The Student Room Group

Couldn't get near a first despite busting my ass

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Dare I say it but luck does come into the mix quite a lot, especially if you're a 2:1/1st candidate. In such cases, if the right exam questions come up, you're sorted, and for coursework, if you get the right/wrong person marking your work there will also be slight boosts up/down which can have significant effects.

Finally, you should always make sure you know the core stuff as solid as a rock before branching out into less relevant material.
Original post by Twinkle1
I think you might have answered your question there. it isn't a choice between the two. it is a case of doing both. of course first and foremost the lecture material is vital as that is the outline of the modules and the course, but from there you need to look further.
I have no understanding of your subject but for instance in my subjects (this is an 'idea of what I mean!')
Say for example I have been taught about a theory about how companies deal with procurement and order fulfilment by author X, and got asked about ways in which companies do this in an exam, I would have learnt that theory, but also found in the literature/theory/academic texts another author who has a similar view or contradicting view? Does that make sense?

Also - you didn't mention but is this your final grading for your overall degree? or just part way through?


The only times I would for historical examples wouild be if something was discovered. I would explain the details of the discovery but I would never look at opposing or alternate techniques or be able to put forward my own theories/opinions.

Lord, would that have taken a HELL of a lot of time. Not only to look at the lectures but to find theories, explain the theories and then critically evaluate and put forward your own 'opinions.' Wow. For the most part I kinda put together material from other papers and tried to present them as logically and as well written as I could but In reality that's all I did. I understood and remembered what I wrote but I didn't stretch myself in thinking and challenging what I put down. Many because I couldn't/ would be long!
Reply 22
You've got a good degree in a hard course, done, under your belt. Now crack on with your life and stop being so hard on yourself amigo. :redface:
Reply 23
agree with 321zero. a 2.1 is great and you should be proud!
Reply 24
All I want to say
U had a really BAD LUck!
Don't you???
Original post by KenGosgrove
I understood and remembered what I wrote but I didn't stretch myself in thinking and challenging what I put down.


I think this may have been the reason you didn't achieve a first. I am not sure what it is like for Science subjects as I did a completely different subject (History) but for my degree at least, to get a first to be able to think originally was essential. You had to do this combined with all the hard work you clearly put in. Not all candidates could do this and some didn't realise you had to do this and this is why only a handful achieved a first, yet the vast majority received a 2.1 (at my uni at least).

Like another poster said, however, it is a lot to do with luck, especially if you are on the boundary. One bad exam paper can mess you up. Misunderstanding one question can really mess you up. I think the lecturer can also make a massive difference too. A good lecturer can help you do very well whereas a bad one can really damage your results.

A 2.1 is a fantastic result though and you should be really pleased! I can understand your frustration as you clearly put everything you had into the degree but at this high level you should not expect to achieve the highest marks or be disappointed that you did not. A lot of undergraduates go through this. I don't know what your academic record was like before uni, but a lot find that they easily got As at A Level and were top of their class, yet are just "average" at uni where everyone got As and were top of their class at A Level. Outside the uni bubble you are still in the top percentage of the population, have a fantastic degree in a very difficult subject and your prospects are good. Stay positive and don't be so hard on yourself. Especially don't doubt your intelligence...you are clearly very intelligent.
A 2:1 is good, especially if it's not your final year.

A few lessons I learnt from my degree:

No man is an island - the people around you on your course can help you. Lecturers can help you.
No one owes you anything but yourself; be proactive, sometimes irritatingly so


I am *itching* to say this, although it's probably quite rude; I don't think you would have gotten a 2:1 on my course. I say this as someone who got plenty of 2:2s/low 2:1s in the first 2 year of the degree, and the average mark for the year group for many modules was in the high 40s, low 50s for many modules - on a course which required AAA at A-level. Why? Because if coursework made up 70% of our year we'd all have strong firsts. We were 100% exam assessed unless one module we took as a dissertation which would be a 17k word beast. For my final year, I got firsts so I know how the jump from 'zero to hero' works. I actually lived in the library - even slept there on more than one occasion. Some people who get firsts on tough courses pretend even when anonymous on forums that they didn't work that hard - they are lying!! Very few aren't, but most are! The definition of 'working hard' really varies from person to person - and 'real' hard work means 12 hour days at least - day in, day out. You really have to know the system at your uni for your course inside out - for law, that means knowing the past exam papers inside out and back to front, so that you can almost predict what will come up because you understand the deep structure of the exam and you know how the question setter thinks. It means writing essays again and again to tutors on different topics - it means sharing notes and essays with other top students. That's how you get firsts at my uni for my course.

Edit: Apologies, I had written previously 'would have gotten a 2:2' when I meant 2:1.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 27
Original post by KenGosgrove
I never did that. For the exams I just looked at the lecture notes with a few reviews thrown into help my understanding of the topic as a whole.


That is definitely a huge mistake, exams are all about showing that you have been reading extensively on your own, if all you can come up with is stuff from the lectures you will be marked down.
2.1 is brilliant.

By the sounds of it, you have a good work ethic, and employee's will see that. It's hard to get a 2.1, never mind a 1st.
Original post by Sommerfugl
That is definitely a huge mistake, exams are all about showing that you have been reading extensively on your own, if all you can come up with is stuff from the lectures you will be marked down.


How on earth can anyone have the time to cover all the material and then go into huge amounts of depth when the examiner can only ask you a few questions? I read reviews and that's all I had time/ability to do so I could know all the topics in some detail.
Reply 30
Original post by KenGosgrove
How on earth can anyone have the time to cover all the material and then go into huge amounts of depth when the examiner can only ask you a few questions? I read reviews and that's all I had time/ability to do so I could know all the topics in some detail.


