politics or diplomacy, but plenty of other fields are open to him:
www.prospects.ac.uk/careers-advice/what-can-i-do-with-my-degree/history

Justbeenjabbed · 15/05/2021 11:07

I haven’t read the full thread OP, but I’ve read your posts, and I think maybe what you might be missing is the rather intangible but ever present elitism in the UK that underpins a lot of our systems, the choices we make, and where we get to in life.

The system in the country you’re from sounds like it’s based on merit. You work hard and do well = qualifications & experience = good job.

It’s not like that here in the UK - we like to pretend it is, and it sort of it to a limited to extend, but the truth is that there are many many other factors at play.

When you start reading about universities, you will hear people talk about ‘prestige’ and be keen to get into the most prestigious universities. That’s your Oxbridge, your Durham, St Andrews etc. These universities are very good, but the prestige isn’t ONLY because they are very good. It’s because they are traditionally upper class universities. They are ancient, have influential alumni, attract lots of funding, international reputation, so they attract the brightest and the best, are very competitive to get into, consequently produce world leading academics - etc. It’s self perpetuating. So it’s good to go to Oxbridge, but not because of the teaching per se. You will get equally good teaching (if not better) in many other universities (look for the Teaching ratings) but what’s different about oxbridge and ‘prestigious’ universities is that you are being taught by, and alongside, people with influence. People with reputation, or talent, or networks, or money, and meny combination thereof.

So, when you graduate from a prestigious university with a 2:2 you won’t necessarily be better at Physics than somebody who got a 1st from an ex-polytechnic, but you will have a million more opportunities because of the people you know, networks that are open to you, and because of the respected name of that university on your CV.

So, prestigious universities are important if you want to be successful and influential in the corporate world, in law, in politics, in business. For careers that carry power, influence, and money ... get yourself into a “prestigious” (old) university. To find them, look at the proportion of private school pupils who go there, and at their famous alumni.

You will also read about Russell Group universities. These pride themselves on the quality of their research. They carry less “prestige” (in social terms) than the likes of Oxbridge, but they are very respectable universities and employers who care about the academic rigour of their new recruits will like to see a Russell Group university. If you want to have a career in academia or science, technology or medicine, then Russell Group universities are a good choice. They have high entry requirements so you need to work hard to get in. Because of their focus on research, Russell group universities tend to be well funded and have good facilities. They will have extensive libraries and staff who are passionate about their subjects. Sometimes the teaching suffers a little (I am generalising here of course) because of the focus on staff’s own research output, so look for a good teaching rating for your chosen subject in a Russell Group university.

Then there’s the ‘other’ universities. Many are truly excellent, some are awful. In my opinion, this is where it’s most important to pay attention to things like staff:student ratio etc, and visit to get a feel for the university.
Goingn to a university that is neither prestigious or Russell Group will put you at a disadvantage if you want to become a partner in a Magic Circle firm or the next Prime Minister. But if you want to become a solicitor, a teacher, a dentist, an engineer, an accountant, these careers are still open to you if you have good grades.
In my humble opinion, there is a lot to be said for going to a non-Russell Group university in a city you love, where you can do the hobbies you enjoy and meet “your” people. You will get good quality teaching (check the standards) by lecturers who are prioritising your education, not their own research output. You are less likely to feel the pressure of working alongside / competing with the student who got 15 A*/9s at A Level, or be too afraid of asking ‘stupid questions’ to the professor whonis the buggest name in the business. With a 1st or 2:1 at any university you can go on to further study or a professional career and lead a very happy and successful life as a fully rounded person who also enjoyed their university experience. A school I know has two teachers in Year 1. One went to St Andrews, one went to literally the worst university in the local area. They were employed based on how well they taught a lesson at interview. They are both excellent teachers and both are paid the same salary. Sometimes it just doesn’t matter.

As for the subject =/= job thing... basically, you can do a further degree (often a Masters, sometimes a diploma, sometimes other qualifications) to ‘convert’ to another discipline if you have a particular profession in mind. Law, medicine, journalism, psychology... probably loads of others... you can’t go straight in with a History degree, but with an additional top up course/degree, you can still qualify as a lawyer (for example). So very few careers are closed off to you, as long as tou don’t mind firther study.
On the other hand, if your heart is set on being a botanist (or a historian) it makes sense to do the subject and see what opportunities open up for you. It’s wonderful to do what you love for a job.

Anyway this monster post has gone on long enough, I hope it wasn’t too boring /patronising and that it was useful.

