Students are advised to be “calmer” about the reputation of the universities they want to attend, after a new study found that it may be better to graduate with a good degree from a less prestigious university than a lower one. degree from a selective institution.
A report by the Institute for Fiscal Research found that graduates in England with first or higher second-class honors (2.1) had higher average incomes up to the age of 30 than those with lower second-class honors ( 2.2), regardless of the institution – which means that the degree was often more important than the reputation of the institution.
The figures in the report also suggest that it is less difficult to obtain a higher-class diploma outside selective universities with competitive entry requirements, although these universities tend to award a higher share of 2.1s and first.
Ben Waltman, a senior IFS research economist and co-author of the report, said prospective students, parents and politicians should take the findings into account and be “calmer” about which institutions they aim to study at.
“The findings suggest that the classification of the degree may be as important as attending university for later life income,” Waltman said.
“Visiting a more selective university is good for future income, and the fact that few disadvantaged students attend the most selective universities is an obstacle to social mobility.
“But with that in mind, many graduates who receive 2.2 from a highly selective university may have received a higher-paying job if they had attended a slightly less selective university and received 2.1.”
The study, based on detailed government data, found that five years after graduation, the annual pre-tax benefits for both women and men who received a lower second-class degree in 2013 were around 3,800 British. pounds lower than for those who received a diploma for a higher second class. .
The study also found that rewards for higher grades vary “enormously” depending on the subject.
Jack Britton, associate director of IFS and co-author of the report, said: “For many entities, the difference between the former and 2.1 is insignificant for revenue. But for others – such as economics, law, business, computer science and pharmacology – this is significant.
For men and women studying law or economics, getting 2.2 instead of 2.1 is associated with 15% lower income or worse, while there is no “significant difference” in pay between grades for those who specialize in education or English.
But achieving at least 2.1 led to a much higher average salary for graduates of more selective universities.
Men and women who received 2.2 from the most selective universities – Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial College London and the London School of Economics – earned an average of 20% less by the age of 30 than those who achieved 2 , 1. In the least selective universities, 2.2 degrees lead to about 6% lower pay for women and 8% for men.
IFS also noted “clear gender differences” in awards between men and women who achieve first-class degrees in many selective universities. The increase for first grade compared to 2.1 is almost nothing for women, but about 14% for men.
“This suggests that fewer high-achieving women are pursuing high-income careers,” IFS said.
Waltman said the pay gap for gender graduates is largely explained by the choice of subject. But even for those who have completed the same subjects, it is clear that by the age of 30 there is a pay gap, which is only partially explained by the fact that women leave the labor market to have children.
“Children are a key explanation, but they’re not the only thing happening here,” Waltman said.
Add Comment