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?

Quattro - AmerryScot obviously knows me - better than I know her (I'm Gwen........)

It seems to be a bit topsy turvy to look at things in terms of whether or not an individual or group can manage to get in to these universities. That surely misses the point that it is widely recognised that many intelligent and capable students are not getting in, or not even applying.

If it were simply a matter of judging people on getting in then we would simply hand out certificates of approval on acceptance and they wouldn't have to bother with 3 years at university.

The judgement is about what happens to the students who do go, and as a consequence of going to a very good university tend to have many doors opened to them which are not quite as open for students at other universities.

I had a Psych lecturer who fixated on RG Universities- weweren't one and from what he used to say he wasn'teven in favour at our place: dread to think what the RG Unis would have made of him.

I think RG status is worth getting for mainstream subjects but you have to be aware of more- DH'sUni has prestige in his particular field though is low to middling overall; as was mine. And of course you have to sek out what you want- the reason I turneddown bristolwas because the course didn't offer what I wanted, whereas a new University did.

It's afactor. One of them.Evenlesssignificant for mature students also, as proximity / childcare facillities matter as much for a great many, and IMEof the very few I actually visited, RG palces don'treally cater in the same way. An average uni with a good nursery attahced and low living costs maybe even with decent local schools (all things I found) is at least as worthy to a Mum looking for a place as RG status.

The differentiation thing amkes sense but most universities offer wide ranges so are neither one or the other.

My degree was pretty old fashioned: Religion and Philosophy (of the world faiths type). But it also offered a lot in the manner of youth work type degrees, plus a thriving arts dept and adecent rep in documentary making, animation and game programming. DH'sspecialises in his field (a variant of theatre technoclogy- lighting design) but has apoor rep in some other areas.

OK i think if you were offered Cambridge and fancied just going to

The only Russell group I'd be interested in would have the late great Russell Harty at it's helm
what tosh

I shall be helped my DS's look at which University is best rated in in their chosen subject rather than which one is best overall when it comes to that.

And if they should decide to do something like Chemistry happily direct them towards the University of Sussex along side Oxford (given that the former seems to be rated higher in that subject by the times and the guardian tables this year)

You can't really judge universities by newspaper league tables. It's not really based on how good the course is at all, or the standard you need to be. For example, Leicester and Keele are ranked above Imperial, UCL and Bristol for maths, although they're really really not better for it.

ALFA, that is a good approach if your child is looking to get a job that is related to their degree. Many students at highly selective universities have no intention of becoming historians, anthropologists, philosophers or even chemists; they go to those universities to get a broad education at a reasonable level, knowing that they can then get into good jobs in totally unrelated fields like journalism. So if another university is marginally better at Anthropology or whatever, it is not really relevant to the student's plans.

So it really depends why your child is going to study that degree in the first place.

I shall be helped??????? WTF - I shall be helping

oh and aMerryScot - I'll have you know it was a church quiz not a pub quiz........although I have to say I find a man with a broad general knowledge much more attractive than someone who is a one horse man. Especially if their "subject" is one I find intensely boring or don't understand at all

Just been putting sausages in the oven (as you do ) and was thinking about some episodes of Mastermind, you get someone that gets loads right on their specialist subject and you think "wow"..........then they have a string of "passes" on the general round and it's such a turn off (not that many of them are attractive anyhow............)

I agree with MillyR - again from the point of view of overall employability. Graduate employers may not know that Ex-FE-college-with-generally=low-entrance-requirements has the best course possible for Anthropology with and Astrophysics subsid incorporating a year out in Ulan Bator. They will just see the ex-FE college bit and wonder.

who on gods earth goes off and does a degree in Anthropology or Astropyhsics with no intentions of having a career realted to them >

oh and peachy - I nearly turned down Edinburgh in favour of St. Andrews, it was only the lack of night life that made me choose Edinburgh (but that was in the days before I knew that Edinburgh was a RG University while St Andrews isn't.............but it is a lovely University and lovely town..........if you like the quiet life)

Exactly Quattro
One of the guest lecturers on dh's degree does the light design for a massive ITV production:in his field far more valuable than any ratings in the papers.

That sort of thing, plus any other netwrking you can do (loads on my MA course), is priceless.

Every anthropology or astrophysics graduate I've ever met has not pursued careers in anthropology or astrophysics. Some of them might have originally intended a career in those fields and decided not to pursue the idea. Some of them just thought, oh this stuff is interesting. Fair enough, no? Therefore always a good idea to keep as many options open as possible.

Awassail I turned down bristol in favour of Newport...... something many people still gasp in victorianesque shock at, but in bristol I oculd afford a too small flat with terrible schools, here we get a lovely old cottage with excellent Church schools thrown in on top. That's a worthwhile trade off (plus i didn't know what Post Grad I would do then, but Bristol doesn't offer what I am doing- far easier to stay in one University IME)

The Russell Group is really about research. Although lots of the good universities are Russell Group, it's not the definition of a good university. Although research does feed into good undergraduate teaching, it is quite separate especially if the subject is not totally 'academic' (i.e. not relating to anything concrete, like Classics, Philosophy etc).

I don't really see it as a snob thing, just a specific thing. Not being in the Russell Group doesn't make a bad university by any stretch of the imagination, but it's not accurate to refer to it as a snob thing.

actually I lie - I don't really care which Universities my DS's decide to apply for (if they do at all), I want to go where they'll be happiest. I know far too many people (everyone from my school went onto either Music College or one of the "top" Universities) that were miserable as hell because they were there for totally the wrong reasons, many of them have since gone on and done "lesser" degrees at "lesser" Universities and ended up much happier as a result of their later degree (and in most cases better jobs)

When I worked for a large multinational employer, they only did the milk round at top Russell Group universities, not that they were called RG then - just universities. I think they had about 8 universities they visited.

Where you go does matter.

...well.... yes... if that's the kind of job you want!

Not everybody wants to work for a "large multinational employer".

Exactly.

The idea of a job at that type of company does nothing for me.

My fieldis charity sector and disability; a degree or MA is needed but they look far beyond that. And if you want to be a teacher (as I did pre- revelation) then what matters is getting a PGCE,and the degree to accessthat.

Many types of people should equal many routes.

Well, if you do want to work for a bluechip, you are SOL unless your alma mater is a top RG.

A RG degree opens doors. You can work for a blue chip, or something more modest. You are not limiting your options.

AMerryScot Some of us were resourceful enough to find employment with the aforementioned blue-chips without relying on those "milk rounds"!

I attended Sutton group of Top UK Universities.Only 13 of them. 7 RG Universities don't make it onto that list.

gosh - i am more confused than ever now! what i need is some kind of powerpoint presentation to enable me to get my head round it. why on earth is Manchester not a member? are the representatives of the funding organisations so gullible that they would not be able to allocate funding in accordance with their own guidlines in the absence of such categorisation?

only universities and aspirational parents are bothered about russell group, though.

Just ignore it. It don't matter.

Manchester is a member of the Russell Group but not the Sutton thingy. Along with the following:

Cardiff University
University of Edinburgh
University of Glasgow
King's College London
University of Leeds
University of Liverpool
University of Manchester
Newcastle University
Queen's University Belfast
University of Sheffield
University of Southampton

There are four universities in the Sutton thingy which are not in the Russell Group

Durham
Edinburgh
St Andrews
York

Confused?