The Student Room Group

The great '2:2 will leave you unemployed' rubbish. Do classifications even matter?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by MrHappy_J
No matter how good the students are, an oversubscribed uni with not enough resources and a poor staff: student ratio is going to be a bad one.

i agree though, the 2:1 barrier is slightly ridiculous and isn't a reflection of someone's ability to perform in a job.


no true in other countries they manage much bigger classes. A typical day at uni is me turning up for lectures seeing the come powerpoint lecture while the lecturers is talking on the board (which is all electronic and I can access later on the internet at home if I want to). If there were a couple more people sitting in the lecture hall don't think there would be much difference. After all a lot of the more popular courses anyway have a lot of students anyway. And still they're educated to a good standard.

If anything if the number of unis are reduced this would lead to each individual uni getting a lot more money (they won't need to share it with so many unis). It's a lot more expensive to have more unis than just having bigger classes. So they can afford to hire more staff if needed. And they'll have more money and resources.

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying cut the no of unis to a very small number like 10 or so. I'm not that radical :wink:. But cutting them down to half or so should be fine. What's more a lot of these less respected unis don't have a lot of students. But they still have uni buildings etc. And struggle to get enough students to pay the expenses of maintaining/paying for those buildings/facilities. Hence you could argue it would be a lot easier if many of those merged.
Original post by LemonLizards
no true in other countries they manage much bigger classes. A typical day at uni is me turning up for lectures seeing the come powerpoint lecture while the lecturers is talking on the board (which is all electronic and I can access later on the internet at home if I want to). If there were a couple more people sitting in the lecture hall don't think there would be much difference. After all a lot of the more popular courses anyway have a lot of students anyway. And still they're educated to a good standard.

If anything if the number of unis are reduced this would lead to each individual uni getting a lot more money (they won't need to share it with so many unis). It's a lot more expensive to have more unis than just having bigger classes. So they can afford to hire more staff if needed. And they'll have more money and resources.

I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying cut the no of unis to a very small number like 10 or so. I'm not that radical :wink:. But cutting them down to half or so should be fine. What's more a lot of these less respected unis don't have a lot of students. But they still have uni buildings etc. And struggle to get enough students to pay the expenses of maintaining/paying for those buildings/facilities. Hence you could argue it would be a lot easier if many of those merged.


cutting down half of all universities would be damaging to the UK. and other countries don't necessarily have a good standard of higher education. that's something britain can take pride in.

it's not just a matter of how many people are sitting at the lectures. it's also a matter of library resources and 1 on 1 tuition. the more students, the less time staff will have for each student.
Original post by MrHappy_J
cutting down half of all universities would be damaging to the UK.

it's not just a matter of how many people are sitting at the lectures. it's also a matter of library resources and 1 on 1 tuition. the more students, the less time staff will have for each student.


library resources aren't too expensive. You can always fill it with more books. A lot of it's electronic these days anyway. Maybe the library will be fuller than normal, but people can study perfectly well at home rather than in the library. They can take their books/get the appropriate information an study in peace at their home/halls. Or with the extra money coming in to each uni they can make the libraries bigger.

I've never really experienced one on one tuition. Don't think many unis do that these days. I've certainly never had it. Students are expected to do a lot themselves, and lectures are more feeding you the information making it easier to learn directly from them (rather than getting help from tutors).
Original post by LemonLizards
library resources aren't too expensive. You can always fill it with more books. A lot of it's electronic these days anyway. Maybe the library will be fuller than normal, but people can study perfectly well at home rather than in the library. They can take their books/get the appropriate information an study in peace at their home/halls. Or with the extra money coming in to each uni they can make the libraries bigger.

I've never really experienced one on one tuition. Don't think many unis do that these days. I've certainly never had it. Students are expected to do a lot themselves, and lectures are more feeding you the information making it easier to learn directly from them (rather than getting help from tutors).


i am too tired to argue further about this but i do think you're being a bit naive. you cannot expect universities to perform just as well with twice the intake of students. it just wouldn't work. and there isn't the budget to pay for extra staff and resources. universities are large enough as they are, the environment would just be too impersonal. it would be like a small city.
(edited 11 years ago)
Strange how many people on this thread seem to have been brainwashed by the "A 2:2 means you are stupid and/or lazy whereas a 2:1 means you're not" dogma. The only thing separating a low 2:1 from a high 2:2 is a bit of luck and how you feel on exam days. Employers set an arbitrary cutoff between the two marks because it makes their lives considerably easier to introduce a grade threshold, not because a low 2:1 actually demonstrates superior workplace skills. Really this is just a failing of the digital age, where recruiters have abdicated responsibility to a computer which tells you whether you are or aren't good enough for a job based on a number that is largely incomparable across universities and to some extent even across courses.

