[Obscenedilemma]

I noticed both have the same course code (LL12) so does that mean they are both the same

Or will Econ & Politics have more econ than Politics? Therefore does that mean I would have to talk more about Econ in my personal statement? (And versa)

Uni's I'm looking at Leicester- Politics and Economics
Loughborough- Econ and Poli
Bristol- Econ and Poli


Thanks,

OD

[SonnyBeatle]

"And" means roughly equal, "With" means the first more than the second. (In terms of core modules). Lboro is a Econ Major with Pol minor.

[Obscenedilemma]

(Original post by SonnyBeatle)
"And" means roughly equal, "With" means the first more than the second. (In terms of core modules). Lboro is a Econ Major with Pol minor.

Thanks, so if it has "and" then basically and I can put Econ with Pol on my CV even if it's Pol and Econ?

[Fynch101]

Politics and Economics are like polar opposites, in terms of careers. One is about thinking deeply about coming up with solutions to problems with society, and the other is just dumbing down those solutions, and supporting the dumbing down of the solutions so joe public can understand them. Politics is a bastard science. An utter waste of 3 years.

[Good bloke]

(Original post by Obscenedilemma)
Thanks, so if it has "and" then basically and I can put Econ with Pol on my CV even if it's Pol and Econ?

Don't misname the official name of your degree subject on your CV. Anyone reading it who is familiar with your course will know you can't even get the name of your degree right and may draw unfortunate conclusions from that.

[Potally_Tissed]

(Original post by Obscenedilemma)
Loughborough- Econ and Poli

It's "Economics with Politics", or "Politics with a minor" (one of the options being economics) at Loughborough. Either way it's a 2/3 - 1/3 split between the two subjects, not half and half.

[Obscenedilemma]

(Original post by Fynch101)
Politics and Economics are like polar opposites, in terms of careers. One is about thinking deeply about coming up with solutions to problems with society, and the other is just dumbing down those solutions, and supporting the dumbing down of the solutions so joe public can understand them. Politics is a bastard science. An utter waste of 3 years.

I enjoy politics and besides, the graduate prospects are the same as econ. Typically Politics itself = 40% after 6months. Now combine that with econ, 79%... obviously it depends what uni you're looking at- Newcastle, Glasgow etc

(Original post by Good bloke)
Don't misname the official name of your degree subject on your CV. Anyone reading it who is familiar with your course will know you can't even get the name of your degree right and may draw unfortunate conclusions from that.

Yeah but why should it matter if they're both taught at 50% Surely the ordering would be insignificant. And besides, I don't the recruiter would know the exact name of the course.

[Good bloke]

(Original post by Obscenedilemma)
Yeah but why should it matter if they're both taught at 50% Surely the ordering would be insignificant. And besides, I don't the recruiter would know the exact name of the course.

I could ask you the same question. Why would you want to change the name of your degree on your CV if it isn't of any significance? Clearly, it is to you.

If I were a recruiter (and I am) finding incorrect or misleading information or lies on a CV it would be filed under "W" as soon as possible.

And never assume that a recruiter doesn't have personal knowledge of what you write. I have, in the past, received a CV from someone who claimed experience at a particular company, which I had doubts about. I knew the person who he would have worked for, rang him and established what the candidate's true role involved. It didn't gel with the CV and he didn't get the job.

[Fynch101]

(Original post by Obscenedilemma)
I enjoy politics and besides, the graduate prospects are the same as econ. Typically Politics itself = 40% after 6months. Now combine that with econ, 79%... obviously it depends what uni you're looking at- Newcastle, Glasgow etc

Statistics like that are so unbelievably inaccurate and misleading. In the sense that to draw conclusions like that isn't really correct.

[Obscenedilemma]

(Original post by Fynch101)
Statistics like that are so unbelievably inaccurate and misleading. In the sense that to draw conclusions like that isn't really correct.

The data is from the unistats website. After 6 months every graduate receives a survey. It's not totally correct of course but it gives a rough idea (there are other factors too like what you graduated with etc) but as I said these are just rough figures.

Are you saying that the grad prospects aren't the same?

(Original post by Good bloke)
I could ask you the same question. Why would you want to change the name of your degree on your CV if it isn't of any significance? Clearly, it is to you.

If I were a recruiter (and I am) finding incorrect or misleading information or lies on a CV it would be filed under "W" as soon as possible.

And never assume that a recruiter doesn't have personal knowledge of what you write. I have, in the past, received a CV from someone who claimed experience at a particular company, which I had doubts about. I knew the person who he would have worked for, rang him and established what the candidate's true role involved. It didn't gel with the CV and he didn't get the job.

A cheeky lie in a CV in the long term usually ends up with more benefits than costs. You asked a good question there "why would it matter to me" I just prefer economics being first because otherwise it makes it look as though there is more politics than economics. It also makes more sense (alphabetical) Why would a recruiter file it under "W" if he knew that content was both 50:50, what's so significant about changing the ordering may I ask? Also what is W

[Good bloke]

(Original post by Obscenedilemma)
The data is from the unistats website. After 6 months every graduate receives a survey. It's not totally correct of course but it gives a rough idea (there are other factors too like what you graduated with etc) but as I said these are just rough figures.

Are you saying that the grad prospects aren't the same?





A cheeky lie in a CV in the long term usually ends up with more benefits than costs. You asked a good question there "why would it matter to me" I just prefer economics being first because otherwise it makes it look as though there is more politics than economics. It also makes more sense (alphabetical) Why would a recruiter file it under "W" if he knew that content was both 50:50, what's so significant about changing the ordering may I ask? Also what is W

The benefit of lying is nil. The downside is possible loss of credibility and providing a cause for the employer to fire you, even years later.
It doesn't look as though there is more of anything, since recruiters are perfectly aware of what degree names imply, on the whole.

"W" is the waste bin.

[carnationlilyrose]

(Original post by Good bloke)
The benefit of lying is nil. The downside is possible loss of credibility and providing a cause for the employer to fire you, even years later.
It doesn't look as though there is more of anything, since recruiters are perfectly aware of what degree names imply, on the whole.

"W" is the waste bin.

Good to see you're still on form, GB. Hope you're well.

On topic, he's right.