Want a good degree outside the "golden triangle"? Here are some tips for other universities which are good choices for the most popular subjects....

Universities are in the news constantly these days. If it's not concerns about the lack of places, then it's the cost of going, or even whether it's worth studying at all.

But if you are looking to apply to university, then you will, I'm pretty sure, be overwhelmed by the choices on offer. Well, School Gate is here to help, and particularly to offer you some tips about other good universities where you can study popular subjects. As the Good University Guide's John O’Leary says, "a good degree (especially a first) from a university with a strong reputation in your subject may be worth more than a mediocre result at a supposedly prestigious institution."

Here's more from John to enlighten you.

"There is no easy route into one of the top universities, particularly in popular subjects such as law or medicine. At first sight, assuming you take the right A levels (maths and physics), there is almost a 50/50 chance of a place in materials science at Oxford. But the competition will all have at least three As – and want to study materials science.

Classics was an even better bet at Cambridge last year, with only 158 applicants, 81 of whom got in. But that just serves to underline the point that the number of applications per place is not a reliable guide to the level of competition: classicists at Cambridge averaged 518 points at entry in 2007 – the equivalent of four As at A level, with an AS level on top.

Most of the top universities have some courses that are not heavily oversubscribed. Bristol - which has 11 applications per place, a ratio exceeded only by the London School of Economics - was in clearing for audiology last summer, for example. But such courses tend to be in areas such as modern languages or engineering, which require particular qualifications. And what would be the point of spending at least three years studying a subject that did not interest you?

The only conceivable reason would be to have a degree from a university that will impress future employers. And it is true that many employers are more interested in the university that a graduate attended than the degree he or she took there.

But in fields of employment that make direct use of the knowledge acquired during a degree course, employers are equally aware of top performers outside the ‘golden triangle’ of Oxford, Cambridge and London. The subject tables in The Times Good University Guide include numerous examples of comparatively lowly-ranked institutions with consistently good employment records in specialist fields.

Robert Gordon University, in Aberdeen, for instance (which you can see above), has had the best graduate employment figures for accountancy and finance in the last three guides, while Bangor is the only university in the current guide to register full employment in art and design – subjects with notoriously uncertain early career prospects.

The higher education system has many such gems that should not be overlooked in the rush for a place at a Russell Group university. An Oxbridge degree still goes a long way in the employment market, but a good degree (especially a first) from a university with a strong reputation in your subject may be worth more than a mediocre result at a supposedly prestigious institution.

Even in some of the most popular subjects, there are attractive prospects outside the leading universities. Here are a few suggestions among the top ten subjects this April.

Law: Scottish universities boast several of the top employment scores, while Loughborough is among the leaders in England by that measure.

UPDATE from John O'Leary (in response to comments below):
Loughborough appears in the law table of The Times Good University Guide because it runs several courses (with good employment records) that include law. But it is true that there is no law school or single honours degree, so it was not a good example to quote. Apologies for that. Hull and Keele would have been better choices - both have good employment rates and entry requirements that are not prohibitive.

Student satisfaction scores for law are also interesting. Sunderland ties with Cambridge for the most satisfied undergraduates, with Derby next, only two percentage points behind. All three had satisfaction levels of more than 90 per cent in the 2008 National Student Survey - well ahead of the other universities in the top 30.

Psychology: Kent offers some of the best employment prospects. The University of East Anglia has the most satisfied students, but has fallen down on graduate employment in the last two editions of The Times Good University Guide.

Medicine: There is no getting away from high entry grades and almost everyone who stays the course gets a job. Outside Oxford, St Andrews has the most satisfied students.

Design: Bangor is the only university in the current guide to register full employment in art and design – subjects with notoriously uncertain early career prospects.

Nursing: Entry grades are not high at most universities and employment prospects are good. Among the more lowly-ranked universities, Edge Hill, Greenwich and Glyndwr all have high satisfaction scores.

English: Even some of the top universities have ordinary graduate employment records. Not so Middlesex, where 78 per cent of leavers found graduate-level jobs or continued their studies in 2007.

Business and management: Applicants are spoilt for choice, but some employment scores are alarmingly low. Chichester’s is not high, but the students are among the most satisfied in the country.

Economics: Keele has a high employment rate with manageable entrance requirements.

