The Student Room Group

is 3rd year of degree harder than 2nd

Hi

i am on biomedical science degree and just finished my second year with about 69% average. but it pushed me to the limit i had never studied harder and am very happy with my grades but i am worried if 3rd year is same or harder :eek:

any comment plz

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Avatar for Inverse
Inverse
I'd assume it gets harder.
Reply 2
Avatar for User990473
User990473
Original post by Inverse
I'd assume it gets harder.


I agree, any rational person would deduce that as the course progresses, so does the workload/complexity.
Reply 3
Avatar for Inverse
Inverse
Original post by Occams Chainsaw
I agree, any rational person would deduce that as the course progresses, so does the workload/complexity.


I like how your username originates from Occam's Razor. :tongue:
I would have thought it would get harder each year... perhaps not as much of a jump between 2nd and 3rd year as there would be between 1st and 2nd but I've heard that degrees in general get harder each year. Maybe you could talk to 3rd year students or start doing extra reading over the holidays to get a head start if you're really worried about it?

At the end of the day you should be looking to work really hard in your final year anyway so that you can come out with a degree classification that you'll be proud of. It's better to work hard and get a 2:2 than fly through and get a 1:1
Reply 5
Avatar for Inverse
Inverse
Original post by littleone271
I would have thought it would get harder each year... perhaps not as much of a jump between 2nd and 3rd year as there would be between 1st and 2nd but I've heard that degrees in general get harder each year. Maybe you could talk to 3rd year students or start doing extra reading over the holidays to get a head start if you're really worried about it?

At the end of the day you should be looking to work really hard in your final year anyway so that you can come out with a degree classification that you'll be proud of. It's better to work hard and get a 2:2 than fly through and get a 1:1


Wouldn't you have to work harder to get a 1:1? :confused:
Reply 6
Avatar for User990473
User990473
Original post by Inverse
I like how your username originates from Occam's Razor. :tongue:


Thanks, it was meant as a pun that not many seem to have noticed, not may have picked up on it at least.
I suppose it suites me quite well and perhaps my answer to the OP is evidence of that.

The name Inverse is interesting, to me, it almost implicitly conveys a troll!! :biggrin:
Reply 7
Avatar for Inverse
Inverse
Original post by Occams Chainsaw
Thanks, it was meant as a pun that not many seem to have noticed, not may have picked up on it at least.
I suppose it suites me quite well and perhaps my answer to the OP is evidence of that.

The name Inverse is interesting, to me, it almost implicitly conveys a troll!! :biggrin:


Not many people are so interested in philosophical principles. :tongue:

I certainly don't intend to be a troll! :s-smilie:
Reply 8
Avatar for User990473
User990473
Original post by Inverse
Not many people are so interested in philosophical principles. :tongue:

I certainly don't intend to be a troll! :s-smilie:


Perhaps devil's advocate then? Or maybe just argumentative? :P
Reply 9
Avatar for Inverse
Inverse
Original post by Occams Chainsaw
Perhaps devil's advocate then? Or maybe just argumentative? :P


Just argumentative. :lol:
Original post by Inverse
Wouldn't you have to work harder to get a 1:1? :confused:


Assuming that they're 2 different people. In my opinion a 1:1 achieved by someone whose naturally ridiculously intelligent and has never really had to work that hard at anything is worth less than a 2:2 achieved by a hard worker. A good work ethic is just as important as intelligence and the person working hard will learn more about themself whereas the person who didn't need to work that hard will just get cocky and rest on their laurels.

There's always someone who seems to get amazing grades without making any effort and I don't think it's very good for anyone.
Reply 11
Avatar for Inverse
Inverse
Original post by littleone271
Assuming that they're 2 different people. In my opinion a 1:1 achieved by someone whose naturally ridiculously intelligent and has never really had to work that hard at anything is worth less than a 2:2 achieved by a hard worker. A good work ethic is just as important as intelligence and the person working hard will learn more about themself whereas the person who didn't need to work that hard will just get cocky and rest on their laurels.

