Did you go to an 'elite' university, and was it useful?

[Gabba Flamenco Crossover]

I'm studying a HND in engineering at a college in London at the moment (in fact I finish next week). They are going to offer me a place on the degree course in September and let me skip the first year. Trouble is, there's been a few incidents this last year that have shaken my confidence in the place a bit, and I don't know if I want to go there for my degree. I wanted to apply to other unis through UCAS, but I was too busy and disorganised to make a decent fist of it - I didn't realise how stupidly early it had to be in (I'm just not used to running my life a year in advance), and by the time I sent it I knew that I was too late for some of my choices.

So if I want to start my degree next year, I've got no choice other than to go back to where I am now, which isn't very appetizing TBH. Or I could take a year out and re-apply in good time for a September 2008 entry. In particular, two of my choices were big, shiny temples of academia (not like the ex-poly I'm at now) who were a bit sniffy about my HND. But if I took a year out, I could do some A-levels in my spare time and probably get in next year, though I would have to start at year one.

So this is the dilemma: if I go back to where I am now in September, I get out with a degree in 2 years - but it might be a crap degree with no credibility. My college is 21st in the Guardian rankings for my subject, which isn't bad, but it ain't great either. Or I could take a year out, gun for a place at the big shiny uni and get a much better degree, but it takes another 2 years out of my life. And to be honest, student life isn't really my bag. the sooner I'm out in a job again, the happier I'd be. But I'm only going to get one shot at this and I need to make it count.

Anyone else been in this position, and what did you do? All advice is gratefully recieved cos I'm a real novice at this, but I particularly need help from anyone with engineering or science qualifications, because that's the field we're talking about here.

 

[ripley]

Hiya

not sure if I can help a ton, being a social science gal and an American

but it depends what you want help with. In the US, if you are not at the very tippy-top where the degree and the connections you make while getting it ease your way all over the place, then other criteria are worth considering


1. the Uni name on your CV - is your field really conscious of this? how does it matter in relation to other things like those below

2. the names of people who can write letters for you. Would the name of a famous professor on your CV be important (some of them are at less-than-top-flight universities)? How about a glowing letter of recommendation from a not-famous but good professor?

3. the experience of learning - quite unconnected from prestige. or somewhat. Professors that care about teaching are usually found in inverse proportion to the prestige of the school.

4. building a network of people you really like, vs. people who are powerful. prestigious schools can give you the second (if you can stomach it when they are jerks), not necessarily the first.

5, opportunities to distinguish yourself - projects, publications, collaborations, designing your own product, whatever. THis may depend on faculty, facilities, or flexibility.. all 3 are not synonymous with prestige (faculty may be famous but have no time for you, facilities maybe does correlate, flexibility usually more at the tippy top and less and the upper-middle I think)

mostly from US experience, and related to undergrad. I did do a MSc at the LSE though, which helped a good deal for #1 (which helped for uninteresting jobs that paid well especially) and maybe #2 but did me a great disservice for 3, 4 and 5.

prestige might matter more at the graduate level, but even then you need some people you can work with.

 

[matt b]

So if I want to start my degree next year, I've got no choice other than to go back to where I am now, which isn't very appetizing TBH.

this isn't necessarily the case- when UCAS starts its clearing procedures (august 16th this year) buy the independent and check if there are any places on the course/institution of your choice and ring the admissions office direct and tell them your story- they may give you a place.

you could also simply ring up a couple of universities now and ask about joining the second year directly- show you're keen / knowledgable and willing to fill any gaps in your knowledge. they can only say no.


about the actual institution you go to, there are a number of factors that may be important: russell group universities (trad. research ones) have more cache with employers in general, but for vocational/practical subjects like engineering, the links the universitiy has with industry is useful, as can help get employment post-qualification.

have a look at the post-qualification employment rates for various places (inc. yours), this is particularly important when paying £5000/year min. for your education.

unemployment amongst engineers is generally low, so such considerations are less important than in the arts

if you REALLY don't want to continue in education you could look for jobs and speak to employers- they might be fine with HNDs and offer training etc

 

[mos dan]

unemployment amongst engineers is generally low, so such considerations are less important than in the arts

if you REALLY don't want to continue in education you could look for jobs and speak to employers- they might be fine with HNDs and offer training etc

i think it's important to distinguish between sciences (or any degree with a practical bent) and the arts. i did the latter at an 'elite' uni of sorts, and while it was a stimulating and one-of-a-kind experience, and i've made lots of good contacts (among my peers), the actual course, the university, and my professors haven't advanced my career one bit. which is fine - provided you don't think 'learning for learning's sake' is a decadent notion.

anyway sorry i can't really help - i think the advice of asking as many people in the field as possible for their views is very sound. i think that advice is always very sound, whatever stage you're at.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

You could work very hard at school and win a place at Oxford or Cambridge.

