Are older non Russell Group research unis significantly different?

[HerstoryInTheMaking]

Not very uni savy. Im just looking this all up as DD may be in clearing.

But im wondering if universities like Surrey, Leicester, Sussex, UEA and Lancaster are significantly different to say Liverpool, Cardiff or Sheffield.

Back in my day there was no real difference, a UEA student for example would be considered no different to a Sheffield student.

I know that Oxford and some of the London universities are very good and always have been.

So is there a big difference between say Sussex and Liverpool? DD had identical offers of BBB from both of these but has chosen Liverpool.

Well it depends what you mean by “different”. The Office for National Statistics produced a report around 2 years ago that looked at graduate earnings 5 years beyond graduation. It found RG universities produced a premium in earnings for their students. So you could say there was a difference. However it was very noticeable in some subjects, and less in others. Nursing wouldn’t see a great differential. For Economics it mattered. So subject and university might matter but it depends on degree.

However some non RG are well respected and some RG more than others. You don’t mention a single former polytechnic. For example for Civil Engineering, Sheffield is highly ranked. Ditto Politics. Many non RG universities, such as Bath, Loughborough, Lancaster etc, also have their great strengths. RG salaries are boosted by Oxbridge, LSE and Imperial amongst others and obviously they have a “tail”. of courses at some of the universities from which grads don’t do as well.

I’ve written assuming you mean job opportunities. You might mean lots of other things such as facilities and teaching. Even with jobs, experience, personality and soft skills can matter as much as degree. Going where you will be happy counts too.

I suppose by different I mainly mean graduate outcomes. I guess earnings are apart of that. I would expect for example however that earnings are likely impacted by the region with London unis fairing best.

I guess my query would be if a student is impacted significantly by going to say Surrey instead of Liverpool/Cardiff or Sheffield.

I can't answer your question but I can say your DD has chosen well - both Uni and city of Liverpool are awesome!

I think the biggest difference is between universities and former polytechnics. But then it depends on the subject.

You really need to check the individual rankings. Lancaster for example is ranked very highly at the moment (and it happens to be the best university anyway ).

I guess my query would be if a student is impacted significantly by going to say Surrey instead of Liverpool/Cardiff or Sheffield.

No in all honesty. Places like Surrey, Sussex etc were part of the 94 group, which was set up at the same time as the RG, but on the whole were made up of smaller research-intensive institutions than most in the RG.

Unfortunately the RG's PR was better and the term became synonymous with 'good' thus implying everywhere else wasn't quite as good, and the 94 group folded. But most pre-92s, ie the original universities, are decent quality places with outcomes on a par with RG.

As you say, London uni graduates earn more, not because they went to uni in London, but because they stayed, and London salaries are higher than in the rest of the country.

The ONS report begs to differ on salaries of grads though. They actually say going to an RG does make a differenct to earning power. However you must factor in that RG includes Oxbridge, Imperial and LSE where grads do very well upon graduation in terms of jobs secured and high salaries. Then factor in Durham, Bristol and a few others and grad opportrunities look rosy. However like any university, the degree studied is part of the mix. So is the career you choose. The other bvig factor is where that career is based. Do Liverpool grads go to London for the big salaries? Ditto Sheffield and Cardiff. All trhis makes a difference.

If you remove Oxford, Cambridge and the London RGs from any salary dataset though there wouldn't be a difference. Look at the Discover Uni website for '3 years after graduation' salary data.

They actually say going to an RG does make a differenct to earning power.

And how much is that due to certain employers getting with the Russell Group self-promotion (or Russel Group, as so many who extol its magic powers would appear to believe it to be. Good job the RG didn't change its name when the hotel it's named after did - they'd certainly never get to grips with Kimpton Fitzroy London Group, would they?) and prioritising RG graduates because the RG says that RG universities are the best?

Nine years ago, the other 20 would have been better than QMUL and York.

Oh, and Exeter.

And...Durham.

Good job the RG didn't change its name when the hotel it's named after did

Good job they first met at a swanky hotel - the M4 Travelodge group wouldn't have been the same.

Back to the actual title of the thread, though - yes, there are quite a few people who consider St.Andrews to be superior to Liverpool.

The Russell group did not exist when I went to university. I didn't try Oxbridge although both my younger siblings went there. I was rejected by Durham and Bristol probably because my school very seriously under predicted my A level grades which in fact were the best in the school and I went to Manchester and did fairly well as a London lawyer after that.

So before the R Group when I went I think the pecking order was likely to have been Oxbridge, then Durham, then places like Bristol. I had Leicester as my 5th choice as back up by the way then. My son who just finished his degree at Bristol had Edinburgh as his back up. I cannot remember what his twin's back up was - may be Exeter.

It really would matter what course you were doing. Engineering courses were considered best at the old technical institutes! Definitely not Oxford or Durham.

I think it’s a bit insulting to think higher earnings amongst RG grads is down to employers being biased. They look at far more than degree. Selection tests, interviews, experience and internships, soft skills and all sorts of other elements go into successful candidates. Even gcse and A level results!

In many instances it depends on the course. Take environmental sciences for example. UEA may not be top ten generally. But for that subject it punches well above its weight (a sort of founding father of the subject with its Centre for Climatic Research which was a big thing even in the 80s).
Surrey has a great reputation for physics, but perhaps is a little more middle of the table for other subjects. Reading always had a good rep for Food Science.
There are countless other micro examples

Depends entirely on the subject and desired career.
Good unis are good unis. RG is a business and there are a couple of unis who pay to be part of the club where I wouldn't rate the graduates enough to hire one without a pg degree from elsewhere. Most RG are more research focussed and have higher expectations for independent study but that also means less contact hours. I've held posts at non- RG and RG and am now in industry: in my field the RG grads usually drop out and go back to studying as they don't do as well professionally as the applied subject graduates. My preferred hire has a non-RG first degree, a RG post-grad research degree and a pub or shop job throughout: best of both worlds and a great work ethic.
What subjects are you thinking about OP?

Many employers want relevant work experience. My DH employs grads and would think pub or shop work a waste of time when the grad could have looked for something to get them ahead in their career. RG doesn’t matter though and not bothered about a first. Being trainable is key! Not pulling pints.

MyOMy what are you talking about?

Automotive engineering is Surrey...surely.

And indeed some very good engineering at South Bank University.

I mainly agree with Titchy, but I once worked opposite the Russel Hotel and would not call it swanky. It was conveniently opposite a Spearmint Rhino.

I think there is still a pecking order, but less so than in the past (funnily enough, talking about this in the car today with dc).

RG unis are still considered in some quarters to be preferable, but there is a greater appreciation that other uni produce good students also.

In the past, the ex-polys were considered second class, but many of these have risen up now, especially in certain specialities, so place like Nottingham Trent are considered good unis.

I’m sorry to say that the lowest in the pecking order now are the colleges that produce uni degrees.

Automotive is great at Warwick. DH is a consulting engineer and he’s happy to recruit from more or less anywhere but they have their own tests. They are not automotive.

I should clarify. I did not work in the Spearmint Rhino, but in an office two doors up. Though there were inevitable rumours that various Directors had been spotted nipping in at lunchtime. Though I assume none of the RG plotters.