DDs preferred choice not a Russell Group Uni

[RedRoses1111]

Hello

Dd is my one and only so this is all new to me. She is 17 and about to sit AS levels next month.

She wants to study English and Film and went to a University Fair today. She has returned laden with prospectuses but her favourite so far is the University of East Anglia which is not a Russell Group Uni. Other choices which do an English and Film course are Southampton, Kings, Exeter and Royal Holloway.

I read so much about the choice of Uni is just as important as the course and that employers won't even look at job applications unless they are from someone who went to a Russell Group Uni.

So, those of you who are more experienced or knowledgable about this, should she be discouraged from looking at non RG unis at this stage?

Many thanks for any insight/knowledge/advice you can offer.

I had pals who did english,film,tv at glasgow.they loved it

Sometimes a person has both - more often, they don't

Not true in my experience of teaching in three countries all at research-led universities, and senior roles in national teaching & research organisations.

LRD- yes she is on Twitter. It's a good idea, I will get her to think about some media/literary figures she could follow.

scottishmummy - I think you have hit a nerve, I am a bit concerned that she might end up studying the wrong degree/ pointless degree and with no clear career path, will end up without a job in any field!

I will know more after the open days so will try and keep a lid on my anxiety until then.

Thanks again everyone

Dd (Y12) will be applying to study English and she wants to be a writer. Cambridge is her top choice and I really wanted her to apply to UEA as I thought it would be a great insurance choice. It has a fantastic reputation for creative writing. Unfortunately, when she went there on a school trip, she hated it and just didn't want to spend 3 years there. Nothing I said could persuade her and ultimately they have to want to go there themselves.

Lots of humanities degrees don't have clear career paths.

If someone is hard working and does well in a degree like that at somewhere good (which it sounds as if she's on track for), they should still be able to work out lots of 'plan B' things to do. Boring, but true.

There seems to be a sense that we can - and/or should - push our teenagers in a particular direction.

If we are not constantly vigilant, exerting all our influence, and as a result they don't get the 'right' grades or go to the 'right' university Oxbridge/Russell Group the most terrible things might happen.

I think most of us were not pressured by our parents in this way. As older teenagers we tried to make up our own minds. We might have made a few mistakes along the way, but we learned from them. And we have survived.

Can't we give our children the same freedom? Yes, it's fine to be lurking in the background and try to give any views we have when asked.

At any rate, that's what I am trying to do with my 16 year old in Year 12,.

MarianneEvans - I know what you mean but I'm just trying to keep my eye on the ball and look out for her and her choices and support her. But believe me, she is not the type of child who can be pushed into anything! After the open days, she will know where she wants to go and what she wants to do. She is very passionate about her studies and interests so I would never want to dampen that by pushing her to go somewhere other than where she has set her heart on. I just mainly wanted to know whether the RG thing was a concern. The rest is just me thinking out loud and voicing some of my anxieties!

It really helps to 'speak' to other people on here who have knowledge and experience about these things and to hear opinions. Dd has lots of friends but I don't really know their parents to discuss this with.

The "Russell Group" is a self-selected set of self-satisfied universities that doesn't actually guarantee quality. For many individual subjects, the league table for that subject will have as many non-RG universities in the top 10 as RG. I went to an RG university and thought it was pretty rubbish really. I have previously worked for a non-RG university which was really brilliant and at the forefront of research in pretty much every field in which it had a department - but because it cover the full range of university subjects (e.g. didn't have a medical school or a law faculty) it couldn't reach the critical mass to achieve the criteria for gaining RG membership. Utterly meaningless - your daughter should go wherever there is a course that she finds inspirational and interesting.

I was undecided between two unis and was pushed by my parents towards Manchester rather than Sheffield Hallam, so that's what I put as my first choice. I didn't like the uni and wasn't happy living in Manchester and I realy regretted allowing them to influence my choice like that. Please let your DD find her own way.

I eventually moved to the uni nearest to my home town although I didn't move back home and was much happier.

Visit the unis is the best idea - my DD didn't like one (too public schooly), DS didn't like one (tutors wore ties!)

(these weren't the only reason for their choices they went to good unis anyway)

marianne that is true.

However, back in ye olden days, there was less choice and is was free!

Also, a degree was a pretty cool thing to have and it opened doors. In the current employment market, a degree will not mark you out as special.

Young people of 16/17 need to understand the implications of their choices with full information.

My advice to all the young people would be not to ignore perception as one thing to take into consideration.

If there's a toss up, with no real discernible difference between the course and the city, then go for the one that will give you the most bang for your buck.

Let's be honest, these 16 year olds are deciding how best to spend forty five grand and three years of their lives.

This is a big decision.

kilda which subjects are you talking about when you say that there as many non RG unis in the top ten as RG unis, as a matter of interest?

Taking the Good University guide for 2014, and looking at a range of main stream academic subjects ( physics, chemistry, English, history, maths, languages, law) you'll see that most have just one non RG uni in the top ten (often that's St Andrews). The most non RG in any of the those subjects in the top 10 is 3 - and that's for physics and thats because of the internationally renowned departments at Lancaster and Surrey.

