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!

Yes - agreed. DD's very wealthy friend and her siblings all got prestigious jobs and a degree apprenticeship in London this year when grads and post 18 are struggling to secure jobs. Two of them with zero work experience. Accents, faces, hobbies, surname all indicators of the right fit.

University choice will matter less if you've come from a private school and better off family (OP) so aiming low is not good advice for everyone. Depends what job they are chasing.

@Sandyoldshoes I think the OP was just asking whether it makes sense or not to go to a very top university when you can go to a medium tier one, work less hard and get the same outcomes e.g. fast stream civil service or equivalent graduate scheme.
Would a young person be better off spending more time on other activities (becoming well rounded) rather than academic ones if they can get the same outcome? Less time studying means more time for sport, university clubs, applications, socialising. Does a 1st from a medium tier university look better than a 2.1 from a top tier but not very top tier university like COWI, UCL or LSE? Although I can't help but feel going to a less good university is a risk.

You’re absolutely right - each student should choose what suits them. It’s a good thing they’re not all the same and it’s a mistake for parents or in your case the school,to try to push them all down the same path.

Mine is the opposite example - she chose Cambridge clear-eyed having looked at the data and the fact her course there has a policy of strictly limiting firsts to 30% whereas at that stage most of the other courses she was applying to awarded more! And duly got a 2:1. But she explicitly wanted to be a smaller fish in a bigger pond, to have a bit more of a challenge. She thrived there (but tbh would have elsewhere if she’d not got an offer - she’s glass half full type, wouldn’t have been bent out of shape by rejection).
Graduate recruitment wasn’t an issue - she got a job offer directly from the company she interned with in her second and third summers.

Swansea gives about 36% firsts. UCL 43%, Cambridge 31% so not necessarily easier to get a first. Modern languages is highly rated at Swansea and a lot of Welsh students study there and learn Welsh from toddler age, or are bilingual and then learn Spanish & French too at high school so go to Uni with knowledge of three or four languages.

Interesting post. So, in some cases a prestigious university still matters? Which universities would be looked on favourably by law recruiters?

do you mean that if places go to private school students then the system doesn't work because these students aren't the best?

Treasury have their own graduate scheme, My impression is top firsts in relevant subjects from Oxbridge will be the norm. Ditto for the foreign service.

This is rather a depressing outlook. Don’t aim high because it doesn’t matter…

Blind recruitment or even positive recruitment seems cock-eyed to me because surely in many roles you want an intellectually-agile candidate? Oxbridge is not full of privately-educated poshos - state-school pupils are encouraged to go and then what? Told they’re “privileged” and downgraded? And what if they did go to a private school? They may be very clever!

Swansea et al is fine for some and jolly good if you leap-frog over the schmucks who went to Oxbridge/Imperial/LSE when it comes to public sector jobs. But if you are clever it is very, very frustrating not to be amongst similar students. My dcs were so happy to find their tribe after a comprehensive school which constantly banged the Don’t get above yourself drum. Dd was told by the tutor group person that she was a snob for not applying to the local university (former HE place) as it was equal to anywhere else. Hmmmmm.

But you also have to take into consideration the level of the candidates.
Eg for Swansea law, the typical offer grades vary from ABB to CCC
Cambridge typical grades are Astars AA

So if you had three As at Alevel there's a strong likelihood wouldn't get into Cambridge, but you might well have the top grades at Swansea.

As degree classifications are given out by percentages at each university, with no comparison with others, then someone who has done better at A levels, due to hard work or natural ability, will be starting from a higher place and finding it easier to come higher in the cohort hence get a higher degree classification.

The equivalent in schools would be turning down the grammar school place to go to the local comprehensive because you wanted your child to be top of the cohort, rather than the middle/bottom

For some children, this would absolutely be the correct decision; for the majority, this wouldn't as they wouldn't achieve their potential.

@MaturingCheeseball- don’t worry, there are way more students ‘aiming high’ than there are places. It’s good if those who’d thrive better elsewhere aren’t all pushed down the same path.

Law is so oversaturated that statistically your odds of going on to qualify as a solicitor or barrister are much higher if you go to a RG higher ranking university or Oxbridge. It’s of course not as simple as uni choice is the only factor, there’s a big overlap between unis preferred by private school applicants and this list for example.
www.chambersstudent.co.uk/where-to-start/newsletter/law-firms-preferred-universities-2019

It really isn’t. The civil service prioritise diversity. Applications are uni blind.

