League table advice

[CardigansOfTheGalaxy]

We are starting to think about uni, and I'm looking for tips on how to compare places and courses. I know about The Student Room, but in terms of league tables, is one better than another? I've come across CUG and the Guardian one.

Presumably student satisfaction scores are important, what else should we look for? Amount of student contact time?

@7yeardraughtmustchangesoonI feel the stats don’t move much on the highest paying jobs - the majority of the applicants selected are from a relatively narrow group of universities. It’s partly to do with high expectations within the university student body but ability too. They aren’t selected for the courses because they are “average”. They are there because they are high achievers in many aspects of academics - and life! Recruiters find the same. University blind doesn’t make much difference.

Yes, kind of what I said - due to the high entry level to those unis, it goes without saying that many of the students are more 'able', hence doing better when it comes to online assessments and interviews etc.

@7yeardraughtmustchangesoon So the university blind firms are really virtue signalling in many instances.

Well, it means that they are more able at 18. It doesn't follow that they are necessarily more able 3/4 years later.

University teaching and learning is very different from school and some young.people will prefer it and some will not. Some will benefit from narrowing their focus down to a single subject, other will not. Some will thrive from increased independence while some will hate it. some will already have peaked in educational achievement while others will only.just be getting started. And so on and so on - myriad reasons that A level success is not directly correlated to university success.

@thing47 For high paying non stem jobs that aren’t seeking specific quantifiable stem skills, the lower ranking unis aren’t making much ground. Often these jobs don’t want a narrowly focussed grad and are looking for a much broader spread of skills and a confident personality.

Often stem grads don’t need to be commercially aware of present themselves to clients who are very choosy! In many stem jobs, dc can beaver away and not meet anyone much. So I think it hugely depends on what the job actually is and what the employer is looking for.

Which table did you find that statistic in? In the CUG it just states medical technology and bioengineering, which also covers radiography, and the top 3 are Imperial, UCL and Liverpool.

In the CUG it just states medical technology and bioengineering, which also covers radiography, and the top 3 are Imperial, UCL and Liverpool.

And one of those actually offers Radiography.

There does seem to be a CUG listing for Radiography as a separate subject, though, although Coventry is nowhere near the top on here, sorting either be university or subject ranking.

https://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/courses/search/undergraduate/radiography?sortby=sub

Thank you @MarchingFrogs I eventually found it by doing it as a separate google rather than looking it up on the CUG website.

DD is at Liverpool for radiography and it is rated at no 3. She is loving it and doing really well.

@RampantIvy that's how I found it, too (tbh, the only time I hang out on league table sites is to check a statement made on Mumsnet ).

Coventry may have slipped in the league table for Radiography, but I have seen the praises of its pastoral care sung on another forum.

Also do remember that there's a tendency on MN to talk about "employers" when what they really mean is very specific professions.

I work in local government and while you might get a small recognition boost from Oxbridge I doubt any hiring manager here would know there was supposed to be a gap between eg. Newcastle and Reading.

And, as other people have said, it very much comes down to individual personality. A middle ranking uni might actually offer more opportunities to the motivated student precisely because there's less competition for them.

I agree. It is always law and finance that keeps being mentioned. Most young people don't want to work for a magic circle/big 4 firm or even in London, yet it is always assumed on those threads that they do.

Outside of those professions most companies just want an employee who has shown academic capability to get a good degree and has the soft skills that will add value to the company and don't care where their employee gained their degree.

@HPFA I worked in local government for decades. The standard of grad employed (mostly) wasn’t stellar. The best don’t apply and they do want more money elsewhere. A few get to head a department of course but some of the jobs are not very interesting and certainly don’t need anyone who is creative or business minded. None of my local government friends have dc in local government. I have many friends who did a short stint in local government who then carved very successful careers in business and found local government slow and stifling with poor management. Many high flying people simply see better opportunities elsewhere.

Of course in some areas, the state is easily the biggest employer so of course the jobs look more attractive. In other areas they aren’t employers the majority want and recruitment is a struggle. Certainly is here.

There’s hardly a gap between Reading (35) and Newcastle (31 CUG). Newcastle is not a high flying RG university so undoubtedly supplies many heading to state jobs. Reading grads head into London because they can more readily. Wholly depends on degree taken though and that applies to any university and career ambitions.

There’s hardly a gap between Reading (35) and Newcastle (31 CUG). Newcastle is not a high flying RG university so undoubtedly supplies many heading to state jobs.

Which goes to show that you need to drill down by subject. DD is a Newcastle graduate and Newcastle are ranked much more highly for her subject and nearly 20 places higher than Reading for the same subject.

Which subject is that? I always find these comparisons interesting (and informative)

Biomedical sciences.

That's really interesting. If you look at Food Science for example, Reading is ranked higher. Bit of a minefield!