Just don't go round for breakfast at K-Punk's after you've graduated - if you don't want the milk in your cornflakes curdled, that is.

Going to Cambridge or Oxford is a magic talisman which ensures that graduates are like the Brazil football team - only the good things they do are perceived, everything else is treated as an aberration.

Just for one week, wouldn't it be good if everyone appearing on television who went to Oxford, Cambridge or Eton - presenters, politicians, captains of industry, etc - had to wear a temporary tattoo on their heads (O for Oxford, C for Cambridge, E for Eton)? That would produce some good resentment, I reckon.

http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/

 

[petergunn]

a) yes

b) no

 

[borderpolice]

I went to 2 of the world's top univerities, studying computer science. Not sure I recommend that course of life to anyone, it's really hard work. But if you want to make a career in science, it's pretty much mandatory that you have been educated in such environments. Alas, and contrary to popular prejudice, it's not enough to have gone to elite schools, but, by and large, one needs to do well there to get on in science. This is because these schools produce way more graduates then science jobs.

If you want an easy life, don't pursue a career in science.

My experience in industry was that graduates from good unis have an edge at the beginning of their careers (easier to get interviews), but after a while professional experience and success is more important than predigree, at least in professions that require numerical skills.

 

[bassnation]

I went to 2 of the world's top univerities, studying computer science. Not sure I recommend that course of life to anyone, it's really hard work. But if you want to make a career in science, it's pretty much mandatory that you have been educated in such environments. Alas, and contrary to popular prejudice, it's not enough to have gone to elite schools, but, by and large, one needs to do well there to get on in science. This is because these schools produce way more graduates then science jobs.

is this really true? my brother-in-law is a nuclear physicist working for the military and he didn't even get a degree until much later when his employer sponsored him. he's profoundly dyslexic and i get the feeling he didn't achieve what he was capable of in school - back in the 70's and 80's schools just weren't aware enough of the condition to adapt their teaching accordingly.

i'm a systems architect and i didn't study computer science at all - but obviously i work in applying this in business rather than science per se. the good thing about IT (if you think there is one) is that its one of the true meritocracies - nobody gives a toss whether you went to oxford or not and theres lots of incredibly bright people who are pretty much self-educated. if you can do the job you will very quickly go far, but you probably know this already.

 

[borderpolice]

is this really true? my brother-in-law is a nuclear physicist working for the military and he didn't even get a degree until much later when his employer sponsored him.

Military research may be different, i don't know. It seems that the military/arms producers will pay signigicantly more than comparable civilian employers, simply because many would not want to work for such morally dubious employers.

i'm a systems architect and i didn't study computer science at all - but obviously i work in applying this in business rather than science per se.

I agree, in business things are different, partly because CS is fairly new and 10/20 years ago, there wasnt much of an established core of methods, picking up programming was easy, not enough graduates being produced and so on. moreover, some of the key issues in programming are about gaining a good understanding of the application domain. as CS has established itself more, it has become more difficult to move into CS from other fields. If you look at the top architectural jobs at microsoft, cisco, google and the like, you'll find that most of them are filled by CS graduates from top universities.

the good thing about IT (if you think there is one) is that its one of the true meritocracies - nobody gives a toss whether you went to oxford or not and theres lots of incredibly bright people who are pretty much self-educated. if you can do the job you will very quickly go far, but you probably know this already.

I agree.

 

[Mr. Tea]

i'm a systems architect and i didn't study computer science at all - but obviously i work in applying this in business rather than science per se. the good thing about IT (if you think there is one) is that its one of the true meritocracies - nobody gives a toss whether you went to oxford or not and theres lots of incredibly bright people who are pretty much self-educated. if you can do the job you will very quickly go far, but you probably know this already.

Exactly. My brother has a couple of A-levels and an HNC or HNC (edit: HND, durrr!) (or something like that) - no universtiy education at all, in other words - and he's already well established in the programming and web-hosting world and doing very nicely. In fact, at the company he used to work for, he sometimes interviewed candidates who'd done a CS or IT degree but had far fewer practical skills than he did, plus of course the debt accrued from three years' study. They'd been poorly sold the degree by well-meaning but misguided careers officers at school, when they'd have been much better off leaving education after their A-levels and getting some practical experience.

 

[borderpolice]

My brother has a couple of A-levels and an HNC or HNC (or something like that) - no universtiy education at all, in other words - and he's already well established in the programming and web-hosting world and doing very nicely.

that's good for your brother, but exceptional. statistically, uni graduates do better than school leavers. very very few top jobs are staffed by school leavers. That's what matters.

