The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

1st class degree stereotypes

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Duncan2012
About 17 years older than what I thought.

I bet you didnt get a 1st, did you?

You did the right thing, son

:u:
In fact, I have read plenty of news from the Guardian and Daily Mail about employer's view on preferring a 2.1 instead of 1st class, they do prefer someone who can provide evidence of participating social activities/volunteer works with a 2.1 instead of someone with a pure first class. Meaning, first class is not useless, but you need to combine with other social experience to outrun a 2.1 with social experience.

Another factor is that every uni is using different grading system, some uni is willing to give out a first with counting only the five courses with the highest grade or only grading the final year modules.

And of course, first class is very useful of getting back to Oxbridge UCL LSE for postgraduate degree and phd funding.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by UWS
They think they're guaranteed to get a job.

Imagine a STEM student with a 1st. :rofl:
They went to a shite uni and did a shite subject. And it doesn't count.
Original post by The journey home
Perhaps

But mind you, some employers deliberately stay away from those with 1sts, cos the employers think they’re social dweebs, cannot communicate and are useless in reality

Also, majority of top grad schemes simply want a 2:1. After that box is ticked, it doesnt matter. A 1st wont make up for a bad interview, bad assessment centre or failing psychometric tests

No employer would "stay away from those with 1sts, cos the employers think they’re social dweebs, cannot communicate and are useless in reality" unless the only thing on the application form was their grade, and even then to be punished for doing well is illogical. The reality is, especially now, people with high grades on applications will also have tons of extra-curricilar experience, so the old "I'm not good academically but I have practical/social skills" will not hold up well against a candidate who is good at both. Given the pressure on students more people are getting a 2.1+ than ever before (although with Firsts its generally the same as these were typically the students who were trying to get them anyway)

Also to quote an article you posted

"Instead, she immediately discards anyone who has a top degree and no extra-curricular activities on their CV. She only interviews those with the highest classification if their additional work is outstanding"

Note only those who did nothing other than get a First were discarded because of course they won't be well rounded, just like someone who only managed to get a 2.2 and had nothing else to show for it (though at least the former has something to show they excelled at). Those with Firsts AND extra-curricular work will still generally be the top candidates
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by KeirCKF
In fact, I have read plenty of news from the Guardian and Daily Mail about employer's view on preferring a 2.1 instead of 1st class, they do prefer someone who can provide evidence of participating social activities/volunteer works with a 2.1 instead of someone with a pure first class. Meaning, first class is not useless, but you need to combine with other social experience to outrun a 2.1 with social experience.

Another factor is that every uni is using different grading system, some uni is willing to give out a first with counting only the five courses with the highest grade or only grading the final year modules.

And of course, first class is very useful of getting back to Oxbridge UCL LSE for postgraduate degree and phd funding.

Then that's exactly the point, a First on it's own won't do much compared to a 2.1 + experience but a First + experience, whether you see it as just a technicality, is a better candidate on paper. I always disagreed that someone (though this is outdated) who was just invited because of their grades was a better candidate

Regarding the grading system, I believe you are referring to a 'technical' first where a candidate is just off the mark for a First but is still awarded one overall because they hit the criteria to demonstrate they are capable of getting a First (normally they require a very high 2.1 and for the majority of your final year modules to be First's). It makes sense as it would seem unfair, given you are assessed over a variety of different modules, to put someone who got a 2.1 by only barely getting a 2.1 across the board and someone with a high 2.1 who has proven in their 3rd year they can get a First in their modules, in the same category.

That said generally a high grade is a 2.1 anyway, I've seen application forms award 1 more point for a first compared to a 2.1 out of 15. Though depending on how fierce the competition is, that 1 point could be the difference between an interview and rejection
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by Notoriety
They went to a shite uni and did a shite subject. And it doesn't count.

Wouldn't that only affect the field of the 'shite' subject that person is entering anyway?
Original post by TempestLaw
Wouldn't that only affect the field of the 'shite' subject that person is entering anyway?

You and a few other people are talking about careers. I ain't interested in that. I am talking p2p.
Let me tell you guys something though

People who simply put a 1st and dont put any other soft skill evidence are only failing themselves

Tonnes of people lie on their cv

Extracurricular garb is easy to work around. It is not difficult to put on your cv that blah blah i was part of a football team at university and part of the debate society, taking part in debates blah blah

All you have to do is prepare some nonsense and made up answers for the interview and there is no way to verify that information. This way, at least they’ll have a more attractive cv and be invited for interview
Original post by TempestLaw
Then that's exactly the point, a First on it's own won't do much compared to a 2.1 + experience but a First + experience, whether you see it as just a technicality, is a better candidate on paper. I always disagreed that someone (though this is outdated) who was just invited because of their grades was a better candidate

Regarding the grading system, I believe you are referring to a 'technical' first where a candidate is just off the mark for a First but is still awarded one overall because they hit the criteria to demonstrate they are capable of getting a First (normally they require a very high 2.1 and for the majority of your final year modules to be First's). It makes sense as it would seem unfair, given you are assessed over a variety of different modules, to put someone who got a 2.1 by only barely getting a 2.1 across the board and someone with a high 2.1 who has proven in their 3rd year they can get a First in their modules, in the same category.

That said generally a high grade is a 2.1 anyway, I've seen application forms award 1 more point for a first compared to a 2.1 out of 15. Though depending on how fierce the competition is, that 1 point could be the difference between an interview and rejection

A 2:1 is no longer a high grade

It is the definition of mediocrity

Anyways you guys are ruining my thread
Original post by Pseudo Intellect
Imagine a STEM student with a 1st. :rofl:

They think they are god’s gift

Facepalm
Reply 31
Avatar for NHSFan
NHSFan
11
They went to Surrey university?
Well i created this thread in the chat section

It is supposed to be a bit on the light-hearted side

And light-heartedness comes from negative stereotypes rather than positive ones
Original post by NHSFan
They went to Surrey university?

That is quite a good one

I read somewhere something like ~40% of students over there get firsts lol
They don't do medicine.
Reply 35
Avatar for NHSFan
NHSFan
11
Original post by The journey home
That is quite a good one

I read somewhere something like ~40% of students over there get firsts lol

I believe it is a ridiculous 50%!
Reply 36
Avatar for Doones
Doones
21
Original post by The journey home
Sure, there is some evidence

Here:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/20/having-a-first-class-degree-makes-you-arrogant-attorney-says-as/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2321056/Lord-Winston-Why-I-dont-employ-students-class-degrees.html

Some employers dont even bother considering those with firsts, cos their experience of these students has always been negative


And yet there is a salary premium for grads with First over those with a 2:1. It's not as large as the premium for 2:1 over lower grades but it's there.
Reply 37
Avatar for NHSFan
NHSFan
11
Original post by Science99999
They don't do medicine.

They could have intercalated and got a 1st!
Original post by NHSFan
They could have intercalated and got a 1st!


Ah you got me there.
Well It is really easier to get a first from some uni...
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/universities-biggest-shares-21s-and-firsts-revealed
^Here's a full list of data, it twas published this year, very up to date.
(edited 5 years ago)

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you