Employers sift applications by university ranking

[Ironoaks]

[[BBC News - Job applications 'filtered by university ranking'
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49728941]]

This contradicts the advice I sometimes see on Mumsnet stating that employers are blind to the institution and only sift on degree classification.

In my job most of my colleagues have gone to 'bog standard' universities, they have well paying jobs and continually develop their professional knowledge through training and learning on the job. University is just the start. and i sort of wish we could go back to calling some universities polytechnics again so we could ban the 'mickey mouse' phrase which is shit quite frankly.

I can't open the link but I think law firms etc will sift through only wanting ivy league type graduates as it has always been an elite profession. But really do we need more lawyers?

Very interesting discussion! I've worked in graduate recruitment and on the university side. In reply to the questions on whether organisations take grads with no work experience - yes a lot will, if you can demonstrate that you've developed great skills elsewhere, such as through voluntary work, clubs, societies, group work etc. This can help individuals who may not have access to work / internships for whatever reason.

Saying that, I'll always remember the graduate recruiter from a well known middle class supermarket answering this question to say they'd seen a really great application from someone with no work experience. BUT they had some really good skills from when they did their trip to Mount Kilimanjaro! You can imagine how that went down in a room full of lefty careers people Completely missed the point around social mobility and diversity in recruitment.

There's no gain without pain, as they say (kinda). Why should someone who puts in 15hrs a week at an ex-poly have the same job prospects as someone who puts in 40 hrs a week at Cambridge?

Because some people don't have the option of Cambridge, no matter how bright and committed they are. And the people who have to live at home to study tend not to be white, middle class and possibly privately educated.

Just in terms of the Russell Group comments: I work in a Russell Group university and it (secretly) makes me cross that there is such smugness here about being in the RG club.

I think it should not be forgotten that the RG selected themselves in terms of size and research capability at the time it was formed... and that some of those universities are now struggling to keep up.

On the other hand, there are several universities who are not in the RG who are storming ahead, as has already been mentioned.

Also: do Oxford, Cambridge or the big London universities go around bigging themselves up on the basis of Being In The Russell Group? They do not.

Interestingly we all know that there are universities who have been handing out unconditional offers to students who probably wouldn't benefit from them. For example, a girl from DD's school was struggling in 6th form and getting Ds, Es and Us all through 6th form. She got an unconditional offer from a non RG university and has struggled through the first year.

If these lower ranking universities (for want of a better phrase) have a reputation for handing out unconditional offers for the less academic students I can see why firms tend to avoid recruiting from them.

The system now is more about bums on seats than whether university is right for that young person. Then you end up with threads like this where some of us see the bigger picture and some are blinkered by the idea that a non RG university isn't worth considering.

I hope my history comments didn't offend. I did state that this is what I had read somewhere.

I've got a degree from one of the MN beloved ones and recent RG joinee - and it's got me probably one or two interviews over time and that's about it. Was not the magical door-opening tool that some tend to ascribe to it - and actually when I went back there for my PGCE - the quality of the course was actually utterly shit.

Now I'm off to one of those polytechnics that make MN clutch their pearls in horror - I've got kids, it's a very specialist degree not offered by many universities in the country and it's the only one reasonably commutable - of course I obviously should just not do the qualification as it's so utterly abhorrent. Plus I do love the assumption that there are obviously no students at any other universities but the MN-approved elite who work at their work at all and the rest just sit around in the bar all day (I did that at the posh uni - this time around I'm working my fucking metaphorical nuts off because I want the bloody first I missed by 2 fucking marks last time around!)

It just depends what you are after. high paid traditional graduate careers tend to want people with all As etc and they are more likely to be at the universities where it is harder to get in and the students on the courses may want to be with other students of a simlar intecllectual level. Other students choose for other reasons - my twins' school ( majority non white school) have quite a few boys who deliberately try to pick one that is not too white as that isj ust a massive change and not necessary as they can go to places like LSE where the racial mixture is wider and the academic standard as good as some others. Other people need to live at home and the nearest to their house even if it takes people with CCC is the best option. Others want a course only offered in XYZ place.

All teenagers need to know is that many employers in higher paid jobs do have a bit of a pecking order even if for those just out of university they may be trying to get a mix of people. Make an informed choice. People can even date based on university attended in due course or when an empoyer 10 years after you graduate has 1000 CVs they may pick someone who went where they did - not best practice but can happen and that might be a sink comp and an ex poly of course just as much as Cambridge.

Lucky you to get two bites of the cherry! Some of us never had one bite!

However, I question the comment about OU degree holders at the big firms quoted. Every single person I know who has done OU went as a mature student with tons of work experience. I bet they were not recruited as 21 year olds fresh from OU! It just doesn’t happen.

The main aspect of all of this is for young people to be encouraged to aim high. If it’s vocational: still aim high! The best course in your field for your future ambitions. Humanities subjects are definitely a case where RG carries more punch when applying for jobs although some degrees are unlikely to hit top salaries even from the most high ranking organisations. But there is a better chance than the same subject at the old college of HE down the road which is now a university. Again though, it depends what you want.

Some RG universities have few students from independent schools. Sheffield is one. I suspect QMU might be another. They are not all full of privileged young people and it’s ridiculous to think this is the case. Anyone in recruitment should use suitable sifting attributes for each job. These shouldn’t be whims or individual preferences. They should be clearly demonstrable attributes, training, education etc that suitable employees will have. The idea that someone throws out all privately educated applicants without work experience is perhaps missing out on good people. There may be a stellar applicant there if all other criteria are met.

Few of the lowly ranked universities are ex polys. Most are ex colleges of teacher training or colleges if HE. Many have local attendees and never should have become universities. The HE level is still needed and should have remained.

I went to Leeds Polytechnic (aka Leeds Beckett these days)

@Ginfordinner and Leeds met for a while! 😉