To be upset about ‘university blind’ recruitment

[Newname576]

DS has overcome so many challenges and has an unconditional offer from Cambridge after achieving 4 A star last year. He has worked so hard and we are so proud of him! But I was upset to learn that so many companies are recruiting “university blind”now - what the hell is the point of going to a top Uni if no one will know about it! My younger child says she will apply to Manchester Met and have a ball even though she too is predicted stellar grades as there is no point going to a top Uni

AIBU to be sad that companies are recruiting blind?

p.s. I don't mean just internships, but actual work. A PT job, or at least something that shows work related skills like volunteering or student societies.

I do have some concern around the fact that students with a 2.2 from a demanding programme can no longer get past HR at many large firms, where a 2.1 from a less demanding programme will suffice. But I think the answer is to stop excluding the 2.2’s. Let applicants compete on the explicit and implicit things they have learnt, whether applications are blind or not.

Well it used to be the opposite - any degree was needed. Now that more people have degrees, 2:2's are a cut-off.

From an 'equality' perspective the percentage of people with 2:2's are very small. For a humanities degree you'd need to have done zero reading for that grade. For STEM, it's a bit more difficult but as most universities base it on a weighted average of marks across years it shouldn't come as a complete surprise. Hence, an 'objective' criteria.

I know that the firms who don't need the degree classification still fail a lot of those grades at the first sift. Presumably making an allowance for outstanding work experience, 'rigorous' degrees etc.

But it's not the end of the world. Direct entry roles don't usually require the classifications, so...

poetryandwine
I agree with you.
It's fine to be institution blind, if the rest of the recruitment process is designed to allow applicants to demonstrate their knowledge and relevant skills.

If it's a case of auto-bin anyone without a 2:1 at first sift then that's quite unfair when not all universities are equal in their academic rigor.

Also @poetryandwine grades are usually curved. A programme with a large number of 2:2's wouldn't be acceptable, even at Oxbridge. Individual modules might have a high pass or fail rate though.

I suppose you can argue that the 'better' students make the more, erm, academically 'daring' choices and ended up with a 2:2. But that means they overestimated their abilities. Although knowledge isn't restricted to exam marks...

I am a brownie guider and have been for over two decades and I’m not 40 yet or even this year. A degree is a good thing but showing that I have and continue to volunteer with young people counts just as much. No matter what level your degree is at or where it is from if you show no life skills or external experience it can count for little. My DH has no Highers (A Levels) but two university degrees. He graduated the second time in 2018 at the age of 35. He got straight into third year (Scotland) the second time due to experience not his previous degree.

All degrees (that are non-accredited) are obvs not equal. My DD is doing Modern Languages at Portsmouth Uni - she is having a blast and working hard but of course her degree is not remotely comparable with a top RG degree! It is not the same as MFL at Oxbridge or Bristol. There is no standardisation of degrees at uni level (unlike the standardisation at A-level and GCSE). So surprising that parents don’t realise this! So many ppl on this thread have their head in the sand - degrees are not the same!

Thinkingtwiceagain
They're not all the same, of course they're not.

But if a candidate is relying on the potential employer to look at their university name and be impressed vs being able to demonstrate their knowledge and skills are of a high level, are they really that much stronger than another candidate from a university 10 ranks lower?

I'd expect the candidates from top universities to be able to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in the selection process. A PP said that blind selection didn't work because the graduates from top universities got most of the jobs anyway, but that doesn't mean blind selection hasn't worked. It means the top graduates have demonstrated they are better.

University blind is a problem if the first sift is a blanket rejection for anyone without a 2.1, but I would imagine any company that decides to do that in the knowledge not all universities are equally academic accepts that they're not that concerned about having top academic talent.

But if a candidate is relying on the potential employer to look at their university name and be impressed vs being able to demonstrate their knowledge and skills are of a high level, are they really that much stronger than another candidate from a university 10 ranks lower?

Totally agree. I've read grad application forms which essentially (not literally) say 'I'm on for a first from Oxbridge so don't really have to answer the rest of the questions on this form do I?' - rejection.
We also had a candidate walk into a selection centre saying 'I'm from Oxford, where are the rest of you from', talked down to them until the other candidates whooped his ass in the group exercises.
i mention these only to remind parents of students at prestigious universities that employers need skills that students will have to be able to prove outside academic achievement.