So I'm probably supporting your argument here - you need to be subject specific and RG is not everything. But the odds are, if it's an old school academic subject, the top ten department for that subject - 8 or 9 are RG unis.

But it is a whole different ball game for new subjects and for vocational subjects - that's where the long held selection criteria for unis don't necessarily apply. And why in this case for the OPs DD UEA would be a great choice for English and film .

I think film studies is probably v interesting but unlikely lead to well paid employment
She will need to be clear Lots of debt accrued with no defined career path
Or she end up doing a pg to qualify in something else thatll result in work

My advice as someone who has made a career in media and film - I actually went to Glasgow Uni (one of the top RG unis) - Glasgow is one of the few RG unis where you can study Film &TV alongside English - would highly recommend it as a Uni anyway.

But my other point is that to get into the film industry in the UK or the media - there is no such thing as a proven path to get there - many, many people who work in these industries don't have degrees at all.

• I would say the one thing most people in these fields who are successful have in common is sheer determination and drive because its what they are truly passionate about doing!

beckandcall agreed.

And what I would say is that even if somehwere has a renowned department in a specific subject, that might not be enough to tempt me.

I teach on just such a course in a very low level RG university, and whilst the department has some real hot shots in it, the reality is that the calibre of student is very mixed. Not a patch on the other place I teach, which I think feeds into the general sparkiness of the place IYSWIM.

But my other point is that to get into the film industry in the UK or the media - there is no such thing as a proven path to get there - many, many people who work in these industries don't have degrees at all- I would say the one thing most people in these fields who are successful have in common is sheer determination and drive because its what they are truly passionate about doing!

Indeed.

Very few degree courses have a defined career path nowadays. The important things in a BA are critical skills, communication skills, team work, independent project management etc etc. These are regarded by some people as "soft" skills, but it's interesting that a lot of post-graduation work-based training is in these areas. A member of my family who's an actor has a lucrative side-business in coaching executives etc in basic speaking, presentation & communication skills -- he says it's always surprising how bad some highly paid executives are at things he finds very easy.

My concern is that Film is a euphemism for Media Studies. I have seen a lot of film courses springing up, and of course the courses sound interesting - especially to a teenager who has just about had their fill of cramming in traditional school subjects. Most of us like watching films and tv! But it's important to be able to distinguish between what is an enjoyable hobby and what is of academic merit.

Riiiight.

Film is a major art form. Film crit is just as academically virtuous as lit crit. The skills one can obtain from studying film crit are as valuable and transferable as those from studying lit crit. If you're interested in making films, film crit can be useful too, just as studying lit crit can be useful for writers - that acing said I have several friends successfully working as writers and film makers who studied completely different things at uni.

It is a big decision and one of the reasons that Russell Group features strongly is the milk round. Many London City employers don't look anywhere else. They hardly recruit from anywhere else. Some careers advisers, eg the Bar, only visit about 4 universities a year. They will not be Sheffield Hallam or Bucks New! So, you pay your money and you have to decide where the best opportunities lie. Employers really don't care about quality of teaching on an arts type degree, eg a English, History. They do care where you went and what your employability is. Also, who wants to pay £9000 fees and be stuck in some backwater with nothing to do and nowhere to go?

So, if you want to study English and Film you shouldn't base your decision around which universities offer that course and are most highly ranked for it. Or even which of the various universities that offer it attract you most, and seem like a place where you will be happy.

You should only consider Russell Group universities on the basis that you might later want to work in the City where you may encounter discrimantory recruitment practices. You should believe that Russell Group universities are all in lively attractive cities, whereas non-Russel Group universities will be dumps in the middle of nowehere.

Incidentally, the Bar Council does talk about the importance of getting a first class degree or a 2:1, but under FAQ there is this section.

"Is the Bar predominantly made up of white, middle class, Oxbridge educated men?

No. The modern Bar is diverse and inclusive, as barristers increasingly reflect the communities that they serve. 13% of pupillages are being taken up by people from Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) backgrounds."

I'm not sure that's what any academic (even those terrible lot of us who dare to teach in RG/research-led universities) is saying here, MarianneSolong. Quite the contrary,I think.

Yes, I was just reacting to the post immediately above my last one.

My take on this is that I had academic parents, went to an academic school and went to a prestigious university.

However because all the focus was on grades and marks and there wasn't a lot of emotional nurture or any support for me when it came to non-academic stuff, I graduated with a shedload of unresolved problems which got in the way of career-related achievement.

Hence a strong belief that shoving your children down the path you regard as best/most prestigious etc can cause a great many problems.

Oh sorry, Mariannne!

And yes, agree with you re shoving one's DC. I wasn't shoved, nor do I/did I shove.

But I came from 2 generations of Oxbridge etc & former wealth (I'm downwardly mobile ) -- high cultural capital. I suppose those who are upwardly mobile without generations of confidence & knowledge get a bit panicky.