2:2 degree holders how did it work out?

I graduated with a 2:2 in law from a redbrick uni in 2010, I now work as an analyst in the city, £32kpa + bonus, 24 years old.

Like others have said, it really isn't the end of the world - granted, I've had to work a lot harder than if I'd got a 1st/2:1 and it's taken a considerable amount of networking (as many traditional grad schemes are closed off without a 2:1). However, once you become an "experienced hire" (i.e. 2 years+) most employers really don't seem to care what your degree classification was, only that you have a degree. It's your experience that starts to count - I guess in a similar way that A-levels are vital when you're 18 but become almost irrelevant at 21.

Of course, if you're looking to pursue a career in academia things might be a lot more challenging - but, personally speaking, whilst I regret not working harder at uni, I don't think things have turned out too badly

It's not the end of the world. The current Lord Chief Justice only got a 2:2.

I graduated with a 2:2 in law from a redbrick uni in 2010, I now work as an analyst in the city, £32kpa + bonus, 24 years old.

Like others have said, it really isn't the end of the world - granted, I've had to work a lot harder than if I'd got a 1st/2:1 and it's taken a considerable amount of networking (as many traditional grad schemes are closed off without a 2:1). However, once you become an "experienced hire" (i.e. 2 years+) most employers really don't seem to care what your degree classification was, only that you have a degree. It's your experience that starts to count - I guess in a similar way that A-levels are vital when you're 18 but become almost irrelevant at 21.

Of course, if you're looking to pursue a career in academia things might be a lot more challenging - but, personally speaking, whilst I regret not working harder at uni, I don't think things have turned out too badly

It's not the end of the world. The current Lord Chief Justice only got a 2:2.

Really? Have you got a source for that anywhere?

I graduated with a 2:2 in law from a redbrick uni in 2010, I now work as an analyst in the city, £32kpa + bonus, 24 years old.

Like others have said, it really isn't the end of the world - granted, I've had to work a lot harder than if I'd got a 1st/2:1 and it's taken a considerable amount of networking (as many traditional grad schemes are closed off without a 2:1). However, once you become an "experienced hire" (i.e. 2 years+) most employers really don't seem to care what your degree classification was, only that you have a degree. It's your experience that starts to count - I guess in a similar way that A-levels are vital when you're 18 but become almost irrelevant at 21.

Of course, if you're looking to pursue a career in academia things might be a lot more challenging - but, personally speaking, whilst I regret not working harder at uni, I don't think things have turned out too badly

Personally I'm shocked at how this was never mentioned at my sixth form college (nor at any of my peers that I've spoken to on the subject), because you would think it would be worth mentioning to students!

Sorry, can't find a link but I had it from someone who was up at Cambridge at the same time. However, whilst I am sure it is true, the proportion of people getting different classes of degree has altered massively over the past 30 years and a 2:2 then would be a 2:1 today.

It only applies to a small amount of the available jobs out there in only a few different industries so it's understandable if already overstretched schools careers departments forget about it.

I'm not sure it's as simple as that. A lot more people go to university today. More people do get higher grades than 30 years ago. But decades ago, with so few people going to uni, 1sts really did represent an elite few. And if a company was too picky, they'd have trouble recruiting. Now big companies can be picky and still rake in the applications. Especially now that there are way more grauduates than jobs.

I agree it's not clear cut but if anything your argument suggests that a 2:2 then might be a First now. (Very roughly) about 4 times as people go to university now as did 30 years ago, and about 5 times as many people who do go get a First, meaning that about 20x more people get Firsts than did 30 years ago. A similar argument exists for 2:1s. A First or 2:1 today is not worth nearly as much as they were and grade inflation has meant that the 2:2, which was a perfectly respectable class or degree, is now regarded as sub-standard.

It's a bit unfair because I don't buy into the 'grade inflation' argument too heavily. I don't think 2:2 graduates 30 years ago were the standard of modern 1st graduates, things were just much easier for them in the jobs market.

So you you think that 20 times as many people deserve Firsts now as did 30 years ago?

Well yes, but if you're sending students to university than they should in many cases be aiming for graduate schemes, so the fact that they are the minority in comparison to all jobs isn't really that relevant. It's amazing how many graduate jobs do require a UCAS tariff these days!

What's so special about graduate "schemes" compared to graduate programmes or graduate jobs that they should be aimed at? I'm quite sure that most graduates are happy to gain a graduate/entry-level position in the industry they want, regardless of whether it's called a graduate scheme, programme, job or whatever.

And there are also a lot of graduate schemes/programmes/jobs that aren't in the slightest bit interested in the applicant's UCAS tariff. I never came across any that did, to be honest. They're hardly as ubiquitous as you're making out.

All is going well so far, actually! My grades have only been the sole barrier to a job interview in one case. Things are going slower than I'd like, but I'd put that down to my disabilities and what I am currently able to do, rather than my 2.2.

It has been a problem for securing funding for a PhD but I'll keep trying as long as it's vaguely viable

I'm pretty sure we've had this same discussion before!

Scheme generally just implies structured training and quick progression, but that will vary of course and isn't exclusive to schemes by any means. 'Graduate job' etc are just different names for the same thing really, most of the larger employers just call them schemes as they take a bunch of grads on at the same time. UCAS tariffs are widely used across graduate schemes / jobs/ programmes or whatever else you want to call it when it comes to the larger employers, as they're so massively oversubscribed they use the UCAS tariff as an added auto-filter to cut down applicants. If you were to go down the times top 100 indiscriminately for example, you may see it from my point of view. For what it's worth every single job I applied for at graduation had a UCAS tariff requirement, hence why I brought up my surprise that at no point in all the careers presentations over the years were these UCAS requirements mentioned.

To counter the argument you'll probably put forward in advance; yes the largest employers don't constitute the majority in comparison to total jobs, but that's not to say they aren't some of the most popular, over-subscribed roles around. The Times list is just an example, it's far from an exhaustive list of the large number of companies that require a UCAS tariff. For example, if a grad wanted to become an accountant, they could go right down the top 20 list of accountancy firms (only 5 of which are included on the Times list) and would still find they need to meet a UCAS tariff requirement.

I graduated with a 2:2 in law from a redbrick uni in 2010, I now work as an analyst in the city, £32kpa + bonus, 24 years old.

Like others have said, it really isn't the end of the world - granted, I've had to work a lot harder than if I'd got a 1st/2:1 and it's taken a considerable amount of networking (as many traditional grad schemes are closed off without a 2:1). However, once you become an "experienced hire" (i.e. 2 years+) most employers really don't seem to care what your degree classification was, only that you have a degree. It's your experience that starts to count - I guess in a similar way that A-levels are vital when you're 18 but become almost irrelevant at 21.

Of course, if you're looking to pursue a career in academia things might be a lot more challenging - but, personally speaking, whilst I regret not working harder at uni, I don't think things have turned out too badly