to object to all this "Russell Group" malarkey?

[tispity]

Where has this term appeared from in the last few years and why does it confer prestige upon it's alumni? From where i'm standing, London University has always been a mixed bag really: Imperial (excellent), LSE and Kings (generally good, excellent for a few subjects) and all the others (I know not how many even). If I were to generalise based on what I saw when I used to sneak into their libraries during the college holidays, hardworking, working/ lower middle-class, suburban kids of average intelligence for the most part.

I am not being arrogant but (as a sibling of one and friend of many of it's alumni) it was always just a good old, reliable, solid red brick institution. Why the need to suddenly rebrand itself, in order to stand out from the group?

ermm where did I say that Aberdeen was 1960's?

There are a lot of different university clubs around though, not just the RG. There's something called the Sutton Trust, which has some RG members but some different members too. Also the 1994 group. There is another club I am sure .

Aberwhatsit (can't spell it without copying and pasting ) is late 1800's

There is nothing wrong with the existence of the Russell Group, but it is there for research purposes, rather than for the purposes used on MN. On MN it is often used to attempt to define universities that students should aspire to attend at undergraduate level. That tends to be because many people on MN seem to think that the main role of a university is to educate undergraduates, which is simply not the case when it comes to a Russell Group university. Undergraduates are often not even in the top 3 funding sources of a RG department.

On MN we are often discussing RG in the context of social mobility, comprehensive schools, undergraduate degree value etc. The group under consideration should be the 'Sutton 13.' This is defined by the Sutton Group as being the 13 most selective educators of undergraduates, and these are the ones that lead into professions where social mobility is a major issue (law, academia, journalism etc).

Some of them are RG, but some not:

Birmingham
Bristol
Cambridge
Durham
Edinburgh
Imperial
LSE
Nottingham
Oxford
St Andrews
UCL
Warwick
York

Sorry, xpost with Quattro.

oooo - another of the Universities I got accepted to (but turned 'em down ) on that list.

I would have loved St. Andrews........but it was just too far from any good night life

Google revearled the Million+ group of universities

See, clearly Universities get lonely on their own and want likeminded friends.

Membership of the RG seems to confer a massive proportion of funding though (unless it's the other way around - ie that if universities get a lot of funding they got to join the RG - in manner of an airmiles club).

actually sod all that brainy University stuff - I single handedly won the Christmas Quiz at church yesterday (general knowledge - not just "religious" stuff) for my side of the church - and I was up against lots of RG, and all the other "top" university graduates many of who are several years my senior and quite often think they know it all

My DS's were very impressed as I rolled off answer after answer (although slightly as I was on the opposite side to them as they were sat with their friends and I was sat near the organ)

That's interesting MillyR. I recognise the Sutton club as being the group of universities that were toughest to get into (in my day, which was a long long time ago) whereas the RG seemed to have some surprising members.

hello hello
i have nothing useful to add

Oh but you have an awful lot to add, believe me

There are some very good universities that are not on the list. I would be quite happy for DS to choose Newcastle or Manchester, which are not on the list, depending on what he chooses to do. I suppose I need to do some more research before the time comes so that I can offer him advice.

I tell you what was more impressive with my answers - I didn't have google in front of me to help

I was so quick with the answers that the vicar told me to move back a few rows (I was sat on the front row near the organ, and as always everyone else had filled up the chairs started at the back, and she had 2 children running to get the answers from each side )

I worked at the University of Leeds about 10 years ago and they talked about being in the Russel group then ,so I don't think it is a particularly new term

this is a list of Russell group Universities from theRussell group website
.Don't know whetre the list above came from but it isn't correct

Awassailing Sorry, just the way I interpreted this sentence:

"what about Aberdeen, University of Wales, Aberystwyth University, Bangor University, Reading, Hull, Exeter and Leicester, not to mention all the other "plate glass" Universities founded around the same time as Warwick?"

I took that to mean that the unis you mentioned where in addition to the "not to mentionall the other's" founded in the 60s.

I think it's simply that these places need to be able to differentiate themselves from the Chester University of Hairdressing, Beauty Therapy and Hollyoaks Retail Therapy degrees.

sorry didn't read that the other list was sutton group

madamearcati - I think the group listed above is the Sutton Group, not the RG

skihorse - yes I see how that could be misread - I was going through the list of Universities not in the RG in order of age with the oldest first and then put the "plate glass" ones at the end as they are a similar age to Warwick

"I think it's simply that these places need to be able to differentiate themselves from the Chester University of Hairdressing, Beauty Therapy and Hollyoaks Retail Therapy degrees."

ahhh you see now that's my point, as there are plenty of other "proper" Universities that aren't in the RG (haven't cross checked the 1994 group with the order of foundation of University) that were founded as early, or earlier than the "newest" in the RG. So all it says is

"we're better because we get more funding for research" >>>

well neither is going to a RG or any other "group" University either judging from some of the twats idiots I know. Oxbridge in particular is full of halfwits who happen to be good singers/organists to get the choral/organ scholarships and only just get the "grades" to get their. Actually - scrap that I know some that would NEVER have got into Oxbridge with their grades if they hadn't got in the through the "back door".

And yes I've looked at those lists, still doesn't explain why there are equally as established Universities that aren't as "prestigious" as the Sutton group or the RG group.

Funnily enough, there is world beyond musicians.

and oh sheesh I'm rather glad I'm not intellectual either - obviously with intellect goes the sense of humour

Have lost plot now. Who's Gwen?

I'll be encouraging the DC's to go to the best university they can when the time comes, because that may make them more employable and increase the choices open to them. I wouldn't be hung up on membership of the RG though.

who said they all did music degrees? Yes most of the Organ Scholars do - but not all of them. And most of the ex-choral scholars I know didn't study music.