You've never answered the question of whether this is your final year.

The fact that people tell you what you need to do to get a first and you keep saying it's too much work suggests that you probably need to accept you're not at that level.
You did your best and worked hard and got a decent grade, fair play.

Not everybody is naturally super bright so its not all about 'you should have done this'. If you tried to get in the Olympics for the 100m you could train your ass off eat all the right stuff and shave a couple of seconds off your time and you would still be well off qualifying pace, it wouldn't be a case of 'well you should have focused more in your training sessions and given yourself more time off' etc its just that you're not an athlete.

It's not the case that everybody can get a first with the right work ethic, some people are naturally good at academic stuff, at exams, essays etc. Working hard will just help you to maximise the potential that you have and if you've done that then you just have to accept it.
Original post by Norton1
You've never answered the question of whether this is your final year.

The fact that people tell you what you need to do to get a first and you keep saying it's too much work suggests that you probably need to accept you're not at that level.


I think you're right.

The whole idea of a first according to everyone on this thread and the mark schemes is for original thought and critical thinking. I'm sure critical thought wouldn't have taken too long if I had the aptitude. I thought the more I read, the more good points I could cite and pass as my signs of originality!

Final year.
Reply 33
Original post by KenGosgrove
I think you're right.

The whole idea of a first according to everyone on this thread and the mark schemes is for original thought and critical thinking. I'm sure critical thought wouldn't have taken too long if I had the aptitude. I thought the more I read, the more good points I could cite and pass as my signs of originality!

Final year.


Ah well, you've ended up with a good degree anyway. It's a shame you didn't know about the requirements of a first before aiming for one but I think it's a good thing that you probably wouldn't have done it anyway.
Original post by Norton1
Ah well, you've ended up with a good degree anyway. It's a shame you didn't know about the requirements of a first before aiming for one but I think it's a good thing that you probably wouldn't have done it anyway.


LOL i agree
Original post by Twinkle1
from experience and what I was always told they want you to 'go the extra mile' and look beyond the lectures and show 'original thought'. That is normally the wording on the mark sheets throughout my undergrad degree.



Original post by xlizzlebizzlex
I am not sure what it is like for Science subjects as I did a completely different subject (History) but for my degree at least, to get a first to be able to think originally was essential. You had to do this combined with all the hard work you clearly put in. Not all candidates could do this and some didn't realise you had to do this and this is why only a handful achieved a first, yet the vast majority received a 2.1 (at my uni at least).


What exactly is meant by original thought? Does it refer to extra reading beyond the syllabus around the subject, your own opinions, or something else?
Reply 36
Original post by facetious
What exactly is meant by original thought? Does it refer to extra reading beyond the syllabus around the subject, your own opinions, or something else?


It's not original in the sense of no one else ever having that thought, it's about analysing and coming to your own conclusion worded in your own way developed from your own sources. This would be rather than parroting the opinion of someone else you've read.

I would offer as an example an English literature student writing on Shakespeare, it's not as if there's anything new out there to say about the man and his works, but if you come to your conclusions in an original way then you get credit.
Reply 37
Original post by facetious
What exactly is meant by original thought? Does it refer to extra reading beyond the syllabus around the subject, your own opinions, or something else?


The other person replying to this summarised it pretty well.

at the moment writing my thesis for masters my original thought comes from (for example) the fact that I am applying a theory for the manufacturing industry to the retail distribution sector.
at undergrad it was also about how you could link different areas of the subjects too.
Original post by facetious
What exactly is meant by original thought? Does it refer to extra reading beyond the syllabus around the subject, your own opinions, or something else?


My method was to literally question everything. Usually looking at what assumptions underlie conflicting views can help you delve a bit deeper cos you realise not only that people disagree but why people disagree. Once you realise this sometimes you can go the extra mile and suggest new ways of looking at problems, or at least highlight the problems with the current approach. This is not limited to various academic arguments themselves but also the question that's being asked. A good technique is to question the question...what assumptions does the question being asked make? In my final year I probably wrote more often than not in my conclusion that the question was impossible to answer as the question itself was too open to interpretation. Sounds silly and a bit of a cop out, but I got the highest mark in my year in final year so seemed to work haha!

Of course to do this you had to read widely. You don't have to work your butt off all year (I didn't) but when it comes to exams then you are gonna have to put in some real effort. In exam time I tried to put in at least 10 hours everyday and I was largely successful, albeit a few days lost to procrastination :rolleyes:. Throughout the year I would say to always make sure you never go into a seminar knowing absolute zero - just skimming the work is enough as long as you have something you can discuss - and start assignments well in advance to give enough time for thorough research and the inevitable procrastination.

I don't know if you could transfer this to science though. Maybe by considering the limiting factors in an experiment or by identifying limiting factors that others haven't? I did History which is probably a lot more airy fairy than a real subject like Science haha :tongue:.

The attitude I always took to my work was that the lecturer knows all the arguments and all the facts and if you just reiterate it back to them its gonna be boring. If your lecturer wrote a paper like that it would be of no use academically. Try and give your lecturer something to think about. I found thinking like this made writing essays a whole lot more interesting and actually a little, dare I say it, fun! I loved the feeling of arguing a point I knew came 100% out of my own head. But maybe I'm just a nerd :biggrin:
Don't worry I busted my ass off and got a crappy 2:2! Uni is a lot harder then people think. It's not just about getting drunk.

Quick Reply

Latest