2.1 from Oxford or 1st from Bristol/Durham

[kekeke]

Could someone help settle a debate I had with a work colleague. Her daughter has just got her a level results and got AAA which means she met the entry requirements for her offer of History at Oxford (Balliol).

The mum was more keen for the daughter to accept Bristol or Durham, citing that she’ll have less pressure and it will be a lot easier to get a first there than Oxford (probably true). So the mum thinks getting a 1st from Bristol will be better than getting a 2.1 from Oxford.

Thoughts?

Oxford grads have a 93% employment record 15m post graduating (40% go on to a Masters, another 30% onto professional exams etc); ave post grad salary £38.8k after 5 years

Bristol grads survey in 2021, 60% were employed, 29% in further ed/training; ave salary 5 years post graduation £29.9K

On balance, a degree from Oxford is generally more marketable

That kind of analysis assumes the set of students going to each University are comparable. Presumably the Oxford students are stronger. The question is how much the Oxford degree adds relative to the Bristol degree. Presumably less than your unadjusted numbers would suggest.

Of course, there are other factors to take into account other than marketability!

I don't think that's necessarily the case @GCAcademic – DD2 has been offered funded PhDs and she didn't get a First. She did get a distinction in her Masters (from a university on a par with Oxbridge for her particular subject) and all the potential supervisors were much more focused on that, 2 didn't even ask about her first degree.

Completely agree with you that A levels and degrees require completely different skillsets. It is possible to have both, but by no means inevitable.

@pinkspeakers Yes. Everywhere! It’s the new 2:1 and doesn’t signify the best in many ways. It doesn’t say anything about personality, ability to multi task, get on with others, leadership, work experience or much else other than heads down academics. For History grad jobs you can be great with more on the cv. Most employers weigh up a number of factors.

It will be a mean average - for every person earning 65k there’l be dozens on trainee teaching salaries, working in the charity sector, or doing PhDs and on no income at all. But the same applies to the Oxford stat.

@kekeke you will never get an impartial view here.

As someone 50+ who went to an RG uni, and has seen the opportunities and experiences my Oxbridge friends had and continue to have via the alumni network etc, I would NEVER pick any other uni if I had the choice of Oxbridge.

DD got a 2:1 for her BA at Oxford and funding for a D Phil. Her subject is not History, but it is another social science. I don't know what she got for her MPhil.

She's a tenured senior lecturer at an RG university now.

I agree with the posters who suggest considering where the daughter would best enjoy spending three undergraduate years.

In History? That would be very much the exception, not the rule (less so in the sciences and social sciences). I’ve scored history applications for the AHRC consortium that my university sits in for several years. Incidentally, the applications are now university-blind, so we have no idea where the First is from.

Those stats are what the league tables use to rank them, and they came from the respective pages of each university, so obviously are based on their own students cohort. I think it’s a generalisation to say that Oxford students are stronger - many are just bright kids groomed into wanting to go by family and schools; whereas many at Bristol are bright kids that actively chose not to apply. Because the universities offer qualitative and culturally different experiences.

My DH went to Cambridge, because he dared apply; I went to York because I didn’t. He is not objectively, quantifiably more intelligent than I am - he has a global career in finance and a professional post grad qualification, I have 3 degrees, the same professional qualification and am completing a 4th degree/PhD. Bristol's students will largely be as bright and/or inept, and as varied, as those as Oxford.

Ah no, not history. Apologies, I hadn't appreciated your post was subject-specific, sorry.

@CautiousLurker Bristol is way bigger than Oxford. It has many students who are very similar to Oxford students in terms of A levels. Oxford is more choosy and Bristol has a very generous disadvantaged tariff. Not sure about Durham but loads of students there are also Oxbridge bright.

There are clearly some areas of work where Oxbridge counts, eg BBC and the bar, but Bristol and Durham grads very much compete. The salary for Bristol after 5 years really must have been low paid grads ! Teachers start on that! In London it’s more. So they really must have asked some odd students. To get an average of below £30,000 where are the engineers, lawyers and economists? Not sure the figures are worth looking at. Individuals vary so much.

The stats were subject specific - ie history graduates at each university. Not ‘all’ graduates.

ie history grads from Oxford earn significantly more than those from Bristol according to their own curated follow ups.

If DD loves History, surely going to a University where virtually every building is a historic artefact in its own right would be a good experience in itself? ( I believe the washing facilities have been modernised, though).

Tbh I think it’s all a bit irrelevant. Most graduate schemes ask for 2.1 minimum. So in terms of career prospects I don’t think it really matters. The child should just go where she most wants to.

Some employers prefer 2:1 as they see 1sts as too academic and less practical/resourceful.

This.

Mum needs to step back and let the student decide.

No guarantee she'll get a first anyway, anywhere

Tbh I think she has a point. A lot of employers do blind recruitment now so the grade matters more than the uni as you often don't even see the uni name.

the nature of the history courses between the two is very different- I’ve been looking at them for one of my kids who has dismissed Bristol on the basis of the finer details of the history course. Like eg Sheffield, it’s very social history/ gender / slavery themed and the options for modern history just won’t do it for some (but will be bang on for others, who aren’t eg Cold War aficionados). Your mate’s child will no doubt have looked into the actual courses and the way they’re taught .

I'd just let the dd make up her mind and stay out of it. Choosing Oxford for prestige is all well and good but my friend got a third in maths and had a very desultory career in audit in a job she hated. I got a 2:1 in literature at an RG University and had a more high flying career in a big 4 firm in an interesting specialism I love.

Having been to Oxford recently as a middle aged woman I'd love my dc to study there but as a 17yo I looked at Cambridge and decided No, based my choice on a city I loved no too far from home.

Daughter should decide.

Here's a tip: get your kids to learn German at school, then study in Germany at one of the many, many excellent universities. There are also a wide range of study programmes offered in English. No fees...and I reckon living costs would be around 750-1000€ a month.

The best thing though is that there is very little of the ridiculuous snobbery which surrounds the whole "going to university" experience in the UK.

Surely the no fees is for German students? I did a year abroad in Munich during my degree and had to pay additional fees

This is true (also looking at History for my DD). Oxford’s modules are very traditional and academic, whereas there can be more breadth and variety at other universities. Oxbridge is not on my DD’s radar for that reason by the courses at UCL and LSE (also very different from each other) appeal more.

Again, it comes down to what the daughter wants and why she chose Bristol/Durham in the first place -and whether she looked at the course content of Oxford or just applied because school encouraged it.

Public universities in Germany are tuition-free for all students, whether you're an EU citizen or not (except for the special case of Baden-Württemberg where Non-EU students must pay 1,500 € per semester).

My DD didn't get an offer from Cambridge and is off to Durham. She'd have loved to go to C, because the teaching style, the course modules, the vibe of the college she applied to were exactly what she wanted. If she got the offer (she already had the grades), there'd be no question, irregardless of a first or second degree.
The girl has to go where she thinks she'll thrive and where her gut says is right. If that's Oxford, great. If that's Durham or Bristol that's great too. All three are quite different
(Also why the debate? If she's made her offer and Oxford was her firm then it's already been decided. Durham has nothing in clearing and doubt Bristol has now either).