Which are the 23 universities singled out for unconditionals?And...

[Miljah]

...are most in financial trouble?

So, in the end my DS's application range was from BBB (which ended up offering CCD) to BCC, so not much difference really.

It's like that for many students, my DD was given A*AA from one university, AAA from two universities and AAB for two others.

Interestingly everyone who I know who went to private school (including me) got high predicted grades. My Dd’s class (state school) were told they don’t predict A* on principle. Then she found out a couple of the Oxbridge applicants were given them. She wondered if she had put an Oxbridge uni down she would have got higher predictions and an unconditional at one of her RB as an ‘exceptional’ student (we know both of them did this).
I managed to talk my way in to a RB uni on a different course with vastly lower grades.

Grrr RG not RB

Yes but your range of offers is wider. brizzle. Mine only went for the BBB one because we knew he'd get a contextual offer ( which he did). Once your PGs are BBC there isn't a lot of wiggle room!

Zanda, I was predicted lower grades at private school (no one ften got good greades at that private school) and then I got the best results in the school. Durham turned me down probably because of the predictions but I did fine at Manchester - best in the year., .law prizes etc. It is an interesting issue as to whether it is bettero be the best in a worse place or medium in a better place. I certainly felt I must be good whereas were I middle of the road at Oxbridge perhaps I would have not been so ambitious.

If we are still talking about unconditionals as long as they don't make people accept a worse univiersity which will blight their CV for life and;/or get worse A level grades than they will ever get then it doesn't much matter. if it does, then it does matter. The only qualifiction my son has used has been his driving test passed at 17 and I suppose he also needs basic reading for his job too. So he really could have left school at 14 rather than university at 21 although he is happy with his choices and glad he went to Reading.

Tapas - employers do know which universities are best and they won’t be confusing the two brizzle ones.

The whole problem with UIFs and staying local is that it might not lead to anything much in terms of a career. That’s why students should have correct info about courses and likely progression from them. The info is available but it’s hard to find. The price of the degree is the same. The cost of living in Hull or Sheffield won’t differ much. So no one needs to stay local. They don’t have to stay in a deprived area with a degree from a top university. Some DC would be better off with an apprentuceship but the best ones are highly competitive and are they local? If DC won’t move, that avenue might be closed too.

Degrees are not remotely equal. Some degrees have no group work at all. My DD did joint MFL. She stood or fell by her own efforts. Some degrees are taught almost like school where students don’t do much research or independent study and can rely on others to help in group work.,

When I said about further study, I didn’t mean a degree. Many young people do professional qualifications which are sponsored by employers. They don’t pay.

As there is no need to pay the grad tax (loan) if you are a low earner, great! The government has fully funded your degree.
Nothing wrong with that!

employers do know which universities are best and they won’t be confusing the two brizzle ones.

Good grief, no - they'd be hanging on for a long time for an architect or a radiographer if they were expecting the one at the top of the alphabet to supply one, for a start.

they'd be hanging on for a long time for an architect or a radiographer if they were expecting the one at the top of the alphabet to supply one, for a start.
Precisely. I do wish that people would realise that there is no such thing as "good" and "bad" universities. There are "good" and "bad" courses - that is an entirely different thing. The brizzle uni at the bottom of the alphabet has some world class courses, as does the one at the top of the alphabet. They're just in entirely different subject areas. Employers, particularly in niche areas, are aware of this and will actively recruit from those best courses, irrespective of RG or overall uni ranking as it's all about the course and the quality of those graduates.

I think it does to certain extent. My nephew works at a big marketing firm in London. Hes been interning in the HR dept. Their graduate scheme isn't really degree specific is open to a good variety of degrees. But they get so many applicants that come through the door via year in industry/sandwich courses. They can spot which unis provide students who have the better statistical/ analytical and application skills by year 2. They have bank of data from which unis and courses that provide the better graduates and they then seem to favour those as their preferred choice of uni and courses.

Sorry English is rubbish today

They can spot which unis provide students who have the better statistical/ analytical and application skills by year 2
Exactly. When I worked in graduate recruitment there were two or three specific courses we knew taught the skill set we needed. We weren't blinded by the rankings, we were interested in graduates who had the skills to do the jobs we were offering.

