Don’t necessarily aim high with uni choices!

[Operafanatic]

My DC had four RG offers and got Astar AA at A-level. They knew they didn’t want to go into law (where uni status still matters) so chose their uni based purely on the course and lifestyle they liked the most. We supported that - despite their prestigious private school's objections (they advocated RG unis only - mainly, I think, because that was/is a performance measure for schools). DC graduated from Swansea last year with a First and is now working in civil service fast stream. If they had gone to another uni, I am not at all convinced they would have got a first - being top of the pack (rather than middling as at school) gave them confidence. More importantly, had the time of their life at Swansea - such a super uni with very high student satisfaction! So question the advice to aim high - sometimes it is better to be a bigger fish in a smaller pond! Am mentioning this because my DD in year 13 (predicted all A stars) is about to do the same - Exeter rather than Imperial or Warwick in her case. Eldest DC found that every grad scheme he applied to was university blind anyway!

My DS has been applying for internships. Out of 40-odd applications, only ONE (the civil service, as you say) has been uni-blind.

I guess it is job dependent. If your DC want to work in financial services or banking, don't assume uni-blind applications.

Eh? I never said they studied law! i explicitly said they never had any desire to ever go into law. They did Modern Languages. And every single grad scheme they applied to - both public and private sector - was totally uni blind in the early rounds (and often all the way through)

Sorry I misread your post - I thought you said that they wanted to go into law instead of not wanting to go into law.

The point still stands though - most employers don't do university-blind applications. It worked out OK in your child's case but it's not a useful illustration.

I'm quoting percentages with offers out if those applying. Here's the source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-service-fast-stream-recruitment-data-2025/civil-service-fast-stream-recruitment-data-2025-html

Not saying the percentages should be equal but I'd have expected the non RG offer rates to be up and Oxbridge to be down from before recruitment blind times. From another thread apparently they have not come in at all by uni type.

Good point. Not sure. My DS had to pass loads of assessments tests though

Not our experience. Most of The Times top 100 grad recruiters start uni blind (and often remain so)

That is very interesting, thank you.

If/when, all statistics bar the university one turn out comparable percentages across the groups, I would say that blind recruitment would be working pretty well and that the university one is expected because it would most closely correlate with ability. And as ‘better’ universities get better at their own outreach, I would expect their percentage to even increase.

My DDs experience was more mixed last year. Public sector all uni blind. Only applied to 2 private sector schemes: one targeted certain unis other (big 4) claimed to be uni blind but asked her which uni at final interview.

I might be wrong but I thought the aim was to have a more diverse CS and more representative of the population it serves rather than highest ability (hence the 2:2 requirement and movement of jobs to the regions).

What an odd post, are you trying to reassure yourself? Exeter is hardly a ‘lesser’ university- it’s RG and well known for attracting public school types + you need high grades.
Or when you say ‘aim high’ do you actually mean oxbridge? Your dc isn’t going to one of the old polys or some ropey place!
IME people consider courses that match their predictions and then look at them to see which they like, in terms of the course, the uni, the accommodation, the town and the general vibe, then apply for those.

It would be odd if more selective universities didn’t select higher performing individuals who are also more likely to be selected by the CS.

And that is what is wrong with the country; choosing ‘diversity’ over ability to do the job.

CS jobs come up on MN all the time, what do they actually involve, and what does the fast stream mean in practice? I’ve always presumed CS jobs are Chandler Bing type jobs but I must be missing something as they seem really desirable.

DD is just starting to think about uni, and I’ve mulled over the status v experience question, so I’m enjoying your post @Operafanatic.

But why did you mention law if they didn’t want to study it?

Really strange post. Exeter is jam packed full of white, privately educated kids, and is extremely highly ranked.

Agree. OP is exhibiting considerable snobbery in suggesting Exeter is lesser choice.

Uni blind recruitment seems ridiculous to me.
What is the point in students working hard at top universities such as Oxford and Cambridge if they don't benefit from it?
And then does private school education, accent then become the main recruitment mechanism rather than actual intelligence? (I don't agree with this although my son did go to private school for GCSEs and is at a selective grammar for sixth form)
@Operafanatic I am also finding this thread interesting because I want to give my son the best guidance in choosing what university to go to. If there is no benefit to going to Oxford, Cambridge, LSE then why put the hard work in? Maybe it is better to enjoy more free time at University to get involved in extracurricular activities like debating, drama, sport etc and to have time to do all these applications for jobs.

B9th my DC went yo look at Exeter but felt that it had a majority of girls and they seemed mostly from private boarding schools not London state schools like them!
It might not be the case but the definite impression they got.
They chose Newcastle and Birmingham!

Because it's one of a handful of careers where it does matter where you go.

@fairyring25 when uni blind recruitment is mentioned those doing the recruiting on here say that the which uni did you go to question often gets asked in the interview. A first from a uni ranking lower than 100th place is very different than getting a 2:1 from a uni ranking in the top 10. I don't think uni blind recruiting is necessarily fair in either direction.

Ds is doing a graduate job and the first round application was what are your GCSE and A levels and what school you attended. Next round was what uni are you at and what do you feel you can achieve? That was for a summer internship that then led to the offer of the graduate scheme job provided they achieved at least a 2:1. This was his one and only application which he got so no need to do any more.

Just because someone attends a top ranking uni doesn't mean they don't have time to do those extra curriculars. Clearly lots do. Some children just find it easier to grasp stuff and sometimes that comes from prior knowledge of if you did the A level so have a foundational understanding. Often it comes down to how you have been taught a subject and your own ability to manage your workload.

Congrats to your son, but the CS grad scheme is, in my small anecdotal sample, a bit shit. No-one stayed. Good luck to him!

Other than Oxford and Cambridge, I'm not convinced many employers have ever considered the intracacies of university rankings within groups of similar universities - places like Exeter, Warwick, Durham, St Andrews are surely all much of a muchness, in fact the only real distinction people in real life seem to make is between traditional universities and ex-polys. It's only on MN that I see people worrying about whether a university is ranked 4 or 9 for a specific course. I know for some specific vocational courses there might be well-known courses but for things like English Literature I really don't think anyone cares if you went to Liverpool or Nottingham or Bristol or Glasgow.

@PictureMeThus
My friend has been involved in the last interview stage of recruitment at a Big Four company. He said he didn't ask what uni the candidate went to (but maybe it was asked earlier).
If you are doing Natural Sciences at Cambridge, you definitely have more hours of work than say Chemistry at Warwick. Cambridge just sets more work to do and it doesn't matter how intelligent you are, more work takes more time. This obviously leaves you with less time to do other things.

So is what you are saying that a first from, say, swansea is easier than one from a ‘top’ university but gains the same benefits because of university blind recruitment?

I do think it a shame that the distinction has been removed between to roles of universities and polys. Polys used to be brilliant at meeting the training demands of local industries. Much better for employability than trying to offer the same sort of courses as old universities which were more about research. Indeed, the Russell Group universities are just a group of universities that agreed to work together to access research grants. St Andrews, of course, is not RG. I notice many of the big employers offering graduate apprenticeships (like the ‘big 4’ accountancy firms) are using ex-polys for their academic input. Presumably because they are still more flexible around designing courses for employers.