I'd expect the candidates from top universities to be able to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in the selection process. A PP said that blind selection didn't work because the graduates from top universities got most of the jobs anyway, but that doesn't mean blind selection hasn't worked. It means the top graduates have demonstrated they are better.

Exactly.

The ‘master’ is still not the CPS.

Any more than the discourse on rape is determined by legal definitions of the offence in different countries. In the U.K. the offence of rape requires a penis, in the U.S it does not.

It’s not just university blind, recruitment info is anonymous so that you can’t tell gender, ethnicity, age, disability, or know if someone came from a privileged background or not.

ultimately people have to stand on their own merit and not name drop universities to try and indicate anything. The degree is almost immaterial as long as you have one, but it’s the cv, the way you highlight your skills and experience.

this is a good thing. Honestly I work with universities, after leaving no one gives a hoot where you went.

My daughter has a 2:1. She didn't go to a top uni but hasn't even been able to get a job in the field she wants to work and despite having a bachelor of science degree. No one seems to give a monkeys. After endless endless applications for jobs she now works in a clothes shop. She's happy for now as she's getting some money but at the same time feels she's wasted 4 years.

Your DC has got their degree and some people in life will be impressed that he went to Cambridge, but everyone knows that getting into Oxbridge is more about money and connections and schools, and not actual merit and ability.
Blind recruiting is a good thing. And if your child gets an interview they can brag about Cambridge then to the recruiter/ interviewer.
For some places it would be a plus, for me as a horse it would be a minus.

Has she had someone review her CV and help with interview practice? I've seen some pretty shocking CVs from extremely capable people. I also know with my own kids they were 'interviewing' a lot , lot bet after some practice sessions. Uni careers services will often provide support after graduation, otherwise there are always local people you can ask for help.

Not aimed at your DD as I obviously don't know but a lot of people write degrees off as a waste of time and money because the DC don't walk into a job - but they have to put effort into CVs, application forms, interview and selection centre skills:

I am so sorry about your DD, @bakebeans

I also wonder whether this is to do with her self presentation. Would she think about working with the Careers Service at her uni, likely for free, or even booking a couple of sesdiins with a private coach?

I know you say she is happy now so she may not want to revisit the situation, but we need scientists and she obviously has potential. The whole thing just seems very sad

What field does she want to work in?

science degrees are all different and are viewed differently by employers- if I am looking for a research associate or phd candidate I am looking for degrees with good research departments. If I am recruiting a tech or for a skills based job I will look at the ex-poly’s who produce graduates with those skills rather than the research focus.

Tell her to keep going. I know someone with an Oxford degree who, after graduating, worked on the till in the co-op for 3 or 4 years due to not being able to get a job. After those years, got a good job in desired field.

You go to Oxbridge for the quality of education offered, not because of the "brand name" on the degree certificate.

I'd expect the candidates from top universities to be able to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in the selection process. A PP said that blind selection didn't work because the graduates from top universities got most of the jobs anyway, but that doesn't mean blind selection hasn't worked. It means the top graduates have demonstrated they are better.

Some common sense.

OP seems to want to stop the clock at university entry. Kudos to her son in his achievements but for many jobs it's the finished product apon leaving university.

Lol. Sure. It's not about the name prestige, AT ALL.

Hilarious.

But it's prestigious because it's good!

Covered what? What did he study?

What is your class / background, OP?

There may be some companies who do this but there are plenty who don't. He may want to go into academia where the Cambridge degree will be very helpful. Either way he has shown great ability and determination to get this far and that will stand him in good stead for job applications, blind or not. The other big thing about Oxbridge is the approach to teaching which is extremely focused and hands on and so you are not just going for the job opportunities afterwards but for the quality of the experience whilst you are there.
I'd recommend not worrying about things that haven't happened and that are based on headlines from alarmist newspapers! He will be fine!

@Poopoolittlekitten a horse using the Internet is very impressive!

Oh my wordddd.

A degree shows staying power, the ability to stick at something. Deferred gratification blah blah.

I was over 40 when I went for my interviews. I was offered every job I applied for. Because I had a bit more confidence in myself, not because I had a few letters after my name.

Was never asked my classifications in my degrees, just what I have degrees in. Nor was I asked where I got them.