The Student Room Group

Harder to score at different Uni?

Is it harder to score a First class honors at University of Nottingham compare to University of Nottingham Trent?

Does it differ much by university ranking?


For example University of east London (Being last in UK league table) is easier to get a First Class Honors compared to University of West England and much much easier compared to University of Lancaster so forth.


Does the value of first class honors different from each other? For example, If i score a second class upper in Oxford, i am better than people who scored a first class honors in university of Nottingham Trent.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Avatar for izpenguin
izpenguin
15
Yes, at better unis the degrees are usually harder.
This is evident from the fact that at higher tier unis a fair number of people get 2.2s/3rds and at lower tier unis a fair number of people get 1sts/2.1. If all degrees were equal difficulty, you would expect that getting less than a 2.1 at a top 10 uni would be virtually unheard of, and higher than a 2.2 at one of the least prestigious unis would be virtually unheard of, but it isn't.
I don't know how big the difference is though.
Original post by izpenguin
Yes, at better unis the degrees are usually harder.
This is evident from the fact that at higher tier unis a fair number of people get 2.2s/3rds and at lower tier unis a fair number of people get 1sts/2.1. If all degrees were equal difficulty, you would expect that getting less than a 2.1 at a top 10 uni would be virtually unheard of, and higher than a 2.2 at one of the least prestigious unis would be virtually unheard of, but it isn't.
I don't know how big the difference is though.


I thought more people got a better graded degree at the higher universities and from I've read on TSR its more rare for people to get a first at a 'low ranked' university.
Reply 3
Avatar for wannabemed
wannabemed
4
Original post by Oh my Ms. Coffey
I thought more people got a better graded degree at the higher universities and from I've read on TSR its more rare for people to get a first at a 'low ranked' university.


Yes but that is because the majority of the time those who go to top unis are more academically able (thought there are exceptions, mature students who cannot move etc) therefore will get a better degree class.
Reply 4
Avatar for bestofyou
bestofyou
18
Original post by izpenguin
Yes, at better unis the degrees are usually harder.
This is evident from the fact that at higher tier unis a fair number of people get 2.2s/3rds and at lower tier unis a fair number of people get 1sts/2.1. If all degrees were equal difficulty, you would expect that getting less than a 2.1 at a top 10 uni would be virtually unheard of, and higher than a 2.2 at one of the least prestigious unis would be virtually unheard of, but it isn't.
I don't know how big the difference is though.


may we see your source of info for this rather strong statement?
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by bestofyou
may we seen your sourse of info for this rather strong statement?


I'm guessing its the TSR GCSE forum.
Reply 6
Avatar for Suetonius
Suetonius
9
People who are somehow convinced that a degree from Nottingham Trent is as rigorous as one from Nottingham are fooling themselves. Probably trying to make themselves feel better about attending a mediocre university. It's self-evidently not the case.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 7
Avatar for The99Call
The99Call
I dont understand how people can say that the degrees are the same difficulty.

For example i had to get AAA to get onto my History course.

Someone who got CCC at A level, then went to do a History degree at a different University would not be as academically able as me in the subject, therefore not expected to complete the same difficulty work as me at University. This would be unfair on the other candidate more than anything, degrees must be catered to the intellect of the particular person, surely?
Reply 8
Avatar for bestofyou
bestofyou
18
Original post by Suetonius
People who are somehow convinced that a degree from Nottingham Trent is as rigorous as one from Nottingham are fooling themselves. Probably trying to make themselves feel better about attending a mediocre university. It's self-evidently not the case.



Doesn't every uni have a certain % of students allowed to achieve each degree class? I have no source of course, just something I heard so that is a genuine question.

If that is the case then prehaps it is 'harder' in the sense that, as said below there are higher numbers of more able students competing for the higher degrees?

Or have I got it wrong and everyone can get a 1st if they get above 80 or what ever the cut off for a first may be?
Reply 9
Avatar for Suetonius
Suetonius
9
Original post by bestofyou
Doesn't every uni have a certain % of students allowed to achieve each degree class? I have no source of course, just something I heard so that is a genuine question.

If that is the case then prehaps it is 'harder' in the sense that, as said below there are higher numbers of more able students competing for the higher degrees?

Or have I got it wrong and everyone can get a 1st if they get above 80 or what ever the cut off for a first may be?


Not sure. All I know is that there are less academic people who were at my school getting 2:1s and 1sts at relatively poor institutions, and that myself and more academic people are getting that at good ones. Even if it is "skewed" so that less people at poor universities get good grades, then this would suggest that it's not by much.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by bestofyou
Ah, for a second there I though she may have just assumed that 'fact' or found it from some place where 'facts' tend not to exist. Glad to know she probably has a legit source for it. We are so lucky to have the GCSE forum making all these facts and statistics for us.

Did you do your Fyear at Durham btw?


