Having scored an A in every exam in my Masters in International Education (Norway), I became adventurous and aspired to enrol in some of the top UK universities until I was confronted with a myriad of additional requirements and muffled 'advice' about trying the less prestigious unis first.

Apparently, Pierre Bourdieu's Cultural Capital theory of the perpetuation of inequality through the reproduction of the knowledge, tastes and values of the plutocray is well and alive in the UK unlike egalitarian Scandinavia. Nevertheless, my question is, does it really matter in the long run? Anyone heard of a Roehampton University? Its apparently quite new. Is that a disadvantage? What about a GRE exam that these elite unis require? Thanks in advance.

Coming from an egalitarian university system, I think that the UK system makes students work harder to get into the best places like Oxford. The additional requirements you've been talking about are a good thing, in my opinion. They make sure some effort goes into the application. If you want to study in a prestigious place, unfortunately you need to be prepared for this, also in terms of time it takes.

Alternatively, just enrol at Kielder University. Takes a minute, but doesn't shine on the CV.

"Nevertheless, my question is, does it really matter in the long run?"

Yes, Oxbridge and the traditional universities i.e. those belonging to the Russell Group will always have a better reputations, and generally this impacts upon employment opportunities. It will take an awful long time for good 'new universities' to achieve the reputations of the older uni's. If you plan to return to your home country - then ranking may make little difference.

"Anyone heard of a Roehampton University?"
In short, no.

"Its apparently quite new. Is that a disadvantage?"
Yes, it could be a disadvantage if you're faced with an interview panel of academic snobs/elite in the future. However, your choice of supervisor, and the quality & specialisation of the department should be considered before general rankings.

"What about a GRE exam that these elite unis require?"
Check individual PhD admission pages.

Does one need a distinction to get a PhD place in the Russell Group?

Some of the smaller places might be lower down overall, but they can really shine in some areas, e.g. Roehampton is quite good for environmental stuff? And somebody told me that Anglia Ruskin is the best place in Europe for Animal Behavior...

In terms of snobby interview panels, I have found that you can get just as much grief being from a prestigious University as from a rubbish one.

The thread-title sounds like a PhD title.

Having had the pleasure of a BSc and now PhD at two different Russell League unis. In my opinion these universities come into their own in terms of funding - the name sells. Imperial, UCL, Oxford & Cambridge get grants becuase their research is good. More money = better quality research and so the cycle perpetuates. New unis are untried and research money is a lot of dosh to throw down the drain for no results. Having said that, some new unis are exceptional in their field, e.g Loughborough for sports sciences (I believe) and Portsmouth for marine biology.
Incidently, Roehampton is an excellent teacher training uni!

Appreciate your time and answers. As a self-financing overseas student, the annual fee is a whopping 9000 UK pounds at Ph.D level - the penalty for Norway turning down EU membership twice (1972 and 1994). Needless to say, I want full value for my money which explains the desire to come into a good university in the UK.

Hypothesis - Loughborough is only a new university in the way that Warwick is (ie one established in late 50s/early 60s). A new university is generally defined as one that was formerly a polytechnic until the early 90s, while a new new university is a college of higher education that became a university since 2000.

Ta commonsense - I thought Loughborough was only made a uni in the 90s. I shall drink myself into oblivion with shame

I believe Warwick and other universities created in the 60s are known as 'glass plate' universities. These used to be the 'new universities' but are no longer since the 1992 Education Act transformed polytechnics into the new breed of universities.

Some 'glass plate' unis are very good and should be considered at least on par with the civic/red brick uni's - Warwick, Lancaster and York spring to mind.