TheLastLotus · 15/05/2021 11:46

@tensmum1964 actually humanities' subjects such as history are very hard to get a first in but easy to get a 2:1. As long as you know enough points from the material and make arguments for both sides you'll get a 2:1.
By contrast in a STEM subject you either know it or you don't. And the 2:2/failure rate is a lot higher.
I did both - as my degree allowed me a variety of optional modules. So I can see both sides.

If someone is inclined towards a humanities degree there's no point in forcing them into full STEM - they'll just hate it and might not be very good at it.
However if they're strong academically across the board and don't care then STEM would make it EASIER to find a job. As there are more jobs which require STEM only with high salaries compared to the other way around.
Also you can move to humanities from STEM, but not the other way around.

Interestingly - The woman who cloned the HIV gene, Flossie Wong-Staal, was advised by her teachers to go into science. She initially wanted to do English literature as that was her best subject.

Having been convinced almost all of my school life that I wanted to do humanities (with literature as my best subject) I am now more inclined towards STEM and work in a STEM field. Luckily I cheated and did a degree with elements of both (:p) so have a bit less to catch up on, but still have a long way to go compared to my peers who did mathematical subjects from the start. STEM fields like Biology IMO are not that much different to the humanities, depending on the modules though.

CovidSmart · 15/05/2021 11:50

@Justbeenjabbed thank you. That was really helpful.

I can see where you are coming from re Oxbridge and the Russel universities. My heart is sinking a bit at that.

The country I’m coming from is elitist but it’s elitist through the training you did/the uni you went to. So yes on paper, if you work hard, you’ll also have the work that goes with it. The issue is the lack of fexibility that follows.

I’m also realising that all training considered worthwhile is somehow vocational there. And all the things like learning to put an a argument Together, learning to think etc... is taken for granted at that level. So it hasn’t been part of my list of what you learn at Uni because that’s what I expect to see regardless of the course (same with learning to. Be independent etc.....)

Lots to think about there.

OP posts:
CovidSmart · 15/05/2021 11:53

@Dustyhedge

Of my cohort (arts degree) we have journalists, senior civil servants, magic circle lawyers, management consultants, policy makers in charities, pr/events people, teachers and a few dossers who haven’t done a lot.

As others have said, the key is for them to get to as high ranking university as possible and then throw themselves into things like volunteering, societies, work experience to have as much to talk about at interviews. I’ve done a lot of grad recruitment and I just don’t look at people who only have the degree.

That’s really helpful. Thanks
OP posts:
MishMashMummy · 15/05/2021 12:04

I think you need to step away from the idea that there is one ‘right’ university for your children. They would probably be able to find success and happiness at several different universities. There is no right or wrong way to do university, only a subjective decision for the student to make about their own priorities and preferences.

You don’t really need to work out which ‘culture’ is the best fit for your children. Let them work that out for themselves. If they like the city in which the university is located, that’s a great start. Let them guide you on what uni is right for them.

Pongo101 · 15/05/2021 12:14

I was lucky that I had a very clear idea of what I wanted to study and found several universities that offered the very specific course I was looking for.
Of those unis, one was a very high ranking university. I am from a working class town and when I went to look around I turned round and told my mum "I just don't fit in here". Lots of people encouraged me to put the uni as my first choice - I had an offer if I could achieve the grades (which I did).
But I chose the university where I felt I could live and where I thought I would make friends. I was really happy there and it contributed to the whole experience where I could thrive because I was happy and I felt like i belonged. I've got a job doing what I always wanted to do - even better than I could have imagined.
So I would say narrow down options to 3-4 based on what the course has to offer. Then choose the winner from that list based on the desired lifestyle and experience.
No point going to an amazing uni with the perfect course if you want to quit in the first year due to lack of friends/fun/social life and just an overall feeling of being isolated and overwhelmed.

CovidSmart · 15/05/2021 12:17

I just wanted to make something clear as I think some posters have seen me as overbearing and interfering.

I really don’t care about the subject either dc will do.
For a long time, it looked like dc1 was going down the STEM route. They have changed their mind. I’m happy for them to go down that route if that’s what is working for them.
What I want is for them to be able to live the life they want and not be restricted.
Eg they have a hobby that could take competiting all over Europe and they will need enough disposible cash to do that.
Or whatever they decide to do.

My worry is if they go down a route that closes doors for them. Which tbf won’t be the case with history (feeling much better about that :))

OP posts:
therearenogoodusernamesleft · 15/05/2021 12:23

@Justbeenjabbed has it exactly right, exactly.

When I recruit, I look out for one of the top universities as a distinguished. Thereafter, it's all a much of a muchness to me and I tend to focus far more on their work history and cover letter.

I think @Justbeenjabbed should write a book about English society Grin

DelBocaVista · 15/05/2021 12:25

When I recruit, I look out for one of the top universities as a distinguished.

