Relative merits of different universities generally

[herecomesthsun]

I had a conversation with someone I know (Dr A)recently about different universities. I have been trying in a small way to get more support for some students to apply to Oxbridge (and also other Russell Group universities). This person works for a non Russell Group uni. They said that Oxbridge no longer has a cachet - they were very disparaging about it - and that they would specifically discourage their own DC from applying there and that it was widely accepted that other unis were better. They thought that students got less individual teaching by experts at Oxbridge than at other unis.

I thought this was a bit odd, but might be their own individual opinion. I would think that generally, OB was a good idea to get into, if you can, on a have-a-go-but-don't-pin all-your-hopes sort of basis, and then RG was a fairly good idea to pursue; American unis might be fantastic if you can get the funding; other unis might be superb especially if they have a particular course that excels or a tutor who you know is interesting to you. And different settings of course suit different people.

I have studied and taught (in a very junior way) at an OB uni and also studied and taught at other RG unis. I also did a course for work at at non RG uni. My experience suggested, boringly, that OB>RG>non-RG for quality of teaching, support and so on. However, we are talking of patchy, anecdotal experience over 40 years here (as I am long of tooth) so my undergraduate experience for example is very out of date.

Another person who had heard this conversation later said that their partner, another academic of much experience and seniority, agreed with Dr A. So I wondered what the thoughts are on here. And also, how to get objective data to substantiate either point of view?

Dr A sounds like a bitter narcissist who doesn’t want want his kids to try for Oxbridge in case they fail.

Oxbridge has lots of issues - pace, pressure, workload etc - but the tuition is excellent. I was usually taught by senior experts but even on the occasions where it was someone young I’d rather be taught by a shit hot, up and coming, Oxbridge PhD, than elsewhere by an aging Prof who never made it out of the Z-list.

That is very rare that a professor teaches undergraduates

@NellyBarney that's absolute cobblers. All the Oxbridge professors I know, including my DH and his best mate (and the best mate is probably the best person in their field in the world), still do small group teaching with all years of undergrads, as do all their fellow professorial fellows.

DS is hoping to go this September to a non RG but highly recommended Uni as mentioned at the start of the thread (Loughborough). We have done the rounds of Open Days this year and by far the worst experience we have had was in a RG university. The lecturer was rude, dismissive and quite frankly didn’t give a shit about the course he was supposed to be promoting. He also was unable to answer very relevant questions the students were asking. By far the best experience we had was at a much lower regarded Uni (Surrey), fantastic lecturers who really knew their students and were so welcoming and knowledgeable. They welcomed any questions no matter how insignificant they were, such a completely different experience.

DS is actually still waiting for an Offer from Loughborough, which is the best Uni for the course he wants to do but the experience he had at Surrey was so much more positive than any of the RG that we visited.

@boys3. We might also be aware that some areas attract more highly educated parents and very motivated ones. So I would expect differences. However if the DrAs of the country were everywhere, applications from state schools would decrease. Thankfully they might be a dying breed but existing in areas of underprivilege?

Is individual teaching a thing anywhere these days? My DS is in his third year (top 10 for his subject) and has never had any individual teaching at all. They have "tutorials" but pretty large groups, usually 10-20 or so

In my experience, yes, it is. Not individual but in groups of six max.

@WarProf. I spent half my life at both O and C, and the variety/inequality of teaching quality/availability of resources among the dozens of colleges and PPHs, and consequently of outcomes, has always been an issue. The Norrington Table is a ranking of colleges with regards to performance in finals, and shows consistently that outcomes are very often closely linked to college wealth. Unfortunately, there never has been a formal ranking of colleges with regards to their teaching quality. The outcome of every governance report has continually be, quote from the present one: 'it is also notable that the University has had difficulty in demonstrating ... that its internal mechanisms for quality assessment and audit are adequate to ensure that quality (of teaching) is monitored and maintained'.

No point listening to someone who is either an ignorant twat or just a lying one. My direct experience of Oxford past and present is that the professors do do undergraduate tutorials.

There are pros and cons of all universities. At the moment, with all the strikes, I should imagine Oxford and Cambridge are offering considerably better value for money than lecture-based university courses where provision frequently grinds to a halt.

If Oxford or Cambridge offer good courses in the subject you are applying for, what on earth would possess you to automatically exclude them from consideration?

@mrsconradfisher
That is just one student’s experience. Others might well say something totally opposite. Non RG means nothing when it’s St Andrews or Bath or Loughborough - and a few more. However you cannot get away from the fact that the post 92 universities don’t facilitate grads getting higher paying jobs as RG snd some of the others do. Neither Surrey or Loughborough are post 92 group. Also the experience of one Dc with one lecturer is hardly in depth research like IFS carry out.