History: Another subject with low graduate employment at many universities. That is true of Portsmouth, but it has had the most satisfied students in the country for the past two years.

Most popular subjects 2009
Law	84,715
Psychology	76,359
Medicine	69,952
Design	66,544
Nursing	59,895
English	55,500
Management	54,838
NN - Combinations within Business & Admin Studies	51,317
Business studies	47,985
Economics	46,709
History	45,924

 Read School Gate:

The most popular universities

What universities do the top employers target?

Have you thought about studying in the USA?

What links Mick Jagger, JFK and the new Apprentice winner, Yasmina? Yes, it's LSE

Comments

[Dave]

This analysis seems to use graduate employment as a proxy for 'quality.

Also, will employers really know which are the good courses at less well-known universities? Usually they don't look beyond the university's name.

[Rachel N]

Not meaning to be rude about Cambridge's classics dept, but maybe there is a reason why the intake is so low (other than the fact that there are only a few of us that study it these days!) A friend of mine did his MA there after studying Classics with me at what would be considered to them an inferior university. He has now decided to go back to said inferior University for his PhD as he disliked the Cambridge department as it was too stuffy (his words not mine) and the lecturers were very snobbish! I never understand how Oxbridge is the be all and end all, yes they are highly respected Universities but all the people I know that have gone to them (minus this particular friend) seem to lack personality and seem too focused on studies instead of gaining broader knowledge of the world around them!

[Whimsey]

This is really scary. With the exception of medicine/nursing there isn't ONE science-based subject here at all (I'm discounting Psychology because of course it's not real science)(or, to put it less contentiously, it's not useful science for the purposes below.)

At a time when THE most essential task is to save the planet from environmental catastrophe (let alone all those ever-present essentials such as feeding humanity etc), it is quite appalling that the upcoming generation don't seem to take that on board.

Law, history, English etc are NOT going to help us when the water levels start rising.

I really am quite shocked! And dismayed....

[Rachel N]

Whimsey

I agree, it is frightening that there are no sciences here. I think the problem is that at secondary school alot of schools only offer Double Science, I know that was all I was offered at GCSE, and as such I came out with a double C as I was terrible at Chemistry but great at Biology. Of course I didn't know that so dropped sciences whereas I would have probably studied Biology at A Level had I known (I wanted to be a Vet when I was at school!) Perhaps we need to work on the way science is approached at schools, I think this would help at University level.

[Whimsey]

Rachel, I agree - it does tend to be assumed at school that if you are 'good' at science then you are good at ALL science...

This may well be true for some, but biology is a 'different' science, because you really need very little other sciences for it, and it can be a very good stand-alone subject. In particular, you really don't need much maths to do it (hurrah!). You can just about get away with chemistry A level without maths (I did - phew!). Physics, though, is impossible without maths, as nature is, of course, written in the language of mathematics.

As for geology, from what I can tell of my son's GCSE curriculum, it seems to pop up half in chemistry, and half in geography! (I can see why, but it does make it harder to view the subject as a coherent whole in its own right)

[Rachel N]

Whimsey

I can't honestly remember half of what I did at GCSE now, I remember I was reasonable at Physics and Biology and the only reason I turned up to chemistry was for the very handsome scottish teacher! I think the same can be said for languages in some ways. There isn't a high turn out at University level because some intelligent person made sure it is no longer compulsary. Bearing in mind I took my GCSE's in 2001 I was definatly not allowed to drop languages, but my partner who would have been the year below me has no knowledge of any language other than English, and it still shocks me how one year group is enough to entirely change a students base knowledge! (the only word he knows in french is Chicken *sigh*)

[Whimsey]

I'm afraid I'm of the school of thought that says languages are the most expendable item on the curriculum. They're a 'nice to have' not a 'need to have' in my book. Just about every other subject is more important.

I appreciate there are good reason for learning foreign languages, but they are not a priority in comparison with English, maths, science, geography and history.

The problem with science as a subject, apart from the need to divvy them up internally according, basically, as to whether you need maths for them or not (!), is that they also need divvying up according to how interested a child is in them. I would say there's a 'base level' that any child needs, then a higher 'base II level' that any academic child needs, even those who are off to be lawyers and linguists etc. And then there is the 'practical level science' that in fact we all need (how the electricity supply works, how cars work, how cookery works etc etc) but which are most essential for the non-academic children.

