My university has massively rounded up people's final grades...
Scroll to see replies
Original post by lucabrasi98
Ok OP is a bit weird counting up soneones marks. But idk why people can't see where they're coming from
By inflating the amount of people on 1sts, you're lowering the value of them. So suddenly working hard means less and less.
Why stop there with that logic. Lets make 66% a first. Its just 2% less, no big deal
By inflating the amount of people on 1sts, you're lowering the value of them. So suddenly working hard means less and less.
Why stop there with that logic. Lets make 66% a first. Its just 2% less, no big deal
I personally think anything above 60% is meaningless but w/e
Original post by whydoidothis?
I personally think anything above 60% is meaningless but w/e
What does that even mean.
Original post by Notoriety
Or the committee that awards the degrees might have used their discretion -- which is pretty much absolute in a lot of cases -- to give the classification they thought the candidate "deserved".
Wow. Does this really happen? It would not be allowed in my university at all.
Original post by chazwomaq
Wow. Does this really happen? It would not be allowed in my university at all.
Yes, this has basically become standard across all UK unis unfortunately...
Obviously different Unis use their discretion to different standards, but this policy is everywhere.
Original post by mnot
Yes, this has basically become standard across all UK unis unfortunately...
Obviously different Unis use their discretion to different standards, but this policy is everywhere.
Obviously different Unis use their discretion to different standards, but this policy is everywhere.
Do you have links to example policies on this? My university has very clear guidelines on calculating degree classification: it's just a mathematical exercise. I assumed it was the same across the sector.
Original post by chazwomaq
Do you have links to example policies on this? My university has very clear guidelines on calculating degree classification: it's just a mathematical exercise. I assumed it was the same across the sector.
Its not normally outlined in the mathematical grade calculation as this normally states 70+ is 1st 60-69 is 2.1...
but it will either have a policy as marginal cases, borderline, or apply a weighting variant or something similar where the academic panels can have a fiddle with the final grade.
https://www.ed.ac.uk/ppls/linguistics-and-english-language/current/undergraduate/handbooks/honours/degree-classification
https://www.york.ac.uk/media/studenthome/studying/examsandassessments/UG-Student-guide-to-progression-and-award.pdf
https://ucasu.com/2016/03/ccf_changes/
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/academicservices/qualitymanual/assessmentandawards/degree-classificationwef201516-sep2015ug-2016pgt.aspx
I also know of Students at Coventry, Southampton & Birmingham who had have all had marks rounded up... but there is a few examples above as well (might have to dig through the pages a bit, although it is clear as day on Notts website)
Its something all Unis do nowadays they just don't want to advertise. I think the telegraph did an article about it a couple years ago.
Couldn't agree with this more, it really takes away from those that worked really hard for their 1:1/2:1.
1 If someone is on a borderline first they are not exactly a mediocre student are they ? If they are on the border of a 2:2 and are rounded up to a 2:1 they are not being bracketed with exceptional ones . You are talking about a couple of percentage point between them. Even with no rounding up, people with 70% are given a 1st as are people who get 80%+ which is a much larger margin- are you complaining about that as well?
2. You will have a transcript for your degree which can be shown to future employers/universities so if you did well getting a good 1st people will be able to se that ?
3. You have no idea how hard other people worked- just because you see that they have been out socialising doesn't mean they didn't work hard. Maybe they organised their time better, or maybe they just needed less time to do the work. Life doesn't work like that. Some people have natural ability some people have to work very hard to excel (Although I expect the vast majority of people who got 1st, rounded up or not, worked pretty hard to get them)
4.Some people can get good grades doing less work than others because they have particular skills/understanding/ways of revising- that is just how it is
5. Surely it is better to do well on your own merits than worry about what other people got. No one will know how hard you worked to get your first and probably no-one will care. How is someone else getting a first detracting from the prestige. When you leave university and apply for a job/other course the person looking at your application will not be looking at your fellow student just you
2. You will have a transcript for your degree which can be shown to future employers/universities so if you did well getting a good 1st people will be able to se that ?
