MSE News: £6,000 or £9,000 uni fees? Is it an irrelevant decision?

The_One_Who

Can you please define these 'tiers'? I haven't heard that term used to rank universities (something I'm pretty against anyway...) for quite a while.

Also, going to a university with a good 'brand name' does not guarantee you the best education. There are a lot of very, very good departments in some not-so-great universities, and there are a lot of good universities with some poor departments. Of course some people just see the brand name, and if that's all that matters to you then fine, but I went to university for a good education. Rankings (and the methods used) change all the time, just because an institution is in the top twenty when someone applies, does not mean it still will be when they come to graduate.

Occams_Razor_2

The_One_Who wrote: »

Can you please define these 'tiers'? I haven't heard that term used to rank universities (something I'm pretty against anyway...) for quite a while.

Also, going to a university with a good 'brand name' does not guarantee you the best education. There are a lot of very, very good departments in some not-so-great universities, and there are a lot of good universities with some poor departments. Of course people just see the brand name, and if that's all that matters to you then fine, but I went to university for a good education. Rankings (and the methods used) change all the time, just because an institution is in the top twenty when someone applies, does not mean it still will be when they come to graduate.

Actually, the reputation of your institution is all that matters if you are using it boost or enhance your career prospects.

Fact is, big name universities are a massive boon to the prospects of the students who go there. Those CV's leap off the page.

you can argue whether they should, but you cannot dispute that they do.

The_One_Who

Occam/s_Razor wrote: »

Actually, the reputation of your institution is all that matters if you are using it boost or enhance your career prospects.

Fact is, big name universities are a massive boon to the prospects of the students who go there. Those CV's leap off the page.

you can argue whether they should, but you cannot dispute that they do.

That is not necessarily the case. Of course it happens, in some industries more than others, but going to a so-called better university is not all there is to it. A lot of employers have said they prefer the graduates from the former polys because they tend to have more practical experience.

I'm still interested in how you are defining and separating these tiers.

Lokolo

Occam/s_Razor wrote: »

Actually, the reputation of your institution is all that matters if you are using it boost or enhance your career prospects.

Fact is, big name universities are a massive boon to the prospects of the students who go there. Those CV's leap off the page.

you can argue whether they should, but you cannot dispute that they do.

Thats a total myth. I went to an ex poly university and have the same job as someone at a top 10 university (but at different companies, same sector, same job, same pay). Those that were at my interview - there were 6 of us, none of us went to amazing universities (I'm talking Oxbridge + top 15), but we all had done year placements.

The CVs that leap off the page are those that have experience as well as knowledge.

However, I do suspect in some cases it would be wise to go into a Top 10 university, but as a general rule, doesn't really matter.

melancholly

Occam/s_Razor wrote: »

that's just in the UK, and you're boasting about how it came in 27th in one survey. in the UK????

that's not exactly proclaiming its tier 1 status now is it? or the fact that the guardian survey, mysteriously has a jump all the way to the lofty heights of 18th this year, when previously the Guardian has it:
2010: 35th
2009: 40th
2008: 46th in the UK.

tell me again, how this is a Tier one school? I can't quite follow your non sequitur.

PS. My Global top 10 MBA says I can mock it all I want. :beer:

i haven't said it's a tier one uni, but it's certainly not one you can mock. i'm sorry that your MBA hasn't taught you to read properly.

and my first from a top 10 world ranking uni (and my masters and my PhD for that matter, if we're doing a 'put our qualifications on the table' competition) doesn't make me 'a better person' in the same way as you think your degree does. thinking one piece of paper allows you to ridicule other institutions that are nationally strong really makes you seem arrogant, out of touch and just trying to show off.

Occams_Razor_2

The_One_Who wrote: »

That is not necessarily the case. Of course it happens, in some industries more than others, but going to a so-called better university is not all there is to it. A lot of employers have said they prefer the graduates from the former polys because they tend to have more practical experience.

I'm still interested in how you are defining and separating these tiers.

yeah it is necessarily the case, and its equally obvious you don't do a lot of recruiting of others.

but hey, maybe I am wrong. Maybe there are all these people like you who turned oxbridge to go to UEA. I am sure this is borne out in the application figures.

and I'll you what a tier 1 school is in the global business school market: Top 10, globally.

somewhere that's top 40 in just one country, sure as eggs ain't the creme of the crop.

I guess its good that you feel proud to be a UEA alumni, but there is no reason to be silly about it.

Occams_Razor_2

Lokolo wrote: »

Thats a total myth. I went to an ex poly university and have the same job as someone at a top 10 university (but at different companies, same sector, same job, same pay). Those that were at my interview - there were 6 of us, none of us went to amazing universities (I'm talking Oxbridge + top 15), but we all had done year placements.

The CVs that leap off the page are those that have experience as well as knowledge.

However, I do suspect in some cases it would be wise to go into a Top 10 university, but as a general rule, doesn't really matter.

hang on a minute, let me get this straight.

you have a job, the same as someone who went to a good school. ok fine.

when you went to your interview, there were 6 others, also from not leading universities - is your point, that you were bracketed with others of similar backgrounds, and that proves that there is no bracketing going on?

the logic doesn't work.

not unless you are an MD at Goldman Sachs.

I might be more inclined to believe your perspective if your interview batch contained a bunch of people with Cambridge first's, but by your own admission it didn't.

Occams_Razor_2

melancholly wrote: »

i haven't said it's a tier one uni, but it's certainly not one you can mock. i'm sorry that your MBA hasn't taught you to read properly.

and my first from a top 10 world ranking uni (and my masters and my PhD for that matter, if we're doing a 'put our qualifications on the table' competition) doesn't make me 'a better person' in the same way as you think your degree does. thinking one piece of paper allows you to ridicule other institutions that are nationally strong really makes you seem arrogant, out of touch and just trying to show off.

is the bottom of a cornflakes packet a top 10 world ranking uni now? :rotfl:

The_One_Who

I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but I'm going to anyway.

I have never set foot in UEA (where did I say that?), but for my subject, I wouldn't dream of going to Cambridge, its department is relatively poor. That is one example of a very good university that has a not-so-good department, but I can think of others. I have no need to boast about my university/qualification/other credentials to try to belittle another's argument.

You still haven't defined what makes an institution 'tier one' instead of 'tier two'. Or does it change annually simply based on one arbitrary ranking out of many others?

You do realise that rankings change every year, don't you? And that they tend to use very out-of-date data; that they can and do weight each category to suit their own agenda; that some of the categories don't actually mean anything; and that there really isn't any difference between one that is at position 10 and one that is at position 20?

melancholly

Occam/s_Razor wrote: »

is the bottom of a cornflakes packet a top 10 world ranking uni now? :rotfl:

added to list
(you can doubt my qualifications all you like - glad you feel big and important because you paid for a nice big MBA. i'm sure your personality shines through in your career)