Roughly speaking, it's a question of divvying up science into the 'wannabe scientists' (of any of the classes of science), the 'never wannabe scientists' (the humanities students) and the 'cannabe scientists' (the non-academic students).

[Rachel N]

I agree with you about divvying stuff out, my only issue would be with students like I was who hated maths (and I was pretty awful at it) and yet got an A for their electromagnetism coursework in Physics. It's awful to say and I know everyone used to think of it as an excuse when I was younger but when maths is taught in a different manner it makes more sense. I was awful at maths in a maths classroom setting, but in the practical world i.e. business and Tech (what I work in) it makes complete sense, so to restrict a child from a certain subject because they can't understand academic maths could be a huge mistake. I also feel that restricting children because you assume that they can't learn certain subjects as they can't learn others is actually detrimental. I wasn't allowed to study Latin at Year 8 at my school because I was in the 3rd set and only set's 1 and 2 were considered "intelligent" enough to understand it, but I would have enjoyed an extra language lesson to the extra Maths lessons I was expected to take instead, if anything it made me resent having to study maths more! Languages will always be a contentious subject, as a person who spent my childhood travelling around different countries at the whim of my parents I am very pro languages, whereas my partner doesn't see the point.

[opinononeverything]

My biggest regret is not keeping up with my languages after A level. My job requires me to work with people across the globe and I always feel incredibly uneducated when I hear perfect English being spoken by someone who is not a native English speaker, yet I am unable to even say "hello" to them in their native tongue...I can't believe languages are no longer complusory, this is a HUGE mistake.

[Claire]

Languages are important not just because of the language itself that you are learning, but what you are learning through learning a language. When learning a language you have to talk about something, so through learning 4 languages in addition to English I have also learnt so much about culture, art, literature, politics, science, communication and much more, as well as the added bonus of having lived and worked abroad with all that entails in terms of the rapid education found in finding somewhere to live all by yourself in a foreign country etc. The learning of the patterns and connections between languages can also help with other subjects (eg having studied Spanish, French, Latin and a little Ancient Greek, I can guess at the meaning of many terms in science subjects and medicine at first glance).

I agree that science is poorly funded and very badly reported in the media, and more children need to be encouraged into that field in terms of studying and career, but I cannot accept that languages are 'expendable' - personally, I think MFL should be incorporated into the curriculum as early as possible, so the idea of speaking and learning in another language isn't alien and embarrassing as it can be for teenagers new to a foreign language.

[Whimsey]

I wouldn't say they are totally expendable, just more expendable than anything else on the curriculum.

I would say that is true, even if we did not have the luxury, in this era, of English being the lingua franca of the world.

Out of courtesy, I think we should all know how to say 'please and thankyou' in the language of any country we visit.

[Lucy w/k K]

Rachel N, that sounds as if you were taught maths badly. It's not somehow less good to understand maths through practical application - that's what applied maths IS! My school were really bad at this too - they taught maths as a series of rules to be learnt and the poor physics teachers had the double burden of teaching their students not only how to understand physics, but also how to understand the maths that hadn't been properly taught in the maths classroom.

Most subjects overlap with and supplement each other if they're taught properly

[Jan Thomas]

I'd take with a pinch of salt any university-generated figures of graduate employment. Some rig these in various ways; for example, those who cannot be contacted after graduation are not included and are very likely to be under- or un-emplyed; other places offer their unemployed graduates clerical and other jobs at the university. It also depends how you classify a graduate job, of course.

[john]

It is suprising,and worrying, that neither engineering nor languages are in the top ten

[Whimsey]

Maybe we should just be grateful that 'media studies' is no where in the list!

I mean, just how many 'meeja-folk' does the planet need???!!!! (I'd say a lot less than we've got!)(eg, entire staff of Hello, Chat, OK, etc etc etc.....)

[Leanne]

Loughborough is an amazing university but it does not have a law school! Just goes to show that you really cannot trust these figures!

[Charles Ryan]

Education stopped being about education a long time ago. Education now is about money.

[GS]

I've just checked a previous comment about Loughborough University not having a law school on the university's website and it's absolutely correct. So can Sarah Ebner please explain her statement that "Law: Scottish universities boast several of the top employment scores, while Loughborough is among the leaders in England by that measure".

