Which uni for chemistry

[cbatoday]

My daughter wants to study chemistry at uni. Any recommendations on where she could go?

It depends.
What A-level grades is she expecting to get?
Is she happy to go anywhere in the UK?
Would she rather be in a big city, at a campus university or happy with either?

Agree with The first - your dd needs to think about those questions first. When my ds was looking at universities we looked at his predicted grades and league tables and then crossed out anything that didn't fit his criteria (didn't want London, wanted a campus, vg sport facilities etc) until we had a list of about 10. We then looked in more detail at the different courses and ended up with the 5 he put on his UCAS form.

No doubt many parents would be horrified that he didn't visit any of them! He is very happy at Warwick and has just finished his first year.

What are her predicted grades ?

Would start with something like www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings?s=Chemistry and her predicted (Chem) grades.

E.g. Durham wants A*AA, Bath wants AAA-AAB, Cardiff wants AAB-ABB including Grade B in Chemistry.

What can she stretch to.

As others have said - what type of city/town/Uni would she prefer.

Then make a long list and start reducing it.

Don't rely on the guardian league table. It doesn't include research ratings, which really does matter in the sciences, and is far too much based on satisfaction surveys which often are small sample sizes and may largely reflect how easily satisfied the cohort is. The order produced for chemistry is, er, shall we say eccentric?

Another more credible source is the QS ranking, you can filter for region to just see U.K. unis.

www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2019/chemistry

Although it's possible to make rational choices without having visited, imo for sciences it's a good idea if you can to check out the lab facilities.

DS1 is applying for Chemistry in 2020 and we've done a few open days and a bit of research.

To narrow down your choice you need to think about:

1. predicted grades - Oxford and Imperial are 'top' but there are loads of courses which would meet all predicted grades.
2. type of chemistry degree? MChem? BSC? MChem has higher entry requirements and is better regarded. MChem needed if you are planning to follow on with a PhD.
3. linked to 2 - do you want a placement option? If so what? MChems can offer industrial placement, year abroad etc
4. are links to industry important to you?
5. city vs campus
6. are you sure you want a Chemistry degree and not natural sciences? Some of these have a lot of chemistry in and are good if you are also strong in other sciences.

There is more to think about but those questions are a good starting point.

I'm a biochemist so slightly different but the most important thing for us recruiters (and PhD supervisors truth be told) is lab experience. It's the easiest way for us to tell how good a new graduate will be in a lab, I've interviewed lab partners before and one can talk us through everything they did and why and the other will say 'we were looking for it to change colour, it went yellow, em, no maybe blue'.

Get your DD to ask how about what the research projects consist of (length of time working on it, how many people work together, when do they do them during the degree, how do they present the work at the end etc etc), what are the opportunities for doing a research project in one of the professor's labs in the summer and how many students do a year in industry. Oh, and if her grades aren't top whack so she's not looking at Russell Group then ask about the department links to Industry. Our local uni (ex poly) isn't high on any ranking but has very good links with local companies. The other alternative is doing a PT degree while doing an apprenticeship, no fees and lots of industry experience.

For chemistry (assuming you are not looking for Oxford) take a look at Imperial or Nottingham. The latter has an outstanding chemistry Dept. Bristol also has a very good reputation.

I think your daughter should think about what she wants to do after graduating and what her strengths/weaknesses within chemistry are. At A-level my inorganic chemistry was woeful but I was okay in organic and physical chemistry. I went on to study pharmacology, which fitted my interests and abilities, although plenty of other options would have been possible, e.g. biochemistry, that would have left a slightly wider range of post-graduation pathways open.

If your daughter knows what she wants to do, some more specialized courses (analytical chemistry, medicinal chemistry, chemistry for drug discovery, chemistry with management, chemistry and biochemistry, chemistry with medical science, etc.) might be more suitable. As each of these is offered at a limited range of universities, she would have to do more research before deciding what to study and where.

I'd be cautious about more specialised courses, tbh. Im a PhD chemist with a 30+ year career in on of the areas SirToby mentioned - google found two specialised courses in my field, one of which looked like it might be ok but the other tbh looked weak.

Another note of caution is around placements and 'industry years' - I've heard that the reality of these may be somewhat at odds with the gloss. Summer internships can be a good way of experiencing the reality of working in a particular sector, but I'm not entirely sure of the benefit of spending a year of your life working in an area you're not yet qualified in.

