Bath, not a Russell group uni, is this a problem for employers?

[tropicalfish]

Hi,
DD has an offer for biochemistry at Bath but is probably going to find a job outside the science sector once she graduates, probably in a well paid City/tech job. She feels that alot of employers, or rather people in charge of recruiting for their department are biased towards recruiting from Russell groups and hence going to Bath would place her at a disadvantage. This is probably due to the significant competition for jobs. What has been the experience of people on the forum with respect to Russell and non Russell Group universities? I'm certainly not saying that Bath is not a great university, just that people show bias towards Russell group graduates.
Many thanks,
TF

Agree with quit..

I got a 2:1 from a uni in biochem, my best friend went to a different uni, again biochem, again 2.1.

While our exam results were both equally deserved, her course at an ex poly was very different- mainly taught facts. Mine at a research uni was based more about analysing data, how to read and describe research, how to design research projects and draw conclusions.

Unsuprisingly, i got offered mainly phd's and research positions. She got offered positions which required less research and more learning skills- nhs scientist, pharma sales, medical information etc.

Different courses equip you with different skills, even in the same subject.

I'd say that work experience (sandwich degree) would give good employability.

There's high competition for jobs but you also have to fit the team where you'll be working, so a good all round skill set and personality. An obnoxious twat won't get the job based solely on university name.

Plus, 3-4 years studying and living at a uni you're only going to for it's name is pretty grim. Choose the place she wants to live in and the course that sparks her interest. Passion and enthusiasm are also key when job hunting.

I went to uni in Bath (old poly) and it is a beautiful city. A wonderful place to live and not too far to London!

I also agree with the poster above, to look carefully at the course and where it leads. A research degree is going to lead into those sorts of jobs.

I just couldn't imagine St Andrews not wanting to be in any prestigious club going!

Bertrand - To lower the tone - I think it is Groucho Marx "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member."

I can honestly say that I have never heard Ds or his friends refer to "RG" universities - that is not to say they would not have looked up rankings etc when they were choosing or be aware of which universities may have a better standing for the subject they were applying for.

Hi Micah,
That is a very interesting key fact about how the course design can equip you for a specific career path.
Thanks to everyone for their replies. DD would love to go to St Andrews but I have said its just too far..
Unfortunately dd is rather concerned about league tables and perceived value of the RG university.

TF

You've said St Andrews is too far? Surely that's your DD's decision to make?

Well it is if shes paying for it and driving herself there

I think the problem for your DD is that schools use it as a lazy shorthand for quality as well as mumsnet . Bath has an outstanding reputation amongst city /tech employers, and links with quite a few of them for sandwich placements etc. leading to employment. Even if your DD is not on one of the vocational courses it is likely there will be Bath graduates involved in the recruitment process who understand what marketing hocum the RG label is.

I have a child at a Scottish university. Yes- the beginning and end of year drives are a pain, but in between she has found amazingly cheap train tickets and flights- don't reject based on travel costs.

I work for a RG uni and I think there's a big misunderstanding of the grouping - I think it's about research excellence, not necessarily teaching or employment outcomes (although investment in one often leads to another). The grouping exists to attract more research income and stronger academics, and it's grown over the years as more universities meet higher standards of research.

The benefits of that are you tend to get people leading the course who are at the top of their fields. Theoretically that means really good up to date teaching, but that's not always true. For one thing, the syllabi often just get repeated year on year and some RGs are hopelessly out of date and stuck in conventional ways of doing thing.

For another, the lecturers are often quite passionate about their subjects but not so much their students. In my experience, the most focused, driven and ambitious researchers are not very good or giving with their teaching.

The key with any course is to look it up directly as a single course in a "worse" university can out-perform those in "better" universities depending on who's teaching, what the syllabus is, and if it has a track record of certain alumni.

Bath ranks around 10th in the UK for biochemistry and a bit higher for maths/economics (beloved by business). I think she'll be OK.

What are the other offers?

St Andrews is brilliant on all fronts - if she'd love to go there (historical/traditional/quirky/small/posh if you like that kind of thing) and she gets an offer, she should go for it! She can just get the train and leave you to it.

RG is a red herring.

The Russell Group is a self-selected group of large research-intensive Universities but membership of the group is no guarantee of quality. Bath is very well-respected in all the fields it offers degrees in and ranks highly in all relevant league tables (including having employability statistics much higher than many other universities due to the emphasis on placements in most courses). However, as it has no schools of medicine, dentistry, veterinary sciences, law, history, geography or english to name but a few, it can't grow enough to qualify for RG status. A degree in Biochemistry is totally unaffected by the lack of these departments.

