York, Durham, Exeter

[GodessOfThunder]

These universities seem feature in a disproportionate amount of discussion on Mumsnet as institutions commenters see as desirable for their DC to attend. Obviously they are well regarded universities, but why do they attract more discussion here than other Russell group universities, especially those in northern and midlands post-industrial cities such as Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds, Liverpool, Nottingham and Birmingham?

A few possible reasons were suggested by DH:

• They enjoy an undue level of perceived prestige due to being in smaller old cities/towns like Oxbridge
• The Mumsnet user base is skewed towards the SE and biased against post-industrial cities. Mumsnetters are less likely to be familiar with them and hold “grim up north” perceptions.
• There is a “showing off” factor in starting threads and commenting that DC has applied for, or attends, these institutions - the same goes for the “Oxbridge support” threads, the like of which you never see for red bricks.

Does anyone agree, or are there other explanatory factors?

@Xenia - I think my criteria of a high quality Uni is very different from yours. Salary outcome is way down the list.

@Zimunya its all published. The ST guide does a good summary, presumably HESA has all the source data. Interestingly neither Durham or Exeter are excessively over represented by grammar pupils unlike say Cambridge and Imperial. Though the Tab, admittedly not known for its exemplar journalistic standards, fails to mention that the private school intake at Oxford Brooks is almost identical to that of University of Oxford. Queens, Belfast is the RG with the lowest private school percentage, and unsurprisingly is the RG with the highest grammar percentage, and indeed the highest grammar percentage of any UK uni, not a great surprise.

I make no apology for wanting my child to be able to afford a house, childcare costs, holidays etc.

I think all parnts want their DC to be able to afford a decent standard of living, but most stuents don't want to be lawyers/financiers/work in the city.

On the higher education threads on here and the WIWIKAU Facebook page there are a lot of parents of students who want to study engineering/medicine/other allied healthcare professions/teaching.

IMO those are not lowers aspirations than wanting to be a lawyer. DD, for example, would be bored to tears in an office (and struggle to say awake if she had a desk job due to her CFS), so she is pursuing healthcare qualifications. OK she won't have a 6 figure salary for a while, but it doesn't make her aspirations less worthwhile.

There is more to life than just money.

@boys3 - Thank you - very interesting. I see I shall have to do some research!

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/ipsos-veracity-index-2022

Doctors, teachers, nurses and engineers are far more aspirational in terms of the trust the public places in them (see link). Lawyers and bankers fare much worse.

Doctors, teachers, nurses and engineers are far more aspirational in terms of the trust the public places in them (see link). Lawyers and bankers fare much worse.

The largest single occupation taken up by Oxbridge graduates is, I believe, teaching...

So if someone above things some of us wrongly put, say, Durham above Nottingham or Bristol above Manchester (or whatever else is being said) then is there a problem? If employers do not make the same "mistake" and many recruit institution blind even for better jobs then it is the Durham preferrers who may be losing out eg if they recommend Durham to a child when LSE might have got the child to their dream job of teaching (or working as a quant or lawyer or whatever else).

Or are people saying MN posters of the Durham perferrers groups and correct that employers unfairly prefer the ones listed and that is the miscarriage of justice?

I just wonder which is the point here - MN delusion or employer bias/unfairness?

@Zimunya What's your hypothesis here?

I genuinely don't know. I'm relatively new to the UK schooling system, although not new to GCSEs and A levels. The thread on here from the junior doctor desperate to leave Tottenham because kids in some schools there are being stabbed and shot at makes me think that it is far harder, even if you are bright and a hard worker, to get into university when your high school was like that. I completely get that all comprehensives are not failing, and that not all grammar schools are marvellous. I was interested to see the results though, as I thought that might give an idea about how many comprehensives are getting students into uni, despite not being able to exclude disruptive students, which I understand grammar and indie/private schools can do? As stated, I am new to all of this, so I really don't know - I was just interested to see if there is a big difference, or not.

Its not greedy to want financial stability. There is big gap between a high salary and and an excessive salary. Only a lack of imagination would make you group those together. He wants a fair market rate for his labour, a secure roof over his head and a reasonable pension, not Porsches, and Breitling watches. What is more a Mumsnet trope is the view that anyone who wants more than minumum wage is greedy and selfish. Madness, utter madness.

There is big gap between a high salary and and an excessive salary.

Yes there is, and my point was solely about the excessive salaries. You have completely misunderstood the point I was trying to make.

What is more a Mumsnet trope is the view that anyone who wants more than minumum wage is greedy and selfish.

That is absolutely not true, and you know that.

@Xenia it matters if it's wrong. Lots of people come onto the HE board looking for help and advice regarding universities, whether because they didn't go themselves, or their DC want to study a subject they know nothing about. There is, I feel, a certain degree [sic] of responsibility on those of us who have had DCs recently go through (or still at) university to try to give an unbiased view.

Information is power, right? So the more you have about league tables and the metrics they use, about eventual destinations of graduates, about drop-out rates, about student experiences at different universities, about whether you actually get taught by the lecturers conducting all the fabulous research etc etc etc, then the better equipped you are to make a decision.

