AIBU to think going to an RG university means absolutely nothing

[Butchyrestingface]

Never one to shy away from a challenge (even if it's a challenge to someone else).

So I went to a RG uni. I didn't even KNOW I'd been to a RG uni until about 15 years after the fact when I joined MN.

Thereafter I referred to it as having gone to a 'Russell Grant' university (bit confused).

AIBU in thinking RG unis are not the be all and end all?

Agree
People can study whatever they like for what ever reason but somebody poo pooed my comment that RGs commanded a higher salary
My facts were queried as wrong ?? With a comment that ‘it’s ridiculous to suggest that’
So now I’ve shown them to be true.

That’s why I bothered.

@R3s3t You are not really understanding that Lancaster might as well be RG! It’s similar to Bath and several others. You need to look at entry tariffs and research to see where it sits. I also think Lancaster attracts a slightly weather student than nearby Liverpool. That it is not RG is simply meaningless. It’s not Northampton or Derby.

If I'm looking at CV's Oxbridge, and Russell Group stand out. Then there's another level and so on and so forth. We say degree not needed on all jobs and it's genuinely not, but they all add to the picture and make it more likely I'll interview you, especially at the start of your career when there's not so much concrete stuff on your CV.

Some people may think it made no difference, but you have no idea which jobs you may have been shortlisted for with better qualifications.

And plenty of "new" universities (ex-poly's, post '92 universities, whatever you call them) are better for certain subjects / courses than any of the traditional ones (be it RG, Bath, St Andrew's or whatever) in the Top 10 or even Top 20. My DC is studying at a uni which is just inside the top 70 in the league tables, but happens to be Top 3 for the particular industry they hope to break into.

You pay the same amount in fees whether you go to a big brand university (RG, Bath, Warwick etc) or a run-of-the-mill one.

If a pair of own-brand or ordinary trainers cost the same as a big brand (eg Nike's), which would you chose?

You get better value for money at a big brand university because of the cachet of the badge.

@DameDoggieDoo post 92 are the former polys and colleges of HE etc. There were other universities established in the 60s such as Surrey, Kent, Sussex, Essex etc. They are not RG but are still slightly older universities. Not that age frankly matters. Post 92 are more likely to do niche courses because these don’t need lots of research. They are often not research lead courses so not what you would find at Durham or KCL.

I feel most students choose a university that seems "most fun" rather than value for money. Social life is always what you make of it.

Well it is because it’s not a Russel Group, and neither are the others you listed.

And RG means 'research intensive uni'..

But doesn't mean they are the only group of universities that take research seriously though ...

So somebody from Liverpool, Ulster, Southampton, Newcastle, Glasgow, Cardiff, Leeds etc stands out more to you than the many non Russel group unis like Bath, Lancaster, St Andrews , Surrey, Loughborough etc that are rated far higher. Bit foolish really. You need to move with the times.

You haven’t though.

I saw this on another thread about what university to go to. Some firms do prescreen by what the university is and prioritise their hiring accordingly.

I saw this on the BBC as well

@Daphnesf Look at who crunched the data! The IFS I referred to earlier. It’s largely true there is a RG premium but of course it blurs at the ended and elite non RG are obviously not below RG in any way.

And where is that cropped from? Some company that isn't keeping up with league tables or wanting to hire aspirational kids from poor backgrounds who can only attend a local uni and commute.

I mean if you are binning a job application from a maths or comp sci graduate from Lancaster but keeping one from Nottingham or York you are a wally. They are all clustered around the same point in the league tables, incidentally rather above Newcastle. I have no truck for idiots who would chuck out bright kids arbitrarily like that, based on them attending a uni that didn't join a self selecting research boys' club.

Newcastle is a strange one. It isn’t very high in league tables that matter but dc often love it. Cheaper place to live and a fun time guaranteed.

The Boston Consulting Group hiring process.

A google search made me find the full image

I think it makes a difference really .my DS went to one .there is a massive difference between a former poly or college .most RG students will have to have proved themselves to get in .My own DS went to a secondary modern boys school, he was taken with slightly lower grades by them .proved himself,went on for an MSC . Now working in industry on a very good wage.1

of only 2 c

You need to do some research. Non Russell group unis aren’t all ex polys 🙄 and many Russell group unis ask for the same or less than non Russell group unis.

I’ve crunched the unis chosen by Tizer on a subject mentioned on the thread so I haven’t manufactured the info as I didn’t chose who to compare.
The numbers show the RG benefits and always have in the years I’ve used this info.

People may not like it nor like the methods businesses use to chose employees but this is how it works and again how it has done for a very long time.
League tables vary too much amongst each other and too much over the years with some Unis bouncing up and down all over the place so Employers aren’t glued to them the way schools and students are.

We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

Ok, so the 2017 list of a US based company. Hopefully updated since then though they appear to target ivy league and Oxbridge types.

Yes because the data you showed showed non Russel group unis with higher and equal wages.

I’ve already been over the figures
They clearly show RGs way down the League tables from Lancaster but scoring £ the same or more.
Only one had a wage average lower which was as I said clearly not doing well in maths ( 1 subject btw! ) and as I said clearly Maths clearly isn’t their thing.
Not all Unis are top top in all subjects obviously but RGs still do better in terms of salaries and employability ( as others have evidenced )

Ive crunched these figures for other Unis and other courses. The results are always the same. The RGs overal do better along with the usuals like St Andrews.

I don’t know why you refuse to accept facts and the experiences of others. It is what it is.
Im done

@R3s3t Liverpool is RG. Also you seem to not understand that most people refer to the university group as RG Plus now. Everyone bar a few, seem to realise Bath, Lancaster, Loughborough, StA and Surrey are equivalent to RG - except they are not members of that group. They might as well be in terms of quality. There’s no difference between them and plenty who are RG. It’s utterly splitting hairs not to see this and keep arguing Lancaster is not “elite”. It is. Just not as elite as Oxbridge or LSE!

The universities requiring a low tariff to get in are unlikely to produce many dc earning mega bucks. Some will of course but overall, not likely. Part of this is because these universities serve a local market. The local market for grads isn’t London in many cases. The students are not applying for high earning jobs in London either. That’s their choice and they are happy.

DS is at the most random uni in existence, it's something like 106th in the tables. He's also doing an apprenticeship earning £23,000 and his degree is paid for. It was that or an RG and it was a no brainer tbh. He's loves it and very likely to get a job there at the end. He's not bothered on getting the best paid, most stressful job at a top company working silly hours, he just wants to enjoy his work and earn enough to get by.