Target University

[holdingtight2]

Just wanted to know what it means when a University is called a target university?

What's the context? Is it in the context of applying, so it's the one you're applying for?

@GreenLampOfLove My niece has offer for maths at Warwick and university of Birmingham but prefers Birmingham so she can commute. She has been told by teachers that Warwick is a target university so if she decided on Birmingham her employability options would be very poor.

I'd say it means your niece's school is talking bollocks. Her prospects from Birmingham will be just as good as Warwick.

I assume they mean employers like Warwick grads, but unless she's doing Maths, both unis are highly respected by employers - both are RG for example.

Oh it is Maths! In which case Warwick is indeed globally excellent and she really should consider it seriously. Does she need to commute? They're not that far apart.... On the other hand if she really does need the support from being at home, she should go where she feels most comfortable. No point in starting at W if she then drops out!

Ermmm... I am ashamed as a teacher when I read such grade A bollocks. 'Targeted universities' does indeed mean some universities are particularly targeted for recruitment in things like fairs and milk rounds. Birmingham is well know for being one of these and has some of the highest employability rankings of any UK university!

A quick squizz at Discover Uni or league tables which report employment stats would show them this.

I would say, however, that is they mean Warwick has a better academic reputations for maths, this would be correct. Stellar in fact. But they shouldn't be dressing this p in 'targeted university' terms.

Here is Warwick. Their maths grads certainly seem highly paid:

discoveruni.gov.uk/course-details/10007163/U-G100/FullTime/

Satisfaction scores are good too.

Birmingham:

discoveruni.gov.uk/course-details/10006840/K0289/FullTime/

She should attend the university that suits her not this made up status things. Yes Warwick is good but so is Birmingham and the mental health support at Warwick sucks, personal experience

Warwick is a no brainer for maths (for most). It’s only behind Cambridge really. Their grads can do well for jobs but so can Birmingham maths grads. If they want to. If she’s just saving money by commuting, or not ready to to university, it’s a shame if this colours her choice. I also wonder if she will stay at home for work too? So maybe her horizons are limited and Warwick won’t convey much advantage, for her, over Birmingham? If she taught it would not, for example. For many applicants Warwick is seen as highly aspirational and world class.

'Target university' is a loose phrase that is applied to those unis that have been seen, historically, as recruitment pools for lucrative 'high finance' roles in the City of London. This is based, in part, on their reputation for churning out very bright maths, economics, computer science, physics and engineering grads.

However, it is important to bear in mind that attending a 'target' uni does not mean you automatically land such roles; nor does it mean attending a non-target uni mean you are locked out from City jobs. Furthermore the City is not the be all and end all for everyone.

What does she actually want to do with her Maths degree? Not very relevant having a better chance at university X than at university Y of being wooed for a career in investment banking, if she really wants to be a maths teacher for example.

Presumably it is the IB sort of employability that the school mean, and not that she'll never get a job at all if she chooses Birmingham over Warwick...?

Warwick is the W in COWI: Cambridge, Oxford, Warwick, Imperial. These are recognised as a tier of their own within UK mathematics. My uni is in the tier below that and, sincerely - keep reading! - with all respect B’ham is in the next tier. (DH is a Maths professor; I am in STEM.)

This is mainly to do with research power, although it has had a knock on effect for the strength of the UG cohort and made UG admissions highly competitive. Depending on your DD’s professional aspirations, it may be easier for her to launch with a good degree from Warwick.

That degree will be harder to earn, although I always get a good feeling at Warwick and the students look happy on the whole. The ones I have known enjoyed the place.

However B’ham is a lovely campus with a fine Maths programme. It is a perfectly good launching pad for many careers and probably a less demanding course, therefore less stressful. B’ham is a terrific city.

PPs are correct that it’s a question of what fits best with DD’s personal goals. I also value applicants’ intuitions when they visit prospective universities. Perhaps your DD will gain insight by doing that. Eg Warwick is a campus uni in the middle of nowhere. Students largely make their own fun. A huge array of clubs, societies, etc. B’ham has a major city with much to offer on the doorstep. (As well as clubs and societies). Many DC will strongly prefer one or the other.

Warwick takes loads of mathematicians who don’t get into Oxbridge. So recruiters know it has good students there. However they don’t all want high flying jobs. I assume Warwick still pre test so getting an offer from them is a great achievement. What does DN want to do with her degree? Any ideas?

My DS1 did maths at Warwick and he has indeed got a great job now. He loved it there, it was his first choice. DS3 is doing maths at Manchester, which is of a similar standing to Birmingham for maths. He does indeed want to be a maths teacher so Warwick or Manchester really wouldn't have mattered. (He didn't have the grades for Warwick anyway!)

Having a great uni experience, while working hard and getting as good a degree as you can, is actually quite important. If Birmingham will give your niece a better experience and she's not aiming for a grad job in the city, it may well suit her better.

Warwick don't pre-test as such. They will take into account MAT or STEP (the latter isn't a pre-test) though as part of their offer. If you have stellar maths predictions they will give you an offer, but it will probably be 3x A * including FM, maybe 2x A star A plus grade 1 STEP.