@RampantIvy Yes but to be fair, employers won’t care that much regarding Reading or Newcastle for that line of study or work. The grads will probably get jobs from both unis using their skills. The league tables and view of universities makes a much bigger difference with humanities subjects and grades needed to get into the courses. History at Durham isn’t the same as History from the Uni of Gloucestershire. In many ways I would suggest these courses serve different purposes too. Biomedical at Reading and Newcastle do not as the degree is closely allied to work and they aren’t poles apart either. Reading is a long established university.

For technical subjects, "top" Universities will cover a lot more ground.

For example Further Maths at A or A* is almost obligatory for economics Cambridge, Warwick, UCL, LSE or Imperial which means that students get off to a flying start. (Those without need to be both very talented and to work very hard in their first year.) DS, who went to LSE, had various final stage interviews for summer internships. University blind recruitment so we was alongside people from Oxford Brookes and U of Westminster. Final stage involved a competency test. An easy hurdle for him, but not for others. He went on to help the guy from Oxford Brookes with applications for Masters degrees. The guy was bright but simply did not know enough to be considered for more demanding courses.

I would use the CUG table by subject but selectively. Entry standards give you an idea of how academic your peers are. Obviously points can be gained from things like music, but then top level music on top of good grades suggests a hard working and focussed student. You probably want to study with peers of similar ability/achievement.

Student satisfaction is an odd one. My observation is that Bournemouth U bobs up and down the Guardian table depending on how sunny the previous summer was. LSE always used to be at the absolute bottom. It had become a matter of pride amongst students that they went to the toughest University, so were not included to be fulsome, even though many of them would have made the same choice if starting again. That said, poor student satisfaction can be a red flag suggesting something is wrong with the course.

Employment too. Employment after graduation and after 10 years are quite different things. Universities with large medical schools benefit from the fact that all medical graduates go straight on to Foundation training, so 100%. Two years later it is a different picture. This year over 50% of UK medical school graduates finishing Foundation faced unemployment. That is no job in Australia, no short term contract, no job in another profession, nor training/permanent employment with the NHS in the UK. Truly shocking. As far as I know prospective medical students cannot find post-Foundation stats by medical school, yet these are the ones that matter.

The emphasis given to research standards and teaching quality can also be subjective. The ultra keen, subject-obsessed high flyer might enjoy the occasional opportunity to sit at the feet of a Nobel-prize winner and not really notice that a lot of their learning is self driven or learning with peers. For others, teaching quality will be all important.

In short it is about fit. CUG will give you clues about the strengths and weaknesses of each course but the prospective student needs to think about what they want from a course (and University Town). FWIW DS suggested that when he and his school friends met up at Christmas after their first term some were having a great time and others were unhappy, either with their course or socially. There was no obvious pattern: Oxbridge, London, red-brick. Some had settled, some not. In time some of these grew to love their University whilst one or two switched.

Yes. I totally agree.

One poster once actually told me that DD's fisrt class biomed degree wasn't worth the paper it was written on because Newcastle isn't a top 10 university. The poster is a lawyer.

Great post @Needmoresleep
There are a lot of things to consider when choosing a university. It isn't just about rankings.

We didn't look at rankings at all when looking at unis with DC. We went by reputation, grades needed, location and the feel of the place when visiting. Don't go by employability as some low ranking unis/old polys do a lot of job specific courses but are hopeless for more academic subjects. I went to South Bank - generally ranked about 100 except for employability where it is in the top ten because so many of its students do building degrees, such as qualitity surveying, nursing, baking and other very practical courses. Also go for the best brand you can as you pay the same for a top brand as a bottom brand.

@RampantIvy Lawyers are not employing scientists though are they? I would say DH would not have been that keen on civil engineering grads from some low ranking unis because experience tells you not all degrees are equal and the holders of them aren’t either. Many employers devise tests to sift out the best candidates for their jobs. This tends to show which degrees are high quality and whether dc can apply what they have learnt.

No they aren't, but that comment was totally uncalled for. It's still a first class STEM degree from a university at the upper end of the league table that had entry requirements of AAA/AAB when DD applied. It has slipped down the CUG since DD took her degree.

For the record, DD walked into a job after graduating and aced her interview for her current post grad qualification.

You've got to love how "employers" has suddenly become "a few people I know...."

Who said “a few people I know”? Do you take offence at everything? I thought my post was fairly straightforward and agreeing that lawyers would not necessarily know about employment of stem grads. Oh well.

There is virtually no crossover between these subjects, though. And I speak as someone whose DD did biomed and niece (who lived with us for large parts of her degree) did food science. Biomed is way more academic - a lot of people use it as a back way into medicine - and even the average universities, like the one DD attended, require chemistry and biology A levels at decent grades.