Fish - there is no such thing as 'qualifying' for RG status by offering certain academic subjects - LSE has no vet med, medicine, dentistry either. It's a lobby group with damn good PR and there is nothing that stops Bath joining - their research quality is certainly good enough, but they clearly don't want to spend the extortionate fee that RG would demand to be allowed to join.

God I would be overjoyed if dd got into Bath! A much better uni than Exeter IMO

A degree in Biochemistry is totally unaffected by the lack of these departments

I would disagree. Again it depends on what she wants out of her degree. A biochem dept in a uni with Medical/dental/vet/pharmacy depts opens up a world of opportunities in disease and applied research. Final year projects for example can be done in hospital rather than labs, with patient samples.

If she is more interested in the Chemistry side, or pure research, or any other area Bath specialises in, then no, likely she won't feel the lack of a Medical school.

I did, er, Nat Sci, at Bath quite a long time ago
It has not stopped me. Bath was (and is) well respected in the areas it focuses in.
I highly recommend the sandwich course if possible. Opens up no end of doors later on.
None RG status didn't stop a large proportion of my course going into accountancy and business after graduation.
It also didn't stop me getting a job where PhD preferred was in the desirables. That said, biochemistry is less mathematically inclined than physics and chemistry, and the majority of folk who went into the city tended to DS the physical rather than biological sciences. I don't know what the biochemistry to city popularity is?

DC1 is at Bath doing a sandwich course in the highly respected Business school. All her other offers were RG and it didn't enter her head to reject Bath for being non-RG, nor would it have entered mine if it were any of my business. I used to work for one of the big 4 accounting firms. We had a continuous stream of Bath placement students through our department and they were invariably offered a training contract on graduation.

all good thoughts. I just need to persuade dd..

If anything Bath graduates are even more successful in the banking sector as far as City jobs are concerned. Has your DD seen this?www.bath.ac.uk/economics/study/career-prospects/

Dd1 has a friend in the year above with Bath as his firm offer for a STEM subject, in preference to St Andrew's, from which he also has an offer. I don't know the ins and outs of why, but this is a very dedicated chap who spent ages considering the various uni rankings for his subject and has a very clear idea of what he wants to do. His top choice was originally Cambridge NatSci - he didn't get in after interview, but it was definitely worth his while applying IYSWIM.

I went to one of the universities clueless mentions - it has fantastic employment and student satisfaction results. When I see the obsession with RG on here, I always think, well more fool you for dismissing some amazing institutions (and more chance for my DC getting a place ).

I agree, burythechains. I've worked in HE careers support / employer liaison for 10 years now, in and out of RG universities, and I'm totally baffled by the obsession with the RG on MN. Some of the newer universities are SO much more creative and dynamic than the RG crowd in building links with employers, introducing placement schemes and years in industry etc etc and that's the stuff that makes you employable. When (and if)my DS gets around to applying that's what I'll encourage him to look at. Get lots of work experience, take advantage of everything the college offers in terms of careers support and you'll be fine!

The grammar schools around me greatly favour Bath as a high quality destination. It is a sought-after destination, judging by the numbers that go there, and is seen as similar to Exeter by many. It requires higher grades than RH for example. There is a bit of an overlap with RG and non RG universities. Is there much difference between Royal Holloway (non RG) and Queen Mary's (RG)? Or Surrey and Southampton?

A genuine question - if Leeds requires AAA for English and Cumbria requires lower grades, does Cumbria get the same number of students with firsts and 2:1s if there is no difference between exam standards? If there is no difference, why do some universities ask for A*AA and are highly selective if students with BBB are just as good and can pass exactly the same standard of exam in exactly the same numbers of firsts and 2:1s? Could Cumbria students do just as well at, say, Oxford as the students who have been chosen to go there?

Is there a correlation between the number of 1sts and 2:1s awarded and entry requirements? No. Ergo a 1st from Oxford (or Bristol or Leeds) is in no way shape or form the same as a 1st from Cumbria, Solent or West London.

There is nothing to stop RG students getting work experience. They are called internships. They just don't take up a whole year. Lots of three year degree students will go on to study a masters in the 4th year or start professional training. Both pathways to employment are equally valid. The newer universities and old polys were always geared towards the world of work and sandwich courses were their thing. Academia was what the older universities did best. The new universities challenged that but it does not mean they are right for everyone.