Are there any other 'prestigous' universities in the UK apart from from Oxbridge?

[mids2019]

Are there any other 'prestigous' universities in the UK apart from Oxbridge?

My daughter was watching some American teen thing yesterday on Netflix and there was girl who's entire future lay on getting into Yale and Ivy League entrance was the be all and end all for this particular group of teenagers.

I know the US has a different HE system and culture but do we still have similar views in the UK in 2022? If there are prestigious universities in the UK how would you define this prestige? If we only allow Oxbridge the prestige label does this mean anyone who wishes to go a prestigious university has one (or two) Oxbridge or busy type application experiences then that ship sails?

Or maybe prestige is an archaic class ridden concept that is fading this millennium?

I was drawn to one of the RG v other university discussions and it may appear that the RG is being used as an artificial label to convey prestige in an HE environment where competition for Oxbridge is more intense than ever.

I agree, especially the Sloane Ranger

I went to one of those you listed and the Sloane quota was massive!

Exeter? Really?
That shows how subject specific our perceptions are, I suppose.

Glasgow was founded in 1451.

and St Andrews 1413

Exeter is full of private school lasses who are scared to go North of the M25 😂

It's more specifically southern English posters (who are also liable to miss out Manchester), not 'all the English posters'! DDs peers didn't consider many southern unis but certainly had the likes of edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews on their 'aspirational' lists (as well as all the many excellent unis in England from the midlands up).

Oxford and Cambridge are the only UK universities in the global top ten. UCL and Imperial are in the top 20. Kings and Edinburgh make it into the top 40.

Not reading 7 pages but I think for pure name recognition regardless of subject, Oxbridge is pretty standalone. That's not to say a number of other universities don't have fantastic reputations.

However, in terms of prestige, I think the Americans have a broader curriculum at undergrad whereas we have prestigious unis in specific fields, say, LSE for economicsy stuff, Cranfield for engineering, SOAS for particular humanities and languages, St Martin's for Art etc. Universities people would be impressed to see on your CV but only for maybe certain areas of expertise. This may not necessarily be reflected in sky high league table placings.

Depends on the list. None of them are the best for tech / engineering.

I don’t disagree, in that all tables are flawed, and a lot depends on the methodology used. However OP is asking whether there are any prestigious universities in the UK other than Oxford and Cambridge.

However flawed the QS table is, it suggests that there are other Universities including UCL and Imperial that have a good claim to be considered as prestigious. And for some subjects areas the LSE is up there as well. (Albeit not great for STEM, and indeed the Courtauld would be a better option for History of Art, and RADA for drama!)

I was replying to Thing47

Reading with intrigue

I think so much depends on subject in the UK. I have a friend who recruits geography graduates for a comostgat does consultancy relating to soil science and stuff, and he is quite picky about which unis they're from, because some do more physical geography and so on. (Don't remember details.) And Bournemouth is known for its animation course, but it's otherwise not a prestige university, I don't think.

Musicians, artists, drama students, vets, medics - they're all going to be looking at different sets of unis, because not all places offer their subject, and also any given uni could be the best at molecular biology, but poor at English Lit, but they'll be recruiting totally different sets of students. And that's as true for Oxbridge as anywhere else. They're not the best at everything.

comostgat is meant to say "company that". I have no idea what autocorrect is up to, but it's nothing helpful...

The league tables are also biased towards research rather than undergraduate teaching, so I really don't think they're the be-all. In the USA, there are colleges that focus on undergraduate teaching with maybe a few master's programmes and they can offer a much better experience for many students. No one would sneer at a degree from Amherst or Wesleyan, but they won't appear on any research-intensive lists.

As someone with a senior in high school in the USA - the admit rates are hot garbage, as Americans would say. The universities encourage people to apply when they haven't really got a shot as low yield rates make them look better. There's no centralised application process so you can apply to as many universities as you'd like. It is very competitive certainly but the system is even more biased than Oxbridge when it comes to legacy admissions, private schools, obscure sports, etc. So you can't infer your personal chances from the stats.

Quite true - some of my "various factors". But actually I think that's another reason the Ivy League and other prestigious unis in the US have such a hold on the popular cultural imagination. Anyone can apply, and many do who have no realistic chance; whereas few here would apply to Oxbridge if they were way off.