In my nephew place of work because theres a strong element of maths stats and coding and everything is fast paced. They want quick thinkers and people that can adapt with their international clients need to be worldly and cultured. Certain uni's have this in abundance. But he said it really is pretty much the top 20 or so sadly . Its mainly also because it cost them too much money in training so rather recruit those that come from robust courses.

I didn’t say there were good or bad universities. I said employers knew the difference beteen universities and courses. Clearly they do and it depends wholly what they are looking for! Lots of degrees, eg Law, don’t have s year in industry. So does that mean a marketing company wouldn’t employ a law grad? Of course not. I’m sure an intern in HR won’t be totally up to speed with recruitment!

"When I worked in graduate recruitment there were two or three specific courses we knew taught the skill set we needed"

I wish this kind of information was available to potential students when they are selecting their choice of university. Everywhere I have looked it just states what percentage of students are in employment within 6 months of graduation. It doesn't specify whether they are doing a job that requires their degree or whether they are pulling pints in their local Wetherspoons.

Maths and coding is one element of a marketing company. It’s certainly not the only grad skills they would be looking for. Creativity can play a part too!

I wish this kind of information was available to potential students when they are selecting their choice of university. Everywhere I have looked it just states what percentage of students are in employment within 6 months of graduation. It doesn't specify whether they are doing a job that requires their degree or whether they are pulling pints in their local Wetherspoons.
I think one of the reasons for this is that it can be a fast changing landscape and a course that suits an employer perfectly today may not do so in 2 or 3 years' time. The employer's needs may change, the course may change (key lecturers leave) etc etc.

I think it depends on what type of marketing company . Nephews is mainly data analyses generated from finance companies, supermarkets large corporates and their depts. From a grad recruitment point they do seem to look at uni and courses alot and work with certain uni to recruit the 3rd year work year placements. if someone ha come in as a normal applicant not graduate then yeah experience trumps.

Haven't looked for a while tapas but I think it's unistats (might be Which) that ahs stats on % graduates in employment in an occupation requiring a dgree (they have a more pithy way of expressing this!)

Thank you Piggy. I subscribe to Which so I will have a look.

FWIW, it was Birmingham who first started giving out Unconditional if Firm offers about 4-5 years ago. Despite their spin about it reducing stress for students, it was obviously a marketing tactic, as at the time they were one of the less popular Russel Group universities. The year after, the idea was quickly picked up by other universities that were around mid-table and of course this puts pressure on other universities to follow suit. I agree that none of the universities on the list are dreadful, but they all perhaps have reasons why they might struggle to recruit compared to some other, comparable institutions.

I also agree this is a symptom of the marketisation of higher education, not the cause.

In some ways, I feel the early pressure put on students to rush into booking accommodation is worse. With Unconditional-if-Firm offers, if students realise they have made a mistake, they can at least be released from the offer with no penalty and find another option e.g. via clearing. If a student has been pressured to sign up for accommodation, they may face financial losses if they do this, which puts even more pressure on them to go to a uni that might be wrong for them.

Unis seem to be opening up their accommodation (on a first come first served basis) earlier and earlier every year- often before applicants have received all their offers. I do think this puts a lot of unfair pressure on applicants, particularly those who may be nervous about the alternatives (such as private halls) as they can be more costly/less well supported.

Also unistats has a lot of detailed statistics on employment destinations:

unistats.ac.uk/subjects/employment/10007783FT-LLP2/ReturnTo/Search

(Course picked totally at random- except for the fact it's near the start of the alphabet!)

tapas no subscription required for that bit! It's just university.which/co.uk

Lincoln vs NTU has interesting stats for my DS's course. On those alone, Lincoln was the right choice : far higher continuation rates , and a higher profile of entrants have the required UCAS points or higher (the vats majority, in fact) : so , for them , UiFs seem to pay off . NTU has really poor continuation rate and a higher number of students entering with grades lower than the tariff : might be why they have dropped UiFs for his course.

jay absolutely right about the accommodation! It's a horrible situation at NTU, amongst others.

Oh lordy thanks for the unistats jayblue literally imputted the most popular degree courses for our local uni. Which majority of the students at our comp go to . The salary they getting after 3 years is £15k-£19k . Imputted the same course at one of the popular mumsnet Russell group uni and its £23k-£32k massive difference!!

Oh dear. The course and university DD has chosen has the worst statistics out of the ones she applied to (and it is a top 25 RG university), and the one that has the best was the university and city that DD really didn't like.