What were her sources for the employment prospects of attending the non-existent Loughborough University law school? Did she simply make the whole thing up? Does anyone at The Times fact-check anything which is written in the paper?

It beggars belief...

[Jake]

Leanne, although Loughborough is a good university for certain subjects it is some way off fantastic. Most go to play sports or study something sports orientated. It is unfortunate that the government are prioritising sport over traditional, rigorous academic study.

[Malcolm McLean]

There is not a single science in the top ten, with the exception of psychology, which is a very immature science, still basically descriptive rather than theoretical. Nor does maths feature.

[Kate C]

"This may well be true for some, but biology is a 'different' science, because you really need very little other sciences for it" WHIMSEY

I take exception to this.As a biomedical sciences graduate from Kent I can assure you that you need chemistry at the very least even for a biological science degree. 1st year students have a module in medicinal chemistry and one in organic chemistry, whilst in the 2nd year they have pharmacology. Added to this a high level of maths is needed throughout the 3 years otherwise they would be unable to make sense of the calculations needed to be performed in experiments etc.To dismiss biological science degrees as not needing the other sciences is total rubbish.
I find it a shame that no sciences are mentioned in the list and that for Kent only pyschology is rated ( a pseudo science if ever there was one). Kent regularly makes the top 20 of good universities to attend so this makes no sense whatsoever.

[Sarah Ebner]

The author of this piece, John O'Leary will reply to some of these comments in due course.

[Whimsey]

Kate - I don't say you don't need ANY other sciences, I just say you don't need a great deal for biology. You can cherry pick the bits and pieces out of phys/chem/maths that apply to biological systems, whether that's eg the mechanics of an organism's locomotion or the gas pressures for lung functions or the stats for population dynamics, etc.

Obviously if a biologist wants to do lots more stuff that needs lots more general science, then fine, but my point is that it's a shame to lose students who are keen on biology by making them do a lot of chem/phys/maths they don't need and may well be put off by (and not be much good at either).

[William]

Law and Psychology at the top, business studies and economics close by, design, but no engineering, and no science. How might hundreds of thousands of bright graduates in these subjects affect the future of Britain? Clearly we'll have an even more materialistic society, on the make and out to hoodwink their neighbour. I predict that Great Britain will soon resemble Greater Los Angeles.

[Karen]

Employment figures are a ridiculous way of recommending courses as there is no way of ascertaining the quality of jobs the graduates are getting. So 100% of Bangor's Art and Design graduates are employed in a related industry? That could include working as a cashier in an art shop, a job which wouldn't have needed a degree in the first place.

[jacob]

GREAT to see History is popular again!

Despite being subjected to the many disasters that nulabour minions have caused in school learning of history, people are still wanting to immerse themselves in History for a degree.

Excellent!

[Mike Donald]

Why do we have a skills shortage?

[Whimsey]

"Why do we have a skills shortage?"

**

But do we?

I think the answer falls into two parts.

First, do we have the skills needed to fill the jobs currently available?

I don't actually know, but it would seem, depressingly, that there aren't actually many (any?) jobs currently available anyway, are there, in these ressionary times? If there are vacancies that are hard (impossible?) to fill, what are they?

Secondly, what skills should be short of? ie, what are the jobs that the UK SHOULD have on offer, for which they should have the skills availalbe out of the education system to fill adequately.

It's that second question that is obviously the most important for the future of the economy - and, indeed, the planet, since so many of the jobs that SHOULD be done are to do with saving the planet (whether it's staffing recyling plants or designing ways to generate and distritue non-polluting power, etc etc)

Plus, of course, we obviously need more doctors and medical staff (or there wouldn't be a waiting list for treatment etc), we need more medical researchers (to find cures and treatments we don't yet have), we need more teachers (so we can cut class sizes), we need more social workers (so overworked SW's don't miss tragedies like Baby P etc), and more probation officers, etc etc etc.

There's any number of people we need with skills that will make this a better country for all to live in.

[Richard Black]

Worrying to see that Law is top of the table.

Very worrying !!

[JAY]

Why study Audiology when the number of jobs is so small and the ability to use the degree overseas is limited.
Also the NHS has only a few places and no 3 rd year clinical training.
So this sept more students start a course with no real chance of a job.
And this is before the NHS 25% cutbacks due to the lack of govt money.Labour have failed to many in further education with no chance of a good job only more debt.Well done nu labour.

