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?

What do the the stats say out of interest?

I also wonder whether the likes of Durham, Exeter, Warwick attract attract a more conservative/conventional-minded student in terms of how they define what a “prestigious” career is.

I think some universities might attract a 'type' of student - very anecdotal but Bristol went down DD's list partly because almost everyone at the open day looked the same, as she put it. Whereas Birmingham was much more diverse, with DC from every tribe.

Warwick uni will always disappoint middle class parents as it's not remotely in Warwick. It's on the Warwick side of Coventry 😂

The world rankings out today. Exeter and York don’t do particularly well.

Interesting that Exeter, York, Bath and Loughborough all come lower than QMUL, which never gets much love on here despite being RG.

And that Durham which I'm sure a PP viewed as Oxbridge equivalent is behind so many others, not even top 10 out of the UK institutions.

Indeed.

These rankings seem to support that quite a few of Mumsnetters “favourite” universities (Durham, St. Andrews, York, Exeter) aren’t exactly world-beating, or even in the second tier behind Oxbridge when one looks only at the UK institutions listed.

I was looking on UCAS yesterday with DS to see what courses have spaces for Computer Science just in case he misses his grades. The only RG with places remaining (just looking at England but not London and Wales) were Newcastle, Liverpool and York.

This is all absolutely true and something a lot of people have been saying for ages. To suggest that Durham is on a par with Oxbridge is just plain wrong and because some universities attract posh kids doesn’t meant they’re better. Places like Manchester, Leeds, Southampton and Nottingham all feature in the top 100 but will never be viewed as highly by some mumsnetters as Exeter and St. Andrews. It’s crazy.

Durham has always been second to Oxbridge for generations.

Second choice maybe, but not second. When you look at the league tables overall and for specific subjects, this is not the case. However, there is a collegiate system which is similar to Oxford and Cambridge, the Union (not an SU although there is one of those too, a debating union), rowing, and because it was always a second choice for quite a few people from certain social classes who didn't get into Oxford or Cambridge, it had (and perhaps still has, although they've done a lot on widening participation) a similar(ish) feel about it.

For computer science (in particular although this statement holds more broadly), take a look at the league tables run by various newspapers and organisations (much of a muchness but with slightly different criteria and hence the lists vary a bit) and you will see that many of the best places to go, especially for undergrad, aren't Russell Group unis; some of these non RG-unis are also in similar small towns, or the same cities as RG unis and often their offering complements what is on offer at the other uni (if there are two in the same place). Or they have lovely countryside campuses. It depends which area of comp sci, too, there are many specialisms with centres of excellence such as cryptography, outside of the RG. Also look at the surveys of student opinion as to good teaching and facilities. Some RG uni departments aren't that great at value-added / good teaching, for example.

RG this, RG that, often isn't the best for the student at all. Help your children by doing your homework properly.

Perhaps she should look at at Mckinsey. It not impossible to get there from a semi target but I suspect its not exactly staking the decks in your favour.

Of course Durham is second to Oxbridge. It’s also second to other UK universities. Having a college system and debating society doesn’t change that.

As I have said before this does depend on what subjects you are looking to study.

I've tried to track back tis comment to see what rankings are being used.

Certainly, if applying for, say, English or history, York would be a topnotch choice.

Do people think Durham is better than it is because it has these superficial similarities to Oxbridge? Successful marketing if so - reminds me of the other day when I thought I was buying Jacobs crackers but actually bought a budget brand because the packaging was so similar 😂

None of it really matters. People can think what they want and I don't mind at all. I just want teenagers to realise some decisions over university matter to future career even though some of the higher paid employers are now trying to recruit "institution blind".

I presume people agree there is some kind of ranking eg Sunderland is probably worse than Newcastle for example if we stick with my native North East on most levels and if you can get into both you may be better off going to Newcastle.

So the disagreement seems to be about which ones you put in the top 10. I agree it may well depend on the career although even with medicine I do think my sibling who did it at Oxbridge did benefit from that for all kinds of reasons, specialism, promotion, academic side to career and much else.

As I live with young people only I have my views challenged on a very constant basis so happy to hear all kinds of views too on MN.

We need some AI programmed to do the task which is pick say the 10 highest paid by age of 35 graduate UK careers let us say in England only and search linkedin profiles of newly hired graduates today and tell us where they went (and their A level grades if those are on linkedin in that person's case) to get some good statistics going.

I and none of my children went to Durham although my father and uncle did as it was local to them in county Durham - I am not anti or pro Durham but it was and remains a good university.

Someone on MN probably has a link to statistics about what A level grades were achieved (not offered but achieved) by those going to particular universites in a particular subject which might give useful data.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/durham-should-be-proud-to-be-a-second-rate-oxbridge/

@Xenia - not everyone chooses their Uni and career based on earning potential. My priority for DC’s was choosing a course they were interested in and a Uni where they would be happy.

@Parker231 - agreed. That's what we're looking for too.

If we are going to look at the quality of universities through the lens of employment outcomes, we should certainly look beyond the outmoded preferences of a tiny coterie of management consultancies and law firms.

Even if we might find their preferences outmoded, if it is the reality of how they recruit, for students wanting to work there, it matters.

QS world rankings favour very large universities with tons of research output.

Sure. But it seems these are used (as they have been on this thread) to paint a picture, which may not be accurate, of an institution overall

If those firms are so blinkered i wouldn’t want my dc working for them. They’re old-fashioned and backwards. No thanks.

The law firms are often recruiting institution blind and their requirements are AAB at A level and a 2/1 as a minimum plus you pass the Watson G test, their assessments, often do a week paid there first to assess you over a week etc. They are trying to be open to lots of institutions where people study.

When the civil service tried institution blind recruitment they got more not fewer oxbridge people as the Oxbridge people were better.

A lot of Law will be replaced by AI soon anyway.

My personal experience of the quality of graduates recruited within a couple of years of leaving university across a number of diverse sectors has been:

• Oxbridge are typically still the smartest and almost always have a strong work ethic.
• Grads from the the other RGs and similar (Bath, Durham, Loughborough) etc are all much of a muchness, and it would be utterly pointless to have a “preference” for, say, Durham or Exeter over Liverpool or Sheffield.
• There is, on average, a noticeable difference between the grads from the above and those from post-92 universities. However, there are often “diamonds in the rough” from the latter who have a stronger work ethic. Obvs many post-92 places excel in creative and technical skills that can’t be recruited from anywhere else.