Thanks for all the replies they have been very helpful. Just one more question I hear that a lot of prospective employers are now doing blind applications so they won't know the gender, ethnicity or which university the applicant has attended. If this is the case then does it make any difference to career prospects which university you attend?

@holdingtight2
Yes. It does. Employers might do tests based on expectations of topics learnt. They look at pre university results. They can see where a Dc should aim for! Going way below what you could do might be a red flag at some employers (lack of ambition).

Taking out some info doesn’t obscure everything. It’s also by no means universal to not ask about university. What happens if the target employers do look at university? If they didn’t care, why do employers link with certain universities or do the “milk round”? They still target certain universities that they respect and trust. The type of Dc still getting the top paying jobs hasn’t changed either. Still dominated by RG Plus. It’s a gamble to think it doesn’t matter. However work sector and degree inform this too.

I support the idea of blind applications, but training shows. Better training should lead to better outcomes, although it is only one factor

My DS did Maths at Manchester and was earning a 6 figure salary within 3 years of graduating. Lots of his fellow Marths grads are also doing very well, a Maths degree from a solid Uni will get you a long way with most firms.
He had offers from more ‘highly regarded’ unis but chose the one where he liked the feel of the Uni and city more. A campus uni was not for him.

Thanks @Milliways that is really reassuring to hear.

? Manchester is RG. Maths grads are very high in the league table of earnings after 5 years of graduation. Near the top as I recall. It’s also a degree where training post grad is on the job in lots of cases. No further years of HE required which skews earnings to later on. I assume you didn’t Manchester Met. Also if he could have gone to Cambridge and didn’t try (for example) he still had stonking A levels. As I said, university blind but not A level blind or skills blind.

He had v.good but not Oxbridge level A levels, and it was Manchester Uni, not Met, but he had higher offers from other seemingly higher regarded units in the groups.
He also had a jobs throughout uni and all holidays, and applied for internships from Yr 2 which all helped, so had his job offers secured well before finals.
He give a talk at his old school and said to focus on student satisfaction scores and what suits you to make your uni experience better, leading to better results, and not to fixate on Oxbridge- which maybe wasn’t best received by some of the teachers! (His grammar school sends a lot to Oxbridge every year)

@Milliways
As a mathematician he really should know student satisfaction scores are a highly debatable metric as the sample is tiny. It’s a great shame he didn’t understand about telling others to aim high. However he did go to a world class university. In the CUG, Manchester is ranked 13th for maths. It’s ludicrous to think it’s a back number. It’s in the top 10 if you discount Oxford, Cambridge, Warwick and Imperial. So I really don’t think he went to anything other than a great university with superb stem provision. . His offer reflected who applied and who they wanted to attract to the course.

Anyone who studies maths is in a great position to get an internship and a job. Maybe encouraging stem and less attention to dodgy stats might be a better tactic in the future. Who teaches changes each year. Options taken vary between students. Just because some like a university it’s absolutely no guarantee others will. One persons happiness does guarantee others will feel the same.

"One persons happiness does guarantee others will feel the same".

@TizerorFizz this is exactly what I was trying to get across. It doesn't mean if the university is in the so called top 5 then that is the be all and all of making your decision. There are lots of other things which need to be considered. Would a 2.1 from the top 5 universities be better than a 1.1 from another RG university?

@holdingtight2
Yes it could do. But you are assuming employers differentiate purely on university or degree award. Some will. Mostly they won’t. The example above is a bit of a red herring. Any decent student doing a maths degree will be able to get a decent job. There’s a shortage of Stem grads, so they can get well paid jobs if they gets themselves organised.

The bigger issue is with humanities and arts degrees. There I do believe it matters. For a variety of reasons. Employers do know it’s harder to get into Durham (say) than some RG universities. They also believe the courses are more challenging at some universities and they are trusted institutions. Not all RG plus (adding in Bath, St Andrews, Loughborough and Lancaster) are the same. In fact the 4 I have mentioned are better than some RG in the eyes of employers. So it’s not black and white.

Also a first is not much different to a 2:1. It could be one mark! It could be getting a bit lucky in finals or not! No one would surely dispute a first at Oxford takes more getting than a first at some other universities? So it’s trusted. Or that a 2:1 at Oxford is not more or less the same as a first from a much lower ranked RG university ? There’s probably little difference. That’s why employers ask for 2:1 or first. They don’t only want the 40% who get firsts from some universities above 2:1s from elite universities.

I think the other difference can be aims and ambitions and who is at the university. What do they want as a career? Are they staying at home or branching out for better prospects? It’s all part of the mix. DD didn’t have a huge number of friends on her course. She was more friendly with the ones who had ambition doing other degrees. That’s her personality and others think differently. But if you are talking about competitive jobs a 2:1 from the elite uni is just as good as a first from elsewhere. But it’s not the only factor. Both need to get a decent cv. Build up a work portfolio and get internships. A 2:1 with that is often worth more than a first with no worthwhile cv at all. Soft skills, tailoring applications and interviewing well are also part of the mix.

@TizerorFizz totally agree with everything you say. A good 2.1 with good co-curricula work experience / internships / voluntary work will be hugely attractive to most employers as in combination develops great skills for the workplace.