A year of work experience in a lab is invaluable. Students will generally be able to take on significant responsibilities over the course of the year.

Summer internships, less so. The time is too short to take on any meaningful responsibilities.

A year of work experience in a lab is invaluable. Students will generally be able to take on significant responsibilities over the course of the year.

I just don't quite get the point of doing it before you're qualified though. Especially not if you're likely to do a PhD, moreso if you now have to first do a masters...

DH is also a PhD chemist who was the R&D manager for a significant chemical company, they employed new graduates and postgrads, rarely had interns and afaik never 'industry year' students.

Horses for courses, I'm just suggesting some caution and to check what the reality is.

The OP made no mention of her DD wishing to do a PhD.

No, and neither did she mention industry years. We've no idea at all what may or may not be appropriate unless the OP wants to fill in the answers to the questions in the second post and discuss further.

I'm not entirely sure of the benefit of spending a year of your life working in an area you're not yet qualified in.

That seems to be spoken from a position of having no practical experience with students who do a year in industry either during their year or after it. The students we have with us mature so much in the year and their scientific knowledge becomes properly embedded because they are using it every day. Practical experience whether it is making up solutions or designing experiments or using modern equipment or working collaboratively on a large project every single day is so valuable and they go back to Uni very ready for their final year project. Science is a practical profession and it doesn't take long for a bright student to get to grips with the real and valuable work we want them to do and to take advantage of the opportunities we give them.

I just don't quite get the point of doing it before you're qualified though. Especially not if you're likely to do a PhD, moreso if you now have to first do a masters...

I did a year in Industry 25 years ago. Not only did the experience help me when I was applying for PhDs but also when I decided to return to Industry after postdocing. And frankly the sooner scientists get practical experience the better, a few years ago I was interviewing students for year in Industry and those from one Uni had already done extended research projects during 2nd year and had worked in a lecturer's lab over the summer between first and second year. Guess which students did best in their interviews? A student who graduates with no practical lab experience at the end of a science degree is at a serious disadvantage.

A student who graduates with no practical lab experience at the end of a science degree is at a serious disadvantage.

Uh, is that actually possible nowadays? used to be more that the final year project(s) would ready the student for industry rather than the other way round.

Science is a practical profession and it doesn't take long for a bright student to get to grips with the real and valuable work we want them to do and to take advantage of the opportunities we give them.

It depends a lot on the sector, mine is pretty theory-heavy and a student after second year would be quite limited in what they could do. It would probably be a year doing something less interesting and valuable (to them and us) than a year with us postgrad.

My DS is at Manchester doing Mchem and enjoying it very much, they seem to have excellent facilities.

I did a year in Industry 25 years ago. Not only did the experience help me when I was applying for PhDs but also when I decided to return to Industry after postdocing.

I also did a year in industry 35 years ago. It gave me a far more realistic idea of what a scientific research career might involve than I could ever have gained just from being an undergraduate student. And I got to spend a year in Switzerland and got paid for it. I'm not sure students get paid now.

I'm not sure students get paid now.

We pay ours, it's pretty standard. There's a lot of competition for the best students.

Just to blow Errol's mind we also have apprentices who come to us after A levels and work for us while doing a PT degree.

That doesn't blow my mind at all, as I said it depends on the sector. My caution arose more from having heard of cases of the reality of industry years not always living up to what some unis had implied ... I think a problem stemming more from the side of the academics than industry.

With regard to the year in industry, yes they do get paid these days. They are quite tough to get a place though. The pay varies from 16-20k on average.

The biggest check that needs to be made is who gets the best placements and how? How much does the university help? Do their contacts provide placements for all or, say, 20%? How do the other students get placements and how good or useful are they?

I cannot comment on the value of chemistry placements but if I concluded I would like a course with one, I would like to be assured of quality.

For what it’s worth, DDs Engineering consultancy takes engineering undergrads for a year. If they are good, they learn a hell of a lot. If they really don’t like it, they can make alternative choices after graduation. DH does see it as a possible recruitment exercise though as well as giving experience to the student.

I think she needs to think about what kind of Chemistry she wants to do (at present) and see how well the courses match that.
For practical experience, there is experience and experience. Some experience is mainly focused on one big project- which means she would only get strong experience in one area of Chemistry, the one her project uses. Other courses can spend a lot more time in the Labs and results in a lot more experience of a wide range of Practical Chemistry.

BubblesBuddy has articulated much what I was thinking and probably not expressing well.