Russell Group versus highest ranked by subject and employability.

[Hassled]

Taking out of the equation variables like course content, desirability of location and so on, and looking at it purely in terms of future employability, is it better to have say a 2:1 in a Humanities subject from a Russell Group university, or from a university that is higher ranked in league tables for that subject?
As an example, Sussex (non RG) is higher ranked (in the Guardian league tables) than Birmingham (RG) for English Lit. Does that RG thing matter? Thanks.

I work at a non-RG Uni, the sort that folk can't even remember where it is.
They are charging £150 per charity/SME exhibitor at the next graduate recruitment fair, £350 charge to large companies. They expect 60 corporate exhibitors + 20ish 3rd sector recruitment stalls. That's the generic recruitment fair, separate from the targeted recruitment events they offer for IT, Law, Health professionals, etc.

Somebody is turning up. They wouldn't pay that money if they didn't see it as worthwhile investment.

To be fair & compare, Manchester's upcoming recruitment fair has 160 exhibitors & they charged £475 or £575 per exhibit. Their location is better for attracting students from a much larger catchment, though. It says in their promo materials that students from many universities will attend (that could include from ours), BUT it will be recorded as a promotion event targeting only one institution.

I have read the thread and I choose to disagree with it. I trust companies like Deloitte, Teach First and PwC know what they're doing in terms of graduate recruitment, and they choose to focus their recruitment on what we all know to be 'prestigious' universities. And unless there's some grand conspiracy we're unaware of, they don't pick graduates who have been spoonfed!

I don't have a clear list of which ones qualify as prestigious. Care to give a list? First you said RG & then you said RG & redbrick: so does it have to be both or either?

It was assumed till 2008 that banks knew best how to run financial affairs, the market knows best and so on. What 'we all know' is very suspect thinking and the kind of mindset that all good universities of any type try to discourage.

Actually the most ridiculous extensive spoon feeding I ever personally participated in was at Cambridge. God those students get spooned! I always thought it was ironic that supposedly the very best students in my subject of their national cohort had so many more teaching resources spent on them than the ones who really needed it.

Spooned, not spooned...

Spoon FED. Fuck me.

needmore I agree with your earlier post that some of the brighter kids could take more risks and apply to higher tariff uni, Instead they go for the easier and safer option. Ok maybe I should eat humble pie or eat my words, as my dd got rejected by 3 of her "premiership league" aim higher uni's but to be honest she was at no loss really to least have a go after all she can only ever go to 1 of her offers. She ended up with 2 good offers 1 RG and 1 non RG, they are still in the premiership league so to speak but further down if she don't get the grades then she will have a gap year to try again.
I think stonelog you would think my dd is absolutely crazy as she has put the the non RG uni as her firm and the RG uni as her insurance. She wasn't in any dilemma to which to firm. The non RG uni won hands down. Her reasons being that she doesnt think she will be persuing a job straight after Bsc but would like to continue with a masters so has chosen the uni which she thinks is more reputable. Plus importantly this uni provided more variety of modules she could pick from to study and specialise. For what its worth the uni she has firmed has a better hiring figure for graduate jobs and are targeted by top firms compared to a fair few RG uni but not all. Overall I think although RG uni's has that kind of quality brand kudos like having a VW car, it's reliable well made, you can't go wrong in choosing this brand kind of impression etc... however I don't think all models within VW brand are built with the same.....Just like RG uni's some are outstanding others are mediocre. There are other uni's that do a better job.

pirate ??

Many many thanks to everyone - you've given us so much to think about and I'm very grateful. We will certainly be paying much closer attention to levels of research at the institutions DS is looking at than we would have been.

Just reading this thread out of interest.

My DD graduated from LSE last year. Whilst I cannot fault the academic side of life there, the social scene was pretty much non existent compared to many 'campus' university's. The majority of students are from overseas and are very much work orientated. Thankfully she made some good friends and settled down.

We live in Surrey so she was able to come home overnight or whenever she wanted. If we had been further away I think she would have struggled being in halls as some of her friends did.

Students are very much left to their own devices and are definitely not spoon fed in anyway shape or form!!

I must just mention the costs involved! For her self catered single room (couldn't swing a cat!) we had the privilege of paying £269.50 per week. I still can't get over the cost!!!

Also, LSE students are very much coveted by employers. My DD and all of her friends had jobs lined up for after graduation.

I am pleased to see DD's chosen university is high up in the linked report for graduate prospects but we didn't pick it for the overall reputation. We picked it for the structure and feel of the course, the course prospects, where she wanted to live etc.

stonelog if you are going on the extremely extensive recruitment activities of the big 4 - who are not just going in to former polls like Nottingham Trent now but also now starting in schools, then you just well and truly undermined your point. But then not everybody wants to be the canon fodder that is entry level Accountancy / Consultancy / Tax Advice which is why they cast their net very far indeed. Even if they wanted to fill their programmes from Oxbridge and London they can't. They have always had the most extensive graduate recruitment activities. And they run just the sort of inclusive recruitment process I highlighted with extensive on line and telephone interviewing designed to whittle down the applications on the Qualities they are looking for, not just the institution. If you were quoting Law firms you might have a point in the case of a minority of firms (and in mumsnet land they account for a disproportionate proportion of graduate jobs