Thank goodness somebody is studying modern languages! Congratulations to your son. Life is short. Do what makes you happy and that can include uni choice.

Dd wants to go to Reading and I agree it looks perfect. Not Russell Group but amazing course. Her second course is Bristol then Exeter but Reading is her lead and wants lower grades. Lower pressure but amazing opportunities. RG really isn’t everything. I’ve just completed a post grad at Exeter and that was very good so I do have a fondness for Exeter.

That really isn’t the case in public sector jobs. The summer vacation schemes aren’t open to all either.

My daughter has graduated from a RG and then completed a masters at the same uni. She has applied to 200 grad jobs and had 4 interview and no offers. She has a v good cv, v good grades etc. the latest interview went well has she’s through to the next round - it is for an admin job (part reception and part admin) for a finance company and the minimum requirement for applications was a 2.1 from a rg university and AAB at a level.

It really does matter for some jobs. The graduate job market is on the floor - a combination of Brexit, recruitment freezes in the professional services sector, and AI replacing grad jobs. Good luck to everyone out there - but in this climate I would certainly choose the best uni you can access. You might find that you won’t succeed against the 4000 applicants for the treasury grad scheme and need to have an RG uni on your cv to get an admin job…

@tramtracks sorry, I was n’t clear. I mean that the selection process for these will have a higher bar for intellectual and subject knowledge than for fast stream generalists and therefore more likely to have a positive correlation with Oxbridge firsts rather than Swansea firsts. Anecdotally seems to be the case for the successful applicants I know of over the last 5 years.

Lots of entry level roles aren’t university blind recruitment. There’s also the fact that your yp is only in early 20s. Over career you don’t know what impact uni choice will have, if any. They might not always stay public sector.
Law which is area I know often stipulate min A level grades eg AAB, so even if they say blind realistically most applicants will be from same top ranking unis not unis ranked 25-100.

OP. I'm sure your DS would have got his job even with a 2:1. Fast stream ask for a 2:2 now. Highly competitive, the application process accounts for the most and is aptitude based. Also, Swansea is hardly scraping the bottom of the barrel. It would have been a bit different if he'd rejected 4 RG universities for e.g. Southampton Solent (for a classic Humanities degree rather than vocational)

I think there are a lot of boys like your son at private schools. Not self starters, a bit lazy but bright. They coast through GCSEs, get good A level grades once they've narrowed them to 3 ( might have a tutor but definitely get much more targeted revision support from their school) Go to university and always come up smelling of roses as so many other factors are in their favour.

It would be nice if employees favoured, and had a way of identifying, those young people who have been consistently top 10% in effort and achievement from year 7.

This is a very interesting stance from someone who has paid an awful lot of money to send their children to a prestigious private school.

Because FYI, this stance applies to all levels of schooling and kids can also come out of the state system and do really well in life.

This OP.

It isn’t the uni. It’s irrelevant. It’s the privately educated bit. Ffs

What I take away from this story is that a 2.1 at Cambridge is better than a 1st at Swansea and this is not surprising. If you want to do a Master's or a PhD after you undergraduate degree then the selection process is very much not university blind. No one cares whether it is a Russel Group university though (this seems to be an obsession with schools but is very damaging). Oxbridge, LSE, Imperial mean something, Queen Mary not so much.

It is important to stress that the top universities are really not for everyone and that I have met many unhappy students there who would have learned more at other places because they would have been less stressed and happier. Many of the "lesser" Russel Group universities have increased their student intake and the courses are now massive. At many non-RG universities one gets a much better experience and the courses are equally good.

This has been my experience too, with DS at Cambridge. Plus if they manage to get a few internships then they are already a known entity with that organisation. They don’t even NEED to apply to any grad schemes, because if they are good enough, and they will be, they are given a return offer for the year they graduate.

Having only been to an ex poly myself this kind of opportunity that the likes of Oxbridge provides was eye-opening.

Yes a relative of mine got headhunted for a paid summer internship while at Cambridge.

He earned more in those ten weeks than I earn in a year and I’m a higher rate tax payer!

If you are an ethnic minority, aim for the best uni you can get. That's my advice.
If you are an immigrant, same advice applies.