Loughborough university, then got offered a place at Durham. Durham does do a foundation year however.
Original post by The99Call
I dont understand how people can say that the degrees are the same difficulty.

For example i had to get AAA to get onto my History course.

Someone who got CCC at A level, then went to do a History degree at a different University would not be as academically able as me in the subject, therefore not expected to complete the same difficulty work as me at University. This would be unfair on the other candidate more than anything, degrees must be catered to the intellect of the particular person, surely?


Higher entry requirements doesn't necessarily mean it's a harder course.
Often unis set high requirements simply because they have so many applicants.

Look at Aberdeen, it's a good uni, but has lower requirements than many other unis of its caliber, simply because it's not a very popular uni (mostly due to its location).
Original post by Suetonius
Not sure. All I know is that there are less academic people who were at my school getting 2:1s and 1sts at relatively poor institutions, and that myself and more academic people are getting that at good ones. Even if it is "skewed" so that less people at poor universities get good grades, then this would suggest that it's not by much.


But you have no source though? You are just assuming based on people that you had better grades than at school getting grades close to yours now.

How do you know they are less academic? You don't. You just know your GCSEs and A-levels are better.

Prehaps they just realised that at uni you can't be spoon feed and actually started to work?

I think if it was the case that it was harder to get a first/2:1 at a top 20 uni than and a 30-50 uni then no postgrad course would ask for '2:1 entry requirements'. Surely they would ask for a 2:1 from ______universities or a 1st from ____ universities

Original post by Popppppy
Higher entry requirements doesn't necessarily mean it's a harder course.
Often unis set high requirements simply because they have so many applicants.

Look at Aberdeen, it's a good uni, but has lower requirements than many other unis of its caliber, simply because it's not a very popular uni (mostly due to its location).


I would say this is likely the case here. QUB is another one. Top university that suffers greatly because it attracts mosty NI students. Obviously medicine etc is oversubscribed therefore they can afford to ask for AAA. However History at ABB clearly isn't as popular, it has nothing to do with History at say Southampton being harder.

Why would Nottingham Trent ask for AAB for their History course? Anyone achieving those grades wanting to do history will go to Notts or somewhere else of similar rank. It doesn't mean that the course at Notts is considerably harder.
(edited 11 years ago)
The awkward moment when you read the title and think 'scoring' means something completely different...
Original post by bestofyou
may we see your source of info for this rather strong statement?


www.unistats.com
This allows you to look up what percentage of students on different courses at different unis get what grades. For example:
According to this website, 40% of those studying maths & statistics at london met get a first, while 34% of those studying the same subject at cambridge get a first.
So either London met students are smarter than cambridge students, or some degrees are harder than others.
With all due respect to london met, I think it's the latter.
Reply 15
Avatar for skibur
skibur
12
Original post by XxelliexX
The awkward moment when you read the title and think 'scoring' means something completely different...


Same, I was slightly disappointed!
Reply 16
Avatar for DKDarkKnight
DKDarkKnight
OP
So, there is no agreeable point in this topic?

Can a person who scored a 2.1 or 2.2 from university of nottingham says that he is better than a person who score 1st class from nottingham trent solely because of the university name?


Will employee still prefer a 2.1/2.2 from uni of nott than a 1st from nott trent student?
Original post by izpenguin
www.unistats.com
This allows you to look up what percentage of students on different courses at different unis get what grades. For example:
According to this website, 40% of those studying maths & statistics at london met get a first, while 34% of those studying the same subject at cambridge get a first.
So either London met students are smarter than cambridge students, or some degrees are harder than others.
With all due respect to london met, I think it's the latter.


Cambridge is in a league of its own for maths, so hardly a fair comparison there.

Engineering at University of Ulster gives less firsts (9%) than Queens Belfast (30%)

So accoarding to your theory Ulster is better than QUB for EEE? Despite the fact that Queens is the higher ranked engineering dept. and has higher entry standards?

Unistats is not a source. It is a bunch of statisics. You can't win an arguement based of statisitcs alone, as I have just proven, because it has more holes in it than a sieve.
(edited 11 years ago)
I looked at the thread title and assumed that you were inquiring about the availability of heroin!
Original post by DKDarkKnight
So, there is no agreeable point in this topic?

Can a person who scored a 2.1 or 2.2 from university of nottingham says that he is better than a person who score 1st class from nottingham trent solely because of the university name?


Will employee still prefer a 2.1/2.2 from uni of nott than a 1st from nott trent student?


Look, I suggest you repeat your A-levels if you are that worried about attending Nottingham Trent because I assure you your lack of faith with your uni will not go away. What course are you doing btw?

There was a thread recently about a 1st from brunel vs 2:2 from RG uni.

It was decided that a 2:2 wouldn't even get you past the entry standards for postgrads and grad jobs therefore I'd say a 1st from Trent is better than a 2:2 from Notts.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you