[John]

I think it’s disastrous that so many students are able to study jurisprudence (law) with such ease. There is an absurd student to firm ratio after graduation which is resulting in bright students with first class law degrees reduced to taking retail jobs. Surely something needs to be done about this problem. Maybe tougher entry requirements for law?

[Tax mummy]

Re the update on Law: why is it "good" to go to a university which has low entry requirements?

There aren't that many top-quality legal jobs at the other end - and a fair few will be taken by students with very good degrees from very good universities ... Low entry requirements won't get you past the lowest-level screening for a job with a good City firm. You may end up a legal exec, but could do that without the degree.

My experience (including recruiting graduates to a top accountancy firm) is that we and the lawyers were flooded out with straight-As at GCSE and A level plus good 2:1s or Firsts at Russell Group universities and still couldn't meet the demand from applicants.

[Chris Cherry]

Whimsey:

"Maybe we should just be grateful that 'media studies' is no where in the list!

I mean, just how many 'meeja-folk' does the planet need???!!!! (I'd say a lot less than we've got!)(eg, entire staff of Hello, Chat, OK, etc etc etc.....)"

So after demonstrating you know nothing of sciences, how they're taught and the reasoning behind them being taught in a certain way, and languages and the importance and value of communicating in several languages, you're now demonstrating you know nothing about Media Studies.

Is there anything you do know?

[BENJAMIN]

PLS I NEED COUNSEL urgently. I WANT TO STUDY FOR FOR AN MSC IN LOGISTICS AND SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT FROM SEPT 2009. PLS WHICH ARE THE TOP 3 UK UNIVERSITIES FOR THIS COURSE. Or should i say the next 3 in rank after cranfiled

[Becky]

Everything contradicts itself SO much, I have parents screaming it doesn't matter and i have to be happy etc, teachers telling me its the degree not the university, Postgrads telling me it's the university more than the degree.

AND I REALLY DONT KNOW WHO TO BELIEVE. CAN SOMEONE PLEASE MAKE A RELIABLE, HELPFUL, HONEST SITE SO PEOPLE LIKE ME DONT FEEL SO SUICIDAL ABOUT THIS CHOICE!

[Rachel E.]

Economics departments outside the golden triangle that are well-respected: UCL, Warwick, Essex, Bristol and Southampton.

[will]

i have just finished my gcses this year and i was just wondering why is law such a popular subject and surely if you want to be lawyer (which you are not bound to do with a law degree)how on earth do you gain employment surely there must be millions of lawyers to compete with since law has been the most popular subject for ages, could someone please answer both aspects of the question because it seems very odd to me. On a different matter my choices are between history, medicine, law and one of the sciences. Ideally i would do history at oxford or cambridge that would be my dream however most other universities do not offer a really good history course and so if i find it is history i want to do and get turned down from oxbridge then i would be seriously worried as the courses that i have seen just arent good enough but perhaps my views on this will change if i research further.

[Tax mummy]

Will: Law is useful for a legal career (solicitor / barrister) as it takes a year off subsequent training. Also well respected for accountancy and other "City" jobs.

And yes, obviously only the best get the best jobs. There must be hundreds who will be rejected often. You need solid A grades from school and a 2:1 or first from a Russell group university to have a chance of a first interview at a top tier firm ...

Why do the other candidates do law? Bad advice ... they think they will buck thee trend.

[ruth]

Jake,
'Most go to play sports or study something sports orientated.'

Most go to Loughborough to do Engineering.

[Polly P]

There is no mention in these listings about the invaluable resource that the delivery of HE in FE colleges provides or the dedication and quality of the teaching. As a mature student living in a rural area with limited access to HE, North Devon School of Art has provided me with a first class (actually accredited by the University of Plymouth) cutting edge degree in Fine Art. The staff are resourceful, encouraging and allow students to embark upon subjects which reflect their personalities and interests. I have visited several other degree shows and have been struck by the lack of diverstity and risk taking which is inherent in the teaching at North Devon. They should be celebrated for their contemporary art practice knowledge and acceptance and encouragement of individuality. Some of the other 'prestigious' courses should look out for the quiet ones.