Polys, thanks autocorrect.....

stonelog can I ask in your 1st post you say virtually no one (employers) will care about rankings of "Humanities" subjects. Only if it was from RG. Are you also kind of saying "Humanities" degrees aren't respected by employers hence thats why you think they would look at where you come from first? As you single out humanities. I'm I infering it wrong?? Its just that I hope employers don't frown on humanity types degrees either as my younger dd would like do a history degree.

bizeemum Most employers are looking for applicants who have developed intellectual skills in the course of studying for their degree, a History degree gives you lots of transferable skills in terms analysis and understanding the issues. There is a slight tendency now for some employers to be wanting graduates with STEM or vocational skills eg a marketing degree for jobs where their skills are directly relevant so undoubtedly a STEM degree could give a candidate an advantage all else being equal. However of course all else is rarely equal and if a humanities graduate has focused on developing skills that make them employable, in extra curricular activities and employment etc as well as the degree then they will make sure they are employable. My DDs cohort are now two three years out of uni and are, to a surprising extent, now getting on in their careers whether their degree is in English or Maths. And their personal qualities are becoming the main determinant of how successful they are.

Phew! Thanks poisonwood that's a relief we've yet to do any research on history degrees, uni's etc.. youngest dd has chosen all humanities AS subject so no stem, unless you class geography as one. In terms of careers are there humanities graduates say from eg history degree doing say actuaries, banking type jobs? is it unheard of or very rare, must one have to come from STEM subjects to go into those fields. Can some careers take a unconventional academic path.

My DH did Classics and his best mate did Geography- Both work in Banking. DH recently hired a new sociology grad. I think it's more important to get a 1st from a good uni. DN went somewhere middling, by reputation, worked her socks off and got a 1st with lots of work experience along the way and got her dream job when she finished. Many of her friends from the course didn't have the same drive and are still working McJobs after 3 years.

Depends what you mean by "banking type jobs". There are a lot of different roles within banking some of which do clearly require talents which would have led a student into studying STEM subjects in the first place, trading being an obvious example but other roles such as industry analyst might well attract humanities graduates with the right qualities, and obviously there are also opportunities in areas like HR. the Big 4 certainly take on Humanitoes graduates on their accountancy, tax and consultancy schemes. In fact I know one Economics graduate who dropped out of the Tax scheme because he realised that it was not his numeracy skills that were required but more the skills in assimilating tax law and guidance and then communicating it in a form that was easy to understand for clients. He suddenly realised why his mentor was so successful having studied English.

And though the world has changed I am a History graduate then MBA, and ended up in a management career that required a lot of numeracy. Indeed the tendency of new graduates, whatever their degree subjects, to engage in data free analysis was one of my big bugbears. I think a History degree actually makes you understand the importance of actually quantifying what you are analysing in order to really understand an environment / problem. Plenty of numbers in good historical research.

horsemad your post gives me some relief, as youngest dd hasn't a clue to types of career path whatsoever. So it gives me inspired hope that, when she does make her mind up probably 5 years later?? she's at least not pigeon hold herself.
poisonwood yes sorry was very vague with banking jobs. I was thinking along jobs needing data interpretating, risk assessing something along that lines. As I kind of feel historians are good at interpretating data and coming to a good judgment so have very good rounded decision making skills. Does this make sense?? Would most maths stuff say in accountancy/finance fields be done by software? so most hard maths stuff is done for you. Or still need maths anyways as they prefer people with the logic.

Bizeemum
ds was had an offer from Bristol last year on their maths engineering course. Apparently a few of the graduates on that course get snapped up by banks. Ds has gone down the stem route but his history/RE teachers always raved about his analytical skills.

bruffin really wish my youngest dd (not sure if I should refer her as dd2 in mumsnet land speak?) would do maths A level or at least to AS. Shes good at maths but has been put off by older dd she took it and the amount of maths papers and stuff littering the house with what looks like gibberish to us has made her think its beyond her, but its frustrating for us as we think maths is a good stand alone qualification is flexible, useful will regarded. But because shes got no career path, shes therefore choosing subjects she enjoys.

Bizee a lot of the Accountants and even Mathematicians I know are actually quite bad at Arithmetic and as you say computers do the legwork anyway. So I agree we are actually talking about the ways in which people's brains work, logic skills, modelling skills etc. For example an effective trader in a bank is quick on their feet and good at spotting patterns, maybe in some cases comfortable with complicated mathematical modelling, algorithms etc. but also with good negotiation skills and comfortable with acting on their instincts because there may not be time to do anything else. On the other hand a back office risk management person needs to be able to understand what they do but also be a bit OCD in developing processes that limit the risks they take. But I do believe that as any Occupational Psychologist will tell you that people are drawn to the professions that they have the qualities to do well in, motivation follows ability. Definitely happened in my case. You wouldn't put me in charge of a piss up in a brewery but when it came to pinning down creativity into concrete plans I found my niche, in marketing and then business strategy development, just as long as nobody asked me to implement them.

Going back to the OP's original question about "looking at it purely in terms of future employability", there was an article today in The Independent which said that "Leading employers value work experience among graduates more than the grades or the university they have been to" but also says the survey "indicates that Ivy League and Russell Group graduates would still have an edge when it comes to seeking employment as a result of employers’ declared priorities".