Does it matter where you go to university or college?
It certainly seems like it matters where you go to university. There is great competition for top universities around the world. Many even pay a lot more to get into one of the best universities; presumably there is some reward for the cost at the end. Is a first or 2/1 from Oxford really better than first from Thames Valley University or any ex polytechnic? Since there are external examiners who check standards presumably all university graduates are marked on a similar level regardless of institution. This leaves simply the prestige of graduating from such universities. It may not make a difference in your qualifications but it is more likely to get you noticed.
You can also add to the debate by leaving a comment at the end of the page.
Certain Universities are impressive
There are Universities that, justified or not, have a certain amount of grandeur about them. At the very moment of mentioning them they have an impressive nature about them. This is not only with Oxford and Cambridge, but also those Red Brick Universities in Britain's oldest towns. If nothing else, these Universities would certainly make a person feel proud of themselves for attending such a university and being able to tell people about it.
It is however likely that employers from red brick universities will prefer red-brick university alumni for employees because they can relate to them(being alumni themselves). [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_brick_university#The_civic_university_movement]]
I agree, it does matter what college or university a student goes to. At each college or university there are a lot of different things. Each and every college and university is different. Some colleges and universities are known well for what kinds of facilities that they have. Other colleges and universities may have a really well built gym. While other colleges and universities have really low income gyms. These gyms have really old and out of date equipment. Or, the colleges or universities do not have a gym at all. On the other hand, some colleges and universities have a really good recreation area. I have seen colleges with bars, pool tables, and a lot of places to eat as well. Also, I have been to colleges that have a small cafeteria. The recreation area is a place for students to go to relax after doing all their homework.
Any one with a first and upper second degree should be proud of their qualification because they have a greater chance of getting jobs or getting graduate degrees than people with a lower class degree(irrespective of the university they graduated from).
In reality, universities throughout the country tend to have the same standard of teaching, and whether you go to Oxford or London Metropolitan, the lectures will be just as good. Certain universities are just more elitist and harder to get in to than others. However, employers will assume that someone who went to Oxford is smarter and therefore a better asset to their company than a person who went to London Met, which is a shame because they should give each person equal opportunities.
I believe that it should not matter which college or university that a student goes too. This is because what employers look for when employers want to hire someone is if the person is qualified enough to do the job. I mean there are a lot of highly qualified people out there who are working. Some people have more skills than other people. What the employer wants to do is find the bottom line. This means that if the employer wants someone with a college degree than the employer will get the person with the college degree. So, this means that it does not really matter what college or university a student chooses to go to. What matters is if the student gets a degree from any university or college. This is because employers want the best person working for them. This is because that person should have certain skills from college that the employers need.
we should concentrate on the skills that we obtain
Going to University should not be like collecting badges. University education is not only about the institution you go to but the skills you learn. If we are suggesting that those skills are of differing quality, then we are saying something is very wrong with our education system. All of our Universities are assessed against the same objective criteria by many external examiners and their research and teaching assessed by many different institutions. Therefore, a 2:1 from one university should be the same as another.
What the argument on the left asserts is that better universities have better lecturers and therefore better opportunities for a student's development. It does not say that there is any difference in a merit or distinction from different colleges.
But certain universities have certain features which make it easier to obtain such grades! [[http://www.oxbridgeessays.com/blog/top-10-uk-universities-625/]] This shows how universities are assessed. The better research score of a university the better educated the lecturers are in that university. They will have undertaken more research and so will have a greater level of expertise in a particular subject area. All this means that the University you attend does make a difference to the education that you receive.
This is a good topic to choose because it rises up many other topics. As a whole each and every one needs to concentrate on their skills. This is because skills are important for each and every job. At some colleges and universities a student can go to a huge lecture hall and learn from a teacher. But, other colleges teach in the classroom with smaller classes. Some students prefer the big lecture halls. This way it makes it easier to lose attention in class. But, in the classroom with smaller classes the student has a better chance of getting to learn a lot more about the subject. This is because the student has the ability to talk and work with the teacher. This would be almost impossible in other colleges and universities with big lecture halls. But, in colleges and universities with small classrooms this makes it a lot easier to learn.
It won't get you noticed where it matters.
It might impress people but it won't get you a job - it is inadvisable to boast about where you went to University in an interview when you could be talking about how well you fit the job role and what you would give to the company - actual skills such as innovation and business sense will help you survive in the recession. As a politician it would impress some people but it could also be a disadvantage if people think you're elitist and can't relate to the people you're making policies about. They will be just as impressed by someone who starts off with nothing and works their way to the top.
C.Vs are submitted before the interview call. People who have graduated from better-known universities are bound to be preferred over those with similar academic and extracurricular performance but with degrees from universities with less star-quality. This is especially true in professions where marketing/advertising/image is at the forefront, customers trust and are impressed by MBAs or Lawyers with Red brick college or IVY league degrees while such professionals from lesser known universities are sidelined. The exception to this rule lies in the realm of the medical profession, where a doctor is a doctor no matter where s/he graduates from.
What do you think?