And we wonder why we have a social mobility issue in this country!
This make me very sad . You're potentially missing out on excellent candidates with this view.

Dustyhedge · 15/05/2021 12:25

CovidSmart I do think the grad job market perpetuates a degree of elitism with lots of unwritten rules. I suspect most career services in schools aren’t preparing their pupils for the fact a degree isn’t likely to be enough. I was speaking to one of the career advisors at LSE a few years ago and he said how he had some first years in tears who hasn’t managed to get an internship. There are plenty of people who know how to play the game so the students who get to year 3/4 and then start to think about jobs are at a massive disadvantage compared to the ones who have been focused from the start.

Rosebel · 15/05/2021 12:30

I work in retail and several of my colleagues have degrees but can't get a better paid job because the degree isn't useful.
Don't really see the point of going to university unless you need to eg teaching, nursing.

therearenogoodusernamesleft · 15/05/2021 12:30

^as a point of distinction, even!

therearenogoodusernamesleft · 15/05/2021 12:34

@DelBocaVista they all have to meet the relevant criteria, but you always look for things that set candidates apart. And ideally this would be exceptional experience, but I think it would be insincere to say an Oxbridge candidate doesn't carry some weight. And presumably, that's why it's so difficult to get into Oxbridge!

NB I did not go to Oxbridge and nor did any of my team. I think only half of them have degrees Grin

Dustyhedge · 15/05/2021 12:39

What I would say though is that when I was recruiting grads I saw an increasing number of masters students and the generally did better an interview than those with just undergrad. Largely because their dissertations often gave them quite weighty examples to talk about for any questions linked to weighing up evidence or critical thinking. And often just being a year older they’d matured a bit. It wasn’t a requirement to have a masters but meant the bar ended up being that bit harder for those without.

DelBocaVista · 15/05/2021 12:41

[quote therearenogoodusernamesleft]@DelBocaVista they all have to meet the relevant criteria, but you always look for things that set candidates apart. And ideally this would be exceptional experience, but I think it would be insincere to say an Oxbridge candidate doesn't carry some weight. And presumably, that's why it's so difficult to get into Oxbridge!

NB I did not go to Oxbridge and nor did any of my team. I think only half of them have degrees Grin [/quote]
First generation students, those from low socioeconomic backgrounds and state school students are significantly underrepresented at elite universities and specifically Oxbridge.

This isn't because they aren't bright enough to get in. There are huge structural barriers at play.

If you are filtering applicants based on university attended then I'm afraid you are just perpetuating the issue and are part of the problem.

lljkk · 15/05/2021 12:46

imho, both OP and her DC are right.
The best way to choose Uni & Uni course (or another path into work world) depends on individuals, there is not a right answer for all.

You are coming across as very ambitious, OP, and that's why (it seems) you are so concerned about the 'right way' to choose university. I'm more like your kids now; I still haven't decided what I'm going to do when I grow up. I do know for sure that life is for living in the meantime.

Justbeenjabbed · 15/05/2021 12:46

Wow thank you @therearenogoodusernamesleft your compliment has made my day Smile 💛

Flowers500 · 15/05/2021 13:09

It’s completely unfair to act like filtering by university is not the standard practice in recruitment. Standards in universities are very different, someone with a high 2:1 from Oxford is a completely different league to someone with a high 2:1 from an ex-poly. Getting into a really good uni is the next thing you can do to set yourself up for career success. There are maybe 8-10 unis in the UK that will open doors fairly automatically. Yes you still need great grades and to be a go-getter, with a good attitude. But it’s hard not to succeed with a good degree from Oxbridge/UCL/LSE/Imperial/Edinburgh etc.

And yea that is massively reflected in recruiting. Uni name is used as a shorthand for academic standards. Unless there is extenuating circumstances you wouldn’t expect to see someone who is Oxbridge material at (I don’t want to name a place). If it does happen then they’ll get a strong 1st and do a master’s somewhere else to prove their first uni was a fluke.

The narrative that uni name doesn’t matter hurts candidates a lot. If you want for example to be a City lawyer, History at one of the top unis means you’ll be interviewed if your application is good. While law at an ex-poly is unlikely to get you an interview, ans their entrance requirements might not be as high as the law firm’s A level requirements.

Flowers500 · 15/05/2021 13:12

Lots of students from underprivileged backgrounds see “law” at a third rate uni and think this will mean they’re in the door for a glittering life as a solicitor. They’d be much better off trying to get into most other subjects at a better uni. It’s heartbreaking to see them pursue the career for 4 years at uni, and be immediately passed over by someone with a general humanities degree from somewhere better. It’s bad career advice that they are getting.