 

[bassnation]

I agree, in business things are different, partly because CS is fairly new and 10/20 years ago, there wasnt much of an established core of methods, picking up programming was easy, not enough graduates being produced and so on. moreover, some of the key issues in programming are about gaining a good understanding of the application domain. as CS has established itself more, it has become more difficult to move into CS from other fields. If you look at the top architectural jobs at microsoft, cisco, google and the like, you'll find that most of them are filled by CS graduates from top universities.

what i've found is that i've had to pick up a lot of the groundwork for CS in later years - have sometimes reflected that it would have been useful to have it starting off, but its not always clear which path you will end up following when you first start out.

a lot of people from my generation came into IT with the advent of the PC, 4GLs etc, obviously a big change to the established system providers and architectures - but over the years i've swung the other way and now work almost exclusively with large mainframe / unix systems etc - all the things i managed to avoid for a considerable amount of time, i now have the utmost respect for. I regard the early stuff i did to be a bit mickey mouse now.

 

[bassnation]

that's good for your brother, but exceptional. statistically, uni graduates do better than school leavers. very very few top jobs are staffed by school leavers. That's what matters.

yes - although everyone knows a degree is just the start of your education in terms of a career, i would never advise my kids to skip higher education for this very reason.

 

[Mr. Tea]

On a slightly different, but related, note, the Guardian had a rather worrying article the other day saying that CVs from graduates were twice as likely to contain spelling or grammatical errors as those from people who'd never been to university.
Which makes you wonder what's going on in our universities... :slanted:

 

[borderpolice]

i would never advise my kids to skip higher education for this very reason.

I agree, and i think that's a fundamental shift in modern working practices, even for my parents it was a case of: you get a job and then expected to do it, or something fairly similar, for the rest of your life.

yes - although everyone knows a degree is just the start of your education in terms of a career, i would never advise my kids to skip higher education for this very reason.

There's the additional issue that going to university is in most cases more fun and interesting than working, especially if you have little in the way of qualification. I think it's good to protect one's kids as long as possible from the realities of working life. it's quite a struggle!

 

[Mr. Tea]

For my money, far too many people (in the UK) are going to university, there are far too many frankly Mickey Mouse courses available, and too many universities full stop. What was wrong with the old technical colleges? People who aren't all that academic should do vocational courses and learn a useful skill.

 

[turtles]

Y'know, having just about completed 7 straight years of uni (in CS) right out of highschool, I've actually been thinking about all the other things I could have done with myself in 7 years and wondering if I haven't really wasted a good chunk of my youth. While I sorta agree with borderpolice about the real world being a scary place, university is just such a safe place, it's just highschool 2.0 with more booze and drugs (well, more acceptable use of).

I think especially in a field like CS, where so many people in the industry are self-taught, the benefits of CS bachelors is really not that great, especially given the theoretical bent they put on most things. I had hoped that doing a masters would have somewhat alleviated that problem, but really it's just more of the same. Application to real world & industry is pretty damn small. Academics just have there heads waaay to far up their own asses.

Sorry if I sound bitter! But I think the value of university is completely oversold these days, except as two sentences on your CV that get you a job easier.

 

[gek-opel]

For my money, far too many people (in the UK) are going to university, there are far too many frankly Mickey Mouse courses available, and too many universities full stop. What was wrong with the old technical colleges? People who aren't all that academic should do vocational courses and learn a useful skill.

I think it would be fair to say that the idea of education as an abstract "good" to be maximised outside of either
(a) a desire to learn for the sake of learning or
(b) some utility in the skills/knowledge which can be applied to some form of later employment... is madness.

Academic University education as a default option for 18 year olds is not going to reap the rewards that some politicians obviously believe it will. In an ideal situation, there would be far less people going to academic university, but they would be much more effectively selected (ie- to avoid the private school system from blocking all the places).

For the record I did go to an elite university, and so far it has been absolutely no use whatsoever, though I would have to admit that is entirely due to my own free will... To be honest sitting on the Internet has been a far better education than anything at my august alma mater... I wish that instead of going to university at 18 I had gone and got a job for three years, then assessed whether I wanted to learn (I think the answer would have been "yes" and that I would have chosen a course more wisely- and by this I do not mean a course with greater employment-applications, indeed, I mean the diammetric opposite-- and benefited from it to a much greater extent)

 

[swears]

I think people going to university to do a completely "useless" course in a subject they are interested in for it's own sake is great. The idea that the state would make provisions for this is very utopian. (Unfortunately, we don't have the grant system anymore.)

But all the people going for three years to get pissed, shag, smoke weed and generally fit in with a load of other obnoxious twats are completely undermining the value of higher education.

 

[gek-opel]

I think people going to university to do a completely "useless" course in a subject they are interested in for it's own sake is great. The idea that the state would make provisions for this is very utopian. (Unfortunately, we don't have the grant system anymore.)

But all the people going for three years to get pissed, shag, smoke weed and generally fit in with a load of other obnoxious twats are completely undermining the value of higher education.

Yes, I think pursuing knolwedge for its own sake is valuable- who knows where it may lead for example? Any university system ought to support this. However, and lets be honest here, most people are not at university for this reason. A lot are there for career development, which is fine if not terribly inspiring, but most are just there because they can't think of anything better to do...