Not saying it is, didn’t realise we could only quote IFS research and not our own opinions/experiences.
My point was (as a first time Uni parent) that considering the reputation of RG Uni’s (and I haven’t actually said which Uni it was) I expected to be wowed by the course, lecturers and whole experience. In fact it was the complete opposite. These kids are given the impression that RG uni’s plus Cambridge/Oxford are the be all and end all, when in fact many of them are getting students in the door by their name and old reputation alone and not actually delivering a high quality education.

@mrsconradfisher
And you have the research to back up that observation? The RG universities plus a few others are consistently high in the league tables for research, entry qualifications and outcomes. Why you expect to be wowed is beyond me! Why? Was it a stage show? Maybe you mistake slick marketing for quality? All the things you cite on an open day have nothing to do with anything. Were you doing the course? Why were you really judging a university based solely on an open day? The courses didn’t wow you? What on earth were you expecting? Your in depth knowledge of university courses must be very sought after.

There is no research that shows other universities, overall, give better value for money than RG plus a few more. Post 92 is more of a gamble apart from certain courses where they are excellent. Why would a parental observation at open days be worth anything? Just say they weren’t what dc wanted. I think you didn’t wsntbto
like them. Thousands upon thousands disagree though - and guess who get the better paid jobs!

I should imagine Oxford and Cambridge are offering considerably better value for money than lecture-based university courses where provision frequently grinds to a halt.

Interestingly the strike situation governed where DD has applied for her masters. She wouldn't even look at Liverpool, which seems to have a lot of strikes.

Oh please lose the patronising tone…
Not claiming to be the font of all knowledge, like I said this is the first time I have done this so I’m hardly saying I’m a bloody expert.

Yes I expected to be wowed and so did DS. He expected lecturers who were approachable, with excellent subject knowledge and who actually gave a shit about the course they were promoting. It wasn’t just me and DS who were disappointed, all the parents who were held back in a different room were saying exactly the same thing. DS came out of the talk and said the bloke couldn’t even answer a basic question about the content of the course.
I didn’t expect a stage show, I do expect basic knowledge of the course when DS is paying nearly £10k a year to study to study there.

And with regard to the entry requirements, they were lower than some non RG uni’s.

I wanted DS to like the Uni, certainly didn’t go there expecting to feel like this about it. It was his first choice until this experience. But clearly his experience is worthless because all RG uni’s are amazing and will lead to highly paid jobs just because they are a RG. No they will lead to highly paid jobs if the course is taught properly and by good staff, RG Uni’s don’t have a monopoly on that no matter what you think.

Didn’t say they had a monopoly. However it’s not school. Students have to study by themselves. However you, overall, are not correct. The research lecturers do is key. Not answering your question is besides the point. Most people are mature enough to understand why some universities are ranked more highly. It’s not based on the open day show and your beliefs about course content.

So genuine question, would you honestly advise your own DC to choose a RG uni over a non RG uni simply because it’s RG?

DS hasn’t firmed his choices yet so if there is a real reason why he should ignore all his reservations about the course/lecturers and go with it then I will pass them on to him. Like I said it was his first choice, lower grade requirements than others and a RG so on paper it sounds ideal.
If it helps, it was Birmingham.

Yes. I would if Dc were going to get the grades. A few maybe not! Some courses are better elsewhere. Eg art, specific courses linked to certain employers and some others where the strengths of certain universities are acknowledged. Some RG are lower in league tables but Birmingham isn’t one.

Another aspect: how many lecturers did you meet? There could be loads teaching modules and options. Why choose a university based on one or a tiny number? It’s not really logical. What do they research? What value is that to the student?

If it’s a humanities course, university really does matter due to uncertainty of getting a grad level job. Always give yourself the best possible chance. Some stem subjects won’t matter as much as job prospects are fantastic. So subject matters but a decent showing in employment stats means employers like what they see.

Thank you, that’s certainly food for thought. We met several lecturers, but it was the chap leading the talk who was the senior lecturer (Head of Department?) who didn’t seem to have a clue what he was talking about. Just seemed a really bad impression to give on a day which is supposed to show the best bits of the course and the university itself.

But it’s definitely worth reconsidering

@NellyBarney I remember the variable quality of tutorials all too vividly from my undergrad degree. But extremely uneven teaching quality is a problem at all the universities I've studied at, taught in, or examined for.

In any case, that wasn't what I was disputing, it was this: That is very rare that a professor teaches undergraduates - many colleges won't have a professor among their fellowes in the course a student might be reading, and going to another college for tutorials does not happen very often.

It's just not true that it's very rare for a professor to teach tutorials/supervisions - it's much more unusual for them not to do so, certainly in the humanities and social sciences, which are what I'm familiar with. I assume from the references to tutorials and Norrington that you're more familiar with Oxford; at Cambridge it's absolutely the norm for students to go to other colleges for supervisions for all sorts of reasons.