[Richard Armstrong]

John O'Leary's advice is sensible but he did not use particularly good examples. I will be a third-year English student next year, and I am doing my extended essay on Dostoevsky, which means if I wanted to apply for a masters at Oxford then I should really apply to do the 1780-1900 strand. Competition will be extremely tough so a viable alternative would be to consider a masters in Russian and East European Studies instead. The same advice could be offered to those taking economics, history and politics too so long as they are interested in the area. The faculty of Medieval and Modern languages offer literature modules too.

You have to realise what skills you have and adapt them when necessary.

[Josh]

Rachel N: I know that have gone to them seem to lack personality and seem too focused on studies instead of gaining broader knowledge of the world around them!

I feel this is worth bearing in mind for overly ambitious students (and parents). A friend of mine spent a year doing medicine at Oxford. He didn't particularly enjoy it and left. The overwhelming impression I got from him, of Oxford undergrads, is that they are so busy developping intellectually they have no time to develop personally. He didn't have many of the valuable experiences I had in my first year at uni as he was too focused on his course.

Choose a course that you will find interesting, as at the end of the day it's the act of studying for a degree, not the knowledge itself which is most employable. I'm not sure how often my Historical knowledge will be useful in consultancy (Cap Gemini) but what I've learnt of intellectual rigour, essay writing, and independant research/work are skills which I will use every day.

[Jon]

No computer science, no engineering and no agricultural science. The only maths is in better economics degrees. And we wonder why there is a skills gap and trade deficit?

[Richard]

The graduate employment measure is pretty useless. It measures percentage in a graduate-style job or postgraduate education 6 months after graduation. But doing a masters (which can be very easy to get onto) doesn't guarantee a proper job at the end and can just add a lot of debt. It is particularly meaningless for Law, since all those who want to be solicitors or barristers must complete the LPC or BVC courses after graduation. Many will go straight onto these (especially if there is one at their own uni or on the doorstep) rack up another £20k debt and then end up flipping burgers. They show as "successes" in the statistics. But someone who takes a year out to get more experience and then secures a place with a top law firm, starting the LPC the following year is a "failure". I know I'd rather be the "failure" in this scenario! The league tables should stop using this misleading statistic; maybe then the authorities might move to a more useful one, like percentage in graduate employment 3 years after graduation.

[Mum of two]

Becky | 15 Jul 2009 14:44:41

Becky
In general the university matters more than the degree unless it is a vocational degree such as medicine. Having said that there are some degrees which are worth steering clear of. I'm not just talking about media studies - geography seems to make people snigger (I speak as a Durham geography graduate). I wouldn't worry about whether it is a relevant subject to any career plans you have but it helps with getting into a good university if you don't set your heart on a subject which is oversubscribed. So my advice would be go for a good university, don't agonise too much about the subject and have a good time (as long as you get a 2:1 at the end)

[N/A]

i'm currently suddying at my sixth form, and just finished my AS's, however as confident as i felt after my exams i didn't do as well as expected, especially having had good grades in my jan sits! i want to study economics, at either birmingham or manchester, yet i feel i have no chance of meeting the actual requirements, unless i work unbelievably hard for my final year! one thing i would like to know is, could i still get into the two universities even if i dont meat the requirements, much appreciated!

[lawyer]

To John O'Leary:
In your comments about studying law, you mention the Scottish universities as a viable option. I am not sure if you are aware of this, but if you study law in a Scottish institution you will not have the correct exemptions to practise in England and Wales.

I really think this should be pointed out to potential law students, as the choice between England & Wales vs Scotland for university is not, as far I am aware, relevant in this way for any other subject.

[Ed]

Graduate employment rates to me seems like a poor indicator of the employability of graduates from certain courses.

I'm certain some universities' figures would be bumped up by the fact that they are more likely to have graduates that financially need to obtain 'any' kind of work after they graduate. Where other students more likely from other Universities can afford to be more choosy

I have just graduated from a MSc, and am employed - but in a call centre. Does this mean my course is good?

[lunchtime]

Rachel E - UCL is 'part' of the golden triangle.

[Psychology student]

I'm sorry. "Psychology is not a real science". You should come and sit in on my biological lectures. Better yet, see how far you would get with a neurological disorder without having to see an expert in the field. That's right a neuropsychologist!