The only silver lining is that once you have your first (proper) job no-one will ever ask for your degree classification again.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by MrHappy_J
actually impossible, unfortunately.


Well end on a round of firsts and get the best damn 2:2 you can :smile:
Original post by BigFudamental
Strange how many people on this thread seem to have been brainwashed by the "A 2:2 means you are stupid and/or lazy whereas a 2:1 means you're not" dogma. The only thing separating a low 2:1 from a high 2:2 is a bit of luck and how you feel on exam days. Employers set an arbitrary cutoff between the two marks because it makes their lives considerably easier to introduce a grade threshold, not because a low 2:1 actually demonstrates superior workplace skills. Really this is just a failing of the digital age, where recruiters have abdicated responsibility to a computer which tells you whether you are or aren't good enough for a job based on a number that is largely incomparable across universities and to some extent even across courses.

The only silver lining is that once you have your first (proper) job no-one will ever ask for your degree classification again.


It also seems that some universities would give you a 2:1 for a 59, others would not. In that respect uni can make a difference.
Reply 147
HELP!
I have a question. I got an offer from JP Morgan in the technology department (application developer). Its conditional on me getting 2.1. However, i know now that there is no way i can achieve that. If i get a 2.2, is there any way i can work for them?
Thanks for any answers
Reply 148
2:2 will get you nowhere depending on what job/position you are applying for. But if you have loads of experience that can always weigh against bad grades.
Reply 149
I ALREADY got an offer. So i am somewhere. The question is if i dont get 2.1 (I wont) will i still be able to go ahead and work for JPM.
Original post by thecoder
I ALREADY got an offer. So i am somewhere. The question is if i dont get 2.1 (I wont) will i still be able to go ahead and work for JPM.


If they asked for a 2.1 and you don't make it, it's unlikely because they, y'know, asked a 2.1. Only thing you can really do is work somewhere else, get experience and then reapply in the future if that's your dream job.
Original post by PurpleMonkeyDishwasher
*******s, I know some ****ing morons who are on the road to a 1st. It does not require intelligence, it just requires hard work. You're lazy, not stupid, just plain lazy. Anyone can get a 1st if they work hard enough.


Can anyone get a PhD with enough hard work?
Original post by PurpleMonkeyDishwasher
*******s, I know some ****ing morons who are on the road to a 1st. It does not require intelligence, it just requires hard work. You're lazy, not stupid, just plain lazy. Anyone can get a 1st if they work hard enough.


I'd like to see you do a maths degree at Cambridge and get a first and just be all, "yeah I just worked hard I'm not actually that clever."
Reply 153
If reading that article caused you to question your 'entire belief system' then i'm not entirely sure you should be at university in the first place.
Original post by Callum828
Can anyone get a PhD with enough hard work?


I highly doubt it but I don't know anyone doing a PhD and I haven't done one myself, but I doubt many simple 'hard workers' would actually want to do one anyway. The kind of people that throw their life into achieving a 1st at a bachelor degree don't usually go on to further study; they're more concerned with gaining employment afterwards. In any case I didn't imply anywhere that with enough hard work anyone can achieve a PhD.
Original post by Callum828
Well that's lovely of you, but unfortunately real HR departments trim based on real, concrete stuff, like degree type, degree class and university. If you read through each CV and see if they can provide 'evidence that they can turn up on time' and 'skills and qualities needed for the job' you are, by definition, not trimming, since you're reading through each CV individually to ascertain such information.


What I said was entirely based on what I know a real HR department do. As Regent has confirmed.
Original post by MrHappy_J
cutting down half of all universities would be damaging to the UK. and other countries don't necessarily have a good standard of higher education. that's something britain can take pride in.

it's not just a matter of how many people are sitting at the lectures. it's also a matter of library resources and 1 on 1 tuition. the more students, the less time staff will have for each student.


Having a good standard and having lots of unis and students are not the same thing. In fact they're inversely proportional. The more people go to university, the lower standards have to slip in order to allow them to pass. By reducing student numbers to a more sensible level, we can increase standards, lower costs, and stop unfairly pricing non-grads out of the job market.
Original post by Callum828
Having a good standard and having lots of unis and students are not the same thing. In fact they're inversely proportional. The more people go to university, the lower standards have to slip in order to allow them to pass. By reducing student numbers to a more sensible level, we can increase standards, lower costs, and stop unfairly pricing non-grads out of the job market.


that's what i'm saying. the more students, the lower the resources, the lower the standards.
Original post by MrHappy_J
that's what i'm saying. the more students, the lower the resources, the lower the standards.


But then surely cutting the number of universities is a good thing?
Original post by Callum828
But then surely cutting the number of universities is a good thing?


how could it be a good thing?? there would be more students at each university if half of them were shut down. your logic makes no sense.

Quick Reply

Latest