This may be taking the thread slightly off topic, but I think there's an interesting question here re the extent that your decision-making should be influenced by one lecturer at an open day who appears rude, dismissive and ignorant about the course. I think I would consider the relative importance of the lecturer to the department. If a head of department came across like that, I would certainly be concerned. I would probably try to find students already on the course to ask them about their experience. If it was one junior lecturer out of a department of 20, then maybe it's less of a concern, though I still wouldn't see it as a non-point. DS attended one open day where he was considering a niche subject, so he knew the lecturers he met at open day would likely be the ones teaching him if he went there. If the lecturers he met had come across as rude, ignorant about the course and dismissive, I think it would have been entirely sensible to cross that university off the list regardless of its wider reputation.

. However LSE grads outstrip Wolverhampton economics grads by miles on starting salaries so why anyone believes RG is losing its position is beyond me!

that’s less to do with RG and more to do with LSE being a world class economics Uni for years, and Wolverhampton being an ex poly. It’s a no brainer even if you’ve never heard of RG.

RG uni’s do tend to be the tier under OB, Manchester, Leeds etc, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t uni’s in that tier that haven’t joined RG- Lancaster, Bath, St Andrews, Dundee etc.

someone turning down one of those on the basis they aren’t RG is beyond me!

I am not impressed by universities relying on their name and not making an effort to engage on open days or offer days. I guess some universities don't feel they need to make the effort and clearly for a lot of people they are right to think that.
My ds has visited 2 RG universities and 3 non RG (all came about in 60s for what it's worth). He has been impressed by the non RG with sample lectures, talks, engagement. One RG went as far as saying we'll look good on your cv and little else. Ds not impressed. Seemed lazy. But- then it seems some universities can afford to be as have a captive market.

It was the Head of Department. It’s not a particularly niche subject but the questions he seemed unable to answer and was very dismissive of, are a fairly integral part of the course.

I realise it sounds like I’m talking in riddles but I don’t want to outright say the subject or department. But it’s like a Chemistry lecturer unable to answer questions on where they would do experiments or how they would do experiments for want of a better explanation.

But maybe it’s worth rethinking if a RG will make that much difference to his employment prospects

someone turning down one of those on the basis they aren’t RG is beyond me!

I think it has already been established on this thread and other similar threads that everyone knows that Bath, Lancaster, Loughborough and St Andrews are higher ranked than most RG universities, so I would assume the umbrella term RG would include these universities even thought they aren’t.

@Lastnamedidntstick Those non RG universities are mentioned frequently! They are known to be equivalent of RG snd have been acknowledged as such.

Lse is RG. Those who say RG is just a club cannot have it both ways. it’s therefore reasonable to compare the best RG with other economics courses. It’s an extreme one but economics should lead to decent earnings. Not less than not going to uni at all.

I don’t see a head of department not answering everything as that important. Does he/she teach? How highly does the whole department rate? It’s never ever based on one person who is probably a highly paid member of SLT! They really won’t be who a student engages with. Probably won’t see them again.

@mrsconradfisher
I’m sorry if I’m banging on a bit but when you look round do you not speak to other people? Students, people in labs, specialist lecturers? Do you not look at industry links, overseas study possibilities, modules and options snd general feel of the uni and the city? Stufents who give up their time to talk about a course are usually knowledgable. They are living the experience. How much is on line teaching is usually a big thing! What about how the course is taught, examined and marked ? What does the web site say? Some give loads of detail. Core subjects might not change a lot but options certainly do. I’m not seeking to change your dc’s mind but just suggesting feeling a bit underwhelmed isn’t everything that should be evaluated.

Yes we should definitely coin a phrase "RGplus" and add it to the definitions page so people don't have to say RG plus (list of 5/6 others).

Yes we did all that. The students couldn’t answer the questions either (or at least the ones we spoke to). We weren’t allowed in the labs(whereas all the other ones we have visited we looked around the labs) To give further context, it’s a Sports Science course. DS knew it didn’t offer a placement year (all the other ones he applied to do offer this). The questions were around how they offer practical industry experience and real life sports analysis. We assumed that seeing as Birmingham is home to many Sports Teams including football, cricket, swimming etc they would have great industry links and at least be able to have access to real life athletes for analysis in the absence of a placement year. He basically said they have absolutely no links to any sporting teams etc. They were then asked how they do the sports analysis without access to real athletes and no placement year, he just sort of said well I don’t know, maybe on each other. Clearly day to day, all Uni’s will use the own students but every single other one we looked at has been very proud of it’s associations with elite sports, with this Uni it was honestly like it was the first time anyone had answered the question.
DS asked a 3rd Year student, he also said they don’t have anything to do with other sporting establishments in around Birmingham. Just seemed a huge red flag for a course which needs that link for both practical experience and industry links.
Now on the website it does say they do some placements but that certainly wasn’t the impression any of them got.
In contrast we were at Surrey offer holder day last weekend and we had a whole presentation on the placement year and the brilliant industry links that they have. So does he chose a RG for the name and no industry links potentially or a non RG with great placements? Or we keep everything crossed that he gets offered Loughborough!