Leicester uni - top choice for DS but school pushing back

[Backflips]

DS (year 13) and I went to open day at Leicester earlier this month and he loved the campus and exploring the city. We were both smitten after spending two days there. The course is perfect.

Leicester now top choice of DS over other unis he’s also applying to (Birmingham, Nottingham etc). School saying he can apply but should regard Leicester as insurance choice not first choice (grades the same ABB as at other unis). We disagree but don’t know enough to challenge. DS really loved Leicester! My DH says that schools are judged on how many students go to Russell Group unis and, as Leicester isn’t one, that’s why they are not being v supportive. Is that a thing?

it’s a stretch to say Durham is not better than Hertfordshire or Bucks New

Not sure how you arrived here from "Russell group means very little (I’d go so far as to say nothing) at undergraduate level." I don't think anyone is comparing Durham with ex polys. But the school recommending RG when it's not in the best interests of this DC is pretty poor.

For some subjects and some courses the best/most prestigious places to study are not Russell Group.

I agree with everyone else that your son should make an informed choice as to where is best for him to spend the next three years of his life.

Well done for standing his ground. It sounds like they were basing advice purely on their marketing - we send 50% to RG or whatever not what best for your dc.
I can understand school intervention if he’s opting for a course well below predicted grades or not well regarded but that doesn’t sound case at all.
I lived in a hall in Oadby and it was a perfect set up for students. I revisited Leicester a few months ago and was very impressed.

@Hughs If RG truly “means very little or nothing” then others must be similar. Or just as good. According to you there’s no difference. Means very little to whom? Who doesn’t care? Possibly not Dc applying for Lse, Durham or Oxbridge and quite a few others that are competitive to get into. Possibly employers care.

It’s a throw away line that’s been utterly debunked by most studies of student outcomes in terms of work. Lse in particular cannot be compared with Leicester. Ditto Oxbridge. Down at 30th place and below there’s cigarette paper between many unis but there is far more between Durham and Leicester. Most employers know what competition for places looks like. However if students don’t care about jobs then does it matter where they go? Probably not.

How many employers outside of law/magic circle/finance in the city care whether a candidate went to an RG university or not?

He’s not apply for law or Oxbridge or LSE though.
The dc is weighing up between Nottingham, Leicester and Birmingham all with ABB requirements.
School are saying pick ‘Nottingham’ solely because it goes on their RG stats not withstanding Leicester may have a better reputation for the particular course or it may suit dc better eg modules offered, industry placements etc.

Corporate Finance here - we don’t care whether candidates went to a RG as we use blind recruitment so wouldn’t know anyway.

There are 23 Russell Group universities from roughly 160 higher education institutions in the UK. That means that the vast majority of UK students don’t go to one. Lots of the 23 aren’t even in the top 40 in terms of rankings, particularly at subject level, losing out to places like Leicester, Strathclyde, Loughborough, Aston, St. Andrews, and the like. A Russell Group uni is no guarantee of a high quality education and in the real world most employers couldn’t give a stuff where you go. They’re more interested in what you did while you were there - what clubs you joined, whether you did a placement or a project for an employer etc. If your DS loves Leicester then he should absolutely choose it. My friend’s DS goes there and he loves it.

I went to Leicester uni (albeit 15 years ago…) I loved my time there! Ignore the school.

@TizerorFizz

If RG truly “means very little or nothing” then others must be similar. Or just as good. According to you there’s no difference.

It wasn't actually me that said it, but no, your argument doesn't make sense. Setting very little store by the RG label is not at all the same as thinking all universities are just as good as each other.

There are lots of ways of judging whether a university is good or not. I believe the PP was saying that RG status is not a particularly useful one from an undergraduate perspective.

Although I am an RG academic I am generally amongst the first to say that people overegg the Group on Mumsnet. I find the idea of schools counting RG admissions as a special class of success ridiculous. We all know the + in RG+ is important and L’shire has some excellent programmes. There is a hot young professor in my discipline who got his PhD there not long ago, employed at an excellent RG institution.

But I don’t think @TizerorFizz was arguing against any of this, or the many excellent niche programmes at post 1992 universities and the excellent employment opportunities they may lead to. She is correct that the top ranked traditional academic programmes with some exceptions, thank goodness, or it would all be too boring - are by and large to be found in the RG+. And this is true whether you are looking at league tables or the REF. There is a lot of overlap.

How much does this matter for a particular student? It varies. For someone who knows what they want, like the OP’s DS, seeking the best degree programme is mature and sensible. This is no argument against Tizer’s statement that overall, different universities have different aims and really aren’t comparable. In turn, I don’t see her claiming that post 1992 universities cannot produce graduates well qualified for work.

