Russell group Unis described as 'elite' in the press?

[mids2019]

Does increasing reference of the Russell group in the media mean post 92 universities that aren't in should be worried about their status?

There are a number of unis such as Bath, St Andrews, Loughboroigh etc that aren't included and certainly back in my day 20 years ago would have been regarded as one of a number of universities that were below Oxbridge in terms of reputation.

The group is selective in terms of research funding I believe but certainly the term does seem to gaining traction in the public's mond.

To be fair, post 92 are different from RG!

The Sutton Trust has led the way in defining “elite” and it now seems to mean competitive. I think most people see St Andrews as elite! Bath and Loughborough too. The greater issue might be for universities like Surrey, Sussex and Essex - the 60s universities.

I also think journalists use shorthand terms to get points across. I’m not sure this worries Loughborough, Bath or St Andrews. They are competitive popular universities.

Different to RG I think might be better English!

Which are the Sutton Trust 30 by the way?

@PresentingPercy

Does journalistic short hand lead on to a wider perception of 'elite universities'.

I agree the number of ways of grouping universties does seem confusing.

So Warwick is a 60s uni and is included in this group? Why has the reputation of Warwick increased relative to similar period universities?

Do yiu mean worried about their status as universities? As in somone is going to make them become polytechnics or colleges?

Or worried because they're are perceived as not as good? And if so by who?

They are mostly good at what they do but RG grads (plus the others above and Lancaster?) do earn more. The lower tier of universities benefitted from far more jobs requiring a degree in a vocational field. Where the issue lies is in grad unemployment and the inability of grads to get jobs where they have taken academic subjects. I think the former polys have always done a great job but now the colleges of HE and old teacher training colleges are universities. Should they be?

Reputation is dynamic. 40 years ago Warwick was certainly more than ok. It’s supply and depend isn’t it. If students see Warwick turning out successful grads, more apply, and course entry requirements go up. When I was at school no-one thought there was any difference between Sussex and Sheffield or Exeter and Essex. Now they do. Perhaps marketing, position in the country and student mobility make a big difference? Not sure.

Also: when I was young, not a single one of my friends had a parent who had been to university. So no knowledge and no comparisons. No advice. Only our teachers had been. All 5 of the maths dept were Oxbridge! I think people ended up where they fancied. No league tables. No clarity much over admissions. You just knew to avoid Oxbridge and the grammar I went to didn’t push anyone there either. We were utterly ill informed. Now so many parents have been to university and there is way more info. Different world and different choices are made.

@PresentingPercy do you honestly think all or even most non RG graduates do vocational jobs? Sounds really snobby and out of touch.

Another thought...
In my experience RG unis do well at research and use this to attract students and a reputation for undergrad and even masters level. When it's actually very mixed in teaching quality. But the myth of superior education is upheld because people think its good quality and recruit privileged people like themselves.

When you actually look atge the courses or have anything to do with universities you realised the idea that RG universities offer better education is really not universally true by any stretch.

It's all about reputation and perception isn't it?

Which is seen as more prestigious: Bath or Liverpool University? St Andrews or Cardiff?

I was the first in the family to go to university, indeed, the first in the family to get a school qualification (most left at 14) and DB passed no O levels yet has gone on to be very successful. All 3 of his children have gone to university (inc RG) but the most successful one, the investment banker living in central London, went to Portsmouth University.

I think this fixation with RG seems to be a Mumsnet thing. Young people should do the course that suits them at the university that suits them and not feel that they always have to trade up. DD's friend has AAAA and had no interest in Oxbridge and was never pushed that way by home or school. She is very happy at a Northern University (not Durham).

That should be 4 A stars at A level.

@PresentingPercy

I agree about the relative prospects from different tiers of universities.

Graduate employability and salaries should be made explicit in course information. It is difficult doing a degree then finding yourself in a non graduate job.

@Bowbridge

What were the reasons for not considering oxbridge? Course type, geography or admissions process?

Sutton Trust 30 :

University of Bath, University of Birmingham, University of Bristol, University of Cambridge, Cardiff University, Durham University, University of Edinburgh, University of Exeter, University of Glasgow, Imperial College, King's College London, University of Lancaster, University of Leeds, University of Leicester, University of Liverpool, London School of Economics, University of Manchester, Newcastle University, University of Nottingham, University of Oxford, University of Reading, Royal Holloway, University of London, University of Sheffield, University of Southampton, University of St Andrews, University of Strathclyde, University of Surrey, University College London, University of Warwick and University of York.

Still no Sussex, interestingly.

Out of interest,OP, where in the media are you seeing and hearing this?

But the grad prospects from Oxford for history are 81%. That is a very blunt tool.