@Zimunya The state school (comprehensive / grammar) is a longstanding debate, plenty of threads on here on it.

Grammars educate a minority (only 5% of secondary pupils) and they are often criticised for being 'gamed' by middle class parents who can afford tutoring. Whereas in my parents generation in the 1950s they were more likely to truly aid social mobility for academic children. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-64714201

You find that true comprehensives offer a range of studies so that children can pursue areas they are interested in at GCSE or equivalent level so by the time they reach GCSE or Alevels there may be less of the disruption you speak of.

The majority of children in secondary education in the UK attend comprehensives, many of whom, go to universities. For those living in areas where there are few pupils who go to HE or who are attending schools with higher than average free school meals provision (or similar measures) then universities can provide contextual offers where the grades needed are slightly reduced. This is in effort to widen access.

@Saynowt - thank you so much. That was incredibly interesting and thorough. I'm grateful to you for the wealth of information you included in your response. I know a lot more now!

Yes there is, and my point was solely about the excessive salaries. You have completely misunderstood the point I was trying to make.
I did misunderstand you. I apologise.

What is more a Mumsnet trope is the view that anyone who wants more than minumum wage is greedy and selfish.

That is absolutely not true, and you know that.

I know otherwise. You are also not allowed to moan because 'other people would kill to be in your position' - paraphrasing. There is a vocal contingent that resent anyone with a bigger house or more money. They want them taxed to hell.

We do have such a range of views on mn you have to piece together what works for you. It is inevitable that people complain about the price of housing. Yet these posters often despise people who earn well and have different objectives. RG a house. Others think earning less in a job you love makes you happy. My experience has been that having somewhere to live makes me happy, and earning enough to get it is part of that. It’s a complete luxury to have parents that can help you out regardless of your choices.

Where you go to uni is personal choice. Subject driven in many cases. Sheffield is one of the best for engineering. Why overlook it? Jobs will follow. Many students can get everything they want but a lot complain they cannot afford what they want. In those cases, looking at what you study and where is essential.

@Zimunya you are broadly correct in terms of grammar (over) representation. Around 7% of DCs privately educated, although this is more like 17 to 18% for Sixth Form, around 4.5% at Grammars, not sure if much increase at sixth form though.

some of the MN fave unis grammar school percentage of students, followed by those from private school. Starting with the three in the thread title.

Durham 12.5 and 38.4, just over half therefore from selective schools.

Exeter 11.9 and 34.5

York 11.5 and 14.6

moving on, global elite

Oxford 16.5 and 31.3

Cambridge 21.4 and 30.0

Imperial 20.3 and 34.2

LSE 18.2 and 30.4

bubbling under

Edinburgh 6.7 and 35.5

UCL 15.9 and 32.4

not quite top table, but not a complete dinner party embarrassed silence

Bristol 12.5 and 27.3

Bath 16.7 and 27.1

St Andrews 6.6 and 36.9

Manchester 11.5 and 16.2

Warwick 17.3 and 19.3

just about tolerable in the rarefied MN higher Ed board world.

Nottingham 15.9 and 19.8

Newcastle 10.8 and 23.

Loughborough 14.3 and 19.3

KCL 12.3 and 17.1

Birmingham 13.6 and 15.9

Leeds 10.5 and 17.7

Southampton 14.8 and 13.0

liverpool 12.6 and 12.6

Cardiff 8.6 and 14.1

Lancaster 10.9 and 10.8

Sheffield 11.2 and 11.5

Glasgow 5.5 and 16.2

Thank you @Socrateswasrightaboutvoting. Apology accepted. We are in the middle income-wise, comfortable, but not rich either. DH is very well respected in the engineering world, and everyone else I know has had careers in just about every walk of life. Only one friend was a lawyer

That makes interesting reading @boys3. DD was at Newcastle and had quite a few privately educated friends as well as friends who were students through the partners programme, so quite a mix.

I think people are entitled to their own opinions about what a “good” uni is. We all have our own personal league tables in our minds. And they don’t all concur. Same as The Times, The Guardian and QS are all different.

We all have different values, and these various opinions reflect those. It seems petulant to insist others are wrong, if they don’t agree that our “values” are correct.

I have two high achieving DDs. One wants to be a lawyer, the other an engineer. It’s chalk and cheese. We are considering a completely different set of unis for DD2. We are flexible like that. 😁

indeed @RampantIvy . Although I’d not wish to jump to any hasty conclusions it does seem that a degree from Newcastle is perceived in many quarters as having worth well beyond the paper it is written on.😁

Interesting stuff. Your “Great Chain of Being” for UK universities through the lens of MS was fun. Can I ask how you would define “bubbling under”?

This dinner party silence analogy is vomit worthy. I wouldn’t want to socialise with anyone who looked down on people because of their dc’s eduction. Get yourself some nicer friends people.

Having just been through STEM/Economics based university options and exits with DS, Warwick is generally liked above Durham in many aspirational circles. I quite liked Warwick in spite a lack of diversity and some ugly disjointed buildings on the campus.