RG, mostly is shorthand for quality. Plus a few others not RG. Some RG are lower ranked but not many.

For many subjects, eg History, MFL, Politics, Economics, Law, RG can matter a lot. A huge amount in the jobs market. A first in Economics from LSE carries a lot more weight than a first in Economics from Wolverhampton in the eyes of employers. They are looking for quality in grad employees. They trust RG plus. If it means nothing, why does anyone bother with RG LSE? It’s because it’s quality and most students know it ranks highly and is research led. That does matter.

I also believe degrees are a vehicle for employment. I don’t see them as just fun. A student who doesn’t think about employability is either wealthy or very lucky in another way! The competition for CS and Economics degrees from many RG unis tells you they do matter. Less competition at Bucks New! If RG doesn’t matter then why do most of the best unis think it does? They cannot all be stupid!

@poetryandwine I absolutely support unis that produce Dc well prepared for work and many are great for practical degrees. What I find difficult is the claim that it makes no difference overall. Blind recruitment ends up taking more from RG. Not less. Oxbridge still sits near the top in some competitive careers. Less for stem I think but I do believe students are not necessarily well served by thinking a first from Aston or Portsmouth trumps a first from the LSE or Durham. In many recruitment tests it doesn’t.

DS has applied for Modern Languages (French and Spanish) with Business (as a minor). Only five unis in the UK do that - two languages with business at 33% max (most have 50-50 one language and business split). So he has applied (on Friday) - predicted AAB - to Newcastle, Birmingham, Nottingham and Leicester. The fifth uni that do his course (two languages with business as a minor) is Sheffield Hallam but school think he will be selling himself short with that as they take CCD. So he has chosen pure MFL (no business) at Swansea instead. So difficult to know what to advise - made worse as we (his parents), schools and parents have little clue about modern languages as not popular choice.

The MFL department at Newcastle has a very good reputation. DD has two friends there in their final year. It is a great city to be a student in, and road, rail and air links to other parts of the UK are excellent.

It also has an excellent public transport infrastructure.

(I don't work for Newcastle tourist Information )

Have you looked at yr abroad options and funding at each one on his list. They seem to vary wildly now it’s Turing and will be a significant part of his degree. Some seem more helpful in terms of support finding placements etc.

@Dixiechickonhols
Turing is aimed at those from deprived families. It’s not available for everyone. That’s the rules. Most unis do not have a list of work placements abroad. You find your own. They do have lists of partner unis. These days unis are the best option unless you have family connections.

Yes what I’m saying is check it out. Having sat through half a dozen year abroad talks at Universities this year there’s no consistency and the organisation and resources varied a lot. Some seemed a lot more supportive than others. Some had lots more options and partner universities for example.

I think schools really push the RG narrative but tbh it does work as in makes the kids all want to go to them

Leicester University is a good Uni. Leicester city not so nice….

Leicester is no different to other big cities though? The others on his list are Nottingham and Birmingham.
The student halls mostly being in posh leafy suburb is a plus.
I went back recently and city centre was fine usual shops and chains. The area near football stadium has changed beyond all recognition since I was there. I revisited my old hall and walked around Oadby and it still had safe pleasant feel just with upgraded facilities.
My dc didn’t like it but having done many university open days this year it compares very favourably. Campus itself is nice too.

Not that many, as we've established on numerous previous threads @RampantIvy 😀

Look, @TizerorFizz has a valid point in saying that if you go to a university which has a strong reputation in the subject(s) you are studying, that is likely to be looked on favourably and stand you in good stead career-wise. So yes if you study history or economics at LSE, it's almost certainly going to give you a head start over someone who studied one of those subjects at, say, Plymouth.

And that is probably true of many academic, non-vocational subjects. But CUG lists 70+ subject areas and in quite a lot of them there are sub-divisions too, so that still leaves a vast range or professions and careers which are going to be less concerned by where you went to university, and more interested in what and how you did there and how employable you are, and more and more employers are carrying out their own assessments and tests to establish that.

I’d disagree - I think the city has changed massively in recent times. I lived in Leicester in the late 90s when it was probably more average (I’m from Nottingham originally) - but these days Leicester more than holds its own against other cities.

Teacher here and ultimately they can only advise. If he applies and gets an offer he’s the one who chooses his firm offer via UCAS. Do look at the there’s though - Birmingham is a great Uni city.

@BMrs - there’s no such thing as first choice any more. Students just apply and then get offers or not.