[quote mids2019]@Bowbridge

What were the reasons for not considering oxbridge? Course type, geography or admissions process?[/quote]
The girl was very able in all subjects - clean sweep of A stars/9s at GCSE but did not have a passion or show a talent in any particular subject...she was just good at them all. At first she considered nursing and went on a taster summer school but then ruled it out. She did not really enjoy her A level subjects but just excelled at them all (a mixture of languages, humanities and sciences). She certainly could not have given a good interview at Oxbridge as she did not actually know what she wanted to study.

When she got a clean sweep of A stars, a parent on results day asked her mum "So is she going to Oxford or Cambridge?" When her mum said where she was going (northern RG), all the parent could say was "Oh, that is a shame." Her mum was livid. It certainly took the shine off the day. The girl is going into her final year and still does not know what she wants to do and is luke warm about her degree... but is getting top grades, of course!

@Piggywaspushed

A lot of leaver results for schools now mention the Russell group and it is mentioned in a number of articles on higher education in the press generally (for instance looking at salaries)

@Bowbridge

Interesting that someone is naturally intelligent and yet does not have a particular focus.

I guess that there are a few like her.

I

I don't think news articles mentioning RG is new mids.

St Andrews is not in the Russell Group is it, but is frequently higher than all of them (sometimes between Oxford and Cambridge) in various league tables.

Bath, I think, seem to be making a name for themselves by being quite innovative with their course offering and focused on student satisfaction. This is the impression I get. They market themselves proactively and don’t simply rest on their historical reputation, as if that’s all you need. All their courses seem relevant to career prospects and usually include an year in industry / study overseas. They are usually in the top 10 unis these days, above many RGs and I’m not sure when that started? Their grade requirements are also more flexible than other unis - not just contextualisation, but there is a policy of lower entry grades if there is also an A or above in EPQ. Never been there but DS applied and of all the unis, their communication has been the best which reflects well on them, I think. As their courses often tend to be a little different, they allow people to do a separate PS more tailored to their courses if necessary.

Exeter is a confusing one because for some subjects they have different grade requirements according to which campus you are on. If DS had applied, it would have been A*AA to be on the main campus (though I heard they sometimes accept slightly lower on results day), or AAB if he didn’t mind being in Cornwall!

@mids2019 there are also students who are academically able but just not that way inclined. My daughter (and her dad) for example - all 8s and 9s at GCSE and likely to get A/A* in all A Levels but she just doesn’t enjoy academic study. She’s a people person; friendships are her main interest!

We were chatting earlier and she thinks occupational therapy is the route for her. Her grandad thinks she’s ‘better than that’ though! She’s also getting all hung up about RG universities, as she goes to a grammar school and that’s the way they’re pushed. I tried to explain that an RG university probably didn’t matter for a vocational course but she’s not convinced.

@crazycrofter Your DD sounds like my DD. She is very intelligent, at a top RG, but does not enjoy studying and is a people's person. She loves 'doing' and getting involved with projects. There is no way she was going to apply to Oxbridge. Oxbridge is not for everyone, even if you have top grades.

DD's friend just has never found a subject she is passionate about. She did find a boyfriend at university so she has had a great university experience!!

Haha, that’s a pretty good result from uni, I know dd would be happy with that @Bowbridge! She would hate the short terms and high pressure at Oxbridge and like your DD’s friend, she wouldn’t be able to convince them she was passionate about a subject, because she’s not!

It’s just counter intuitive to assume that top grades = highly academic/super interested in an academic subject. I know that if you’re not sure what you might do as a career and will probably be aiming for a graduate scheme, then academic subject at an RG/top 20 is a good move. But it’s silly when students looking at vocational subjects like healthcare or design, feel they have to worry about RG.

'Elite' and league tables are subjective. The Times Higher Ed 2021 table has St Andrews in the UK 30s (top 200-250 worldwide). The Guardian league table has St Andrews at No.2 above Cambridge!

It is a historical fact that the polytechnics were largely set up to offer courses which were vocational in the main. The colleges of HE were almost entirely vocational as were colleges of education. There is no getting away from the historical perspective that these polytechnics were wet up to be less academic than the existing universities. The new universities like the missing Sussex were set up to ensure more people could access academic education. Over the years,the edges have been considerably blurred. Is this a good thing?

Years ago there were not nursing degrees, social work degrees etc. You became qualified via another route. Ditto with primary school teachers in the main.

Yes, there is a difference between St Andrews and Cardiff and Bath and Liverpool - depending on the job you want. Grades to get in might be quite different too.

Neither is RG a Mumsnet thing. It is in school prospectuses, it is in the press, it is pored over and dissected by every social mobility group: it is compared to other universities by the Office for Fiscal Studies. Comparisons are everywhere. Most people do rate the majority of RG (not all I think) above the other groups but you need to add in a few more who have achieved similar status. The 30 the SuttonTrust use is too wide. The old 13 they used was more accurate in terms of elite. 30 are not elite.