@knitnerd90 I agree. There are further structural reasons why comparing international/US acceptance rates with UK acceptance rates is a mug's game.
There is no centralized admissions process in the US, so many candidates apply to more than a dozen institutions. In the UK the UCAS system limits applicants to 5 choices, with the further restriction that you can only apply to one of Oxford and Cambridge.
A system with decentralized admissions and no limits on numbers of applications inevitably results in more applications and lower offer rates than a system with centralized admissions and limits on numbers of choices per cycle. It says nothing about the selectivity or quality of the institutions.

yes - and meanwhile every year it seems the US news finds a story on someone who has gotten admissions to all 8 Ivy League universities! It's ridiculous and makes a mockery of the statistics. As I understand it, the use of the Common Application here has driven this process even further. 25 years ago, you had to manually fill out applications for each university, write a separate essay, etc. (So I have been told by the admissions counsellors)

Hands down Oxford and Cambridge are the most prestigious. They have had nearly a thousand years to build their international brands. They are globally known by just about everyone. There is a good chance that an Inuit in Alaska or a farmer in Mali or gas station attendant in Alabama will recognise the names and be impressed due to their reputations, glamour and representations in pop culture. It must be very validating for alumni to know that when they drop the name of their alma mater, everyone will be impressed. If a person goes to Imperial or the LSE, its just not the same. Fact.

However, when the Imperial grad applies to CERN, CERN will know; when the LSE grad applies to Goldman Sachs, Goldman will know. The brands of Oxford and Cambridge are some of the best and most valuable in the world, hands down. But its more “fire power” than most people need. For the UK’s very impressive “Second Tier” all the relevant people know and are suitably impressed.

The real issue is how slow the next tier of universities after Oxbridge are to give offers. It’s causing chaos in the system as students wait to see if they are accepted at:
Durham
Edinburgh
The LSE
St Andrews

Imperial, UCL and Warwick are offering more quickly, but are certainly as prestigious. Something needs to be done to speed up these schools, the same way as Oxbridge offers are dealt with early.

This is just my gut from hearing about local children and reading Mumsnet. I am sure genuine stats could be compiled to figure where the true bottlenecks are and clear them.

Agree - so hard to get into

drama courses are a nightmare to get in - something like 16 places for acting at Rada

Plenty of central London kids from my school went up to Manchester to study. Infact, they were privately fuming about meeting so many of their old classmates there there because they each hoped to be the only one!

I agree with the post about science/finance employers knowing exactly what they would like to recruit. However, in other areas like law and management consultancy, the magic circle firms and places like Bain and McKinsey are Oxbridge/Ivy League heavy (even after a decade of trying to address it). The tiny number of regular students they admit are usually loaded and have enough family connections to forge their path independently.

The real issue is how slow the next tier of universities after Oxbridge are to give offers. It’s causing chaos in the system as students wait to see if they are accepted

It doesn't cause 'chaos'. It may cause some of the applicants and their anxious parents some stress, but doesn't make any material difference to the outcome of whether they're offered a place or not. The offer or rejections should all eventually come ahead of the date by which the applicants need to choose their firm and insurance. There's a bit of chaos caused by applying on the basis of predicted grades hence clearing and sorting out accommodation but that's a whole other topic.

The "equal consideration" deadline is late January, so the more selective / oversubscribed institutions need to hold back most of their offers until January to ensure they can offer a level playing field. oxbridge and medical schools are exceptions due to the October admissions deadline. It may cause a certain amount of angst among those who have applied early (usually those who submitted their 4 other choices at the same time as their oxbridge choice, but it's not causing "chaos" - that's the way the system works.
The real issue is that everyone knows it would be fairer to switch to a post-results application system, because the current system works on predicted grades, references etc (i.e. hot air) and can be gamed by private schools and well-heeled parents, but nobody is willing to put in the effort to make it happen.

Objections to the word “chaos.”

Year after year, students wait right up to the final week, day, even after the deadline to know if their have a place st Durham, the LSE etc. This means that York, Lancaster, Newcastle, etc. are left waiting on students to decide on offers till they hear from their preferred choices. This has knock on effects right down the chain. It hurts the next tier of students, compresses the time to get paperwork in place, sort out housing, etc. It’s hardly ideal.

Oh absolutely, I totally agree with you. And I would add all sorts of other names to the list for specific courses as well. For example if you want to work in engineering in the motor racing industry, Oxford Brookes is one of the best places to go because most of the manufacturers have bases in or around the area and have direct input into the course content so they know that graduates will have the specific skills they are looking for.

My point re. the QS rankings was only that several posters seemed to be holding it up as the main source of worldwide rankings, and I would be careful about doing that. It is one source of information among many, in the same way that each UK league table tells you something, but none of them tell you everything because they all give different weight to different metrics.