There's always someone who seems to get amazing grades without making any effort and I don't think it's very good for anyone.


I don't see how this evaluation correlates with logic. Why do you assume that people who achieve 1:1 degrees don't work hard? Even the most intellectually able candidates are prone to do badly without working hard. Although this would only potentially apply for a very small number of students in terms of the comparison, it's not an accurate viewpoint at all.
It's pretty much a truth universally acknowledged that the workload will only increase as you progress through academic life.

Year three was a hell of a lot harder than year one in primary school.
Reply 13
Avatar for User990473
User990473
Original post by littleone271
Assuming that they're 2 different people. In my opinion a 1:1 achieved by someone whose naturally ridiculously intelligent and has never really had to work that hard at anything is worth less than a 2:2 achieved by a hard worker. A good work ethic is just as important as intelligence and the person working hard will learn more about themself whereas the person who didn't need to work that hard will just get cocky and rest on their laurels.

There's always someone who seems to get amazing grades without making any effort and I don't think it's very good for anyone.


Meaning that someone of average/above average, but not outstanding intelligence could get a 1st honor and still have learnt the lessons that the guy who got the lower second did.

Original post by Inverse
I don't see how this evaluation correlates with logic. Why do you assume that people who achieve 1:1 degrees don't work hard? Even the most intellectually able candidates are prone to do badly without working hard. Although this would only potentially apply for a very small number of students in terms of the comparison, it's not an accurate viewpoint at all.


Also, this is true. :smile: You don't get a first with no work. Granted, people will get a first with relatively little done compared to others but you have to remember that 1) that person may have just been paying attention in the right places 2) the person in question was hiding the amount of work they were doing and just portrayed a lackluster attitude.
Original post by Inverse
I don't see how this evaluation correlates with logic. Why do you assume that people who achieve 1:1 degrees don't work hard? Even the most intellectually able candidates are prone to do badly without working hard. Although this would only potentially apply for a very small number of students in terms of the comparison, it's not an accurate viewpoint at all.


I never assumed or even implied that. My point is that at every stage of the education system there's always someone who seems to get top marks with minimum effort and other people who work really hard and get very average grades. Obviously if you get a 1:1 through really hard work then that's great.

I just personally think that the harder you work to achieve something, the more it should be worth to you and that if you're constantly doing well in things without working very hard then it's not really going to do you any favours in the long run because one day you'll need a work ethic and it might not be there.
What are you talking about? What is a 1:1?

Don't you mean a 'first' or a '1st'?

'2:1' means 'second class, upper division' and '2:2' means 'second class, lower division'.

There is no upper or lower division of first class honours; there's no need for a second number.

/rantcomplete
Logically yes, third year is harder because you have your dissertation to research and write on top of other modules and the course material in general is designed to make you progress into more complicated areas, but some people have said they found third year easier than second (possibly because they prefer to be left to their own devices to research a project that interests them more freely) but it depends on your qualities and strengths.
Original post by Aspiringlawstudent
It's pretty much a truth universally acknowledged that the workload will only increase as you progress through academic life.

Year three was a hell of a lot harder than year one in primary school.


lol you are taking to the extreme but i have heard some freinds say that second year is the hardest for some reason.
Reply 18
Avatar for spyka
spyka
6
In my experience Year 3 was the easiest.

For a start, there were fewer modules as the dissertation was worth four, and was on something that you (should) love and have a passion for. It's therefore very interesting and easy to get yourself motivated.

With the modules, unlike in previous years, they were all choices, therefore again the work I did was what I wanted to do, what I loved to do and as a result I found it easier than studying something I didn't understand or didn't care about
Personally, I found second year to be the hardest. My course was structured in such a way that they squeezed most of the harder theoretical modules into the second year and then third year was mostly clinical work and dissertation (mine was a relatively straightforward experimental project, so that took time but wasn't difficult) with a bit of brushing up on clinical knowledge and legal issues.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you