3. You have no idea how hard other people worked- just because you see that they have been out socialising doesn't mean they didn't work hard. Maybe they organised their time better, or maybe they just needed less time to do the work. Life doesn't work like that. Some people have natural ability some people have to work very hard to excel (Although I expect the vast majority of people who got 1st, rounded up or not, worked pretty hard to get them)
4.Some people can get good grades doing less work than others because they have particular skills/understanding/ways of revising- that is just how it is
5. Surely it is better to do well on your own merits than worry about what other people got. No one will know how hard you worked to get your first and probably no-one will care. How is someone else getting a first detracting from the prestige. When you leave university and apply for a job/other course the person looking at your application will not be looking at your fellow student just you
Original post by MidgetFever
Couldn't agree with this more, it really takes away from those that worked really hard for their 1:1/2:1.
This is nothing to do with this generation wanting everyone wanting to be a winner. This is in fact not about winners and losers. When you take you take your degree you are not competing with everyone else on the course, so comparing it to a 100m race is not relevant.
The border for a first is in the end where the university says it is. The rules and regulations about how each university decides on classification are clearly set out so if the university awards a first that is because they feel that is what the student deserves. If you really don't like it make sure you go to a university where the don't do this .
In the past some universities , use to do vivas for people on the border- my mum had to do one for her undergraduate degree back in the 1980s- Looking at a students overall academic record rather than just looking at numbers can be a good one to determine if someone is worth the next grade up.
The border for a first is in the end where the university says it is. The rules and regulations about how each university decides on classification are clearly set out so if the university awards a first that is because they feel that is what the student deserves. If you really don't like it make sure you go to a university where the don't do this .
In the past some universities , use to do vivas for people on the border- my mum had to do one for her undergraduate degree back in the 1980s- Looking at a students overall academic record rather than just looking at numbers can be a good one to determine if someone is worth the next grade up.
Maybe you calculated it wrong?
Overall percentage isn't the only thing that determines the grade, there may be policies such as the number of modules in the higher grade bracket that influences overall grade.
Overall percentage isn't the only thing that determines the grade, there may be policies such as the number of modules in the higher grade bracket that influences overall grade.
Original post by Anonymous
This is nothing to do with this generation wanting everyone wanting to be a winner. This is in fact not about winners and losers. When you take you take your degree you are not competing with everyone else on the course, so comparing it to a 100m race is not relevant.
The border for a first is in the end where the university says it is. The rules and regulations about how each university decides on classification are clearly set out so if the university awards a first that is because they feel that is what the student deserves. If you really don't like it make sure you go to a university where the don't do this .
In the past some universities , use to do vivas for people on the border- my mum had to do one for her undergraduate degree back in the 1980s- Looking at a students overall academic record rather than just looking at numbers can be a good one to determine if someone is worth the next grade up.
The border for a first is in the end where the university says it is. The rules and regulations about how each university decides on classification are clearly set out so if the university awards a first that is because they feel that is what the student deserves. If you really don't like it make sure you go to a university where the don't do this .
In the past some universities , use to do vivas for people on the border- my mum had to do one for her undergraduate degree back in the 1980s- Looking at a students overall academic record rather than just looking at numbers can be a good one to determine if someone is worth the next grade up.
The problem is almost all UK unis do this so you don't have a choice (and 'this issue' is not normally mentioned in the normal grade classification description, but tucked away in a long list of policies no one ever reads).
Universities are not doing it because student deserve it. It's often because the data used on CUG, Guardian, Which Uni promotes % of students achieving higher grades, and many employers ask for grades as a check box exercise rather than looking at transcripts or the students record of academic quality, hence they want the stats boost.
Vivas for undergrad degrees aren't a thing of any importance any more, some might have to do one for their dissertation project but its overall influence is minimal.
I think its either QAA or Dept for Education who need to do something about University marking standards.
How has this got anything to do with my emotions ? what bias ? You are not speaking a truth you are stating an opinion. You are of course entitled to that opinion and I am sure there are others who agree with you but that doesn't me it an "objective truth "
How do you know why universities are doing it ? Were you in all the meetings of all the universities when they set out their regulations ? I am sure there are some universities who may be influences by things like league tables but there may also be some who want to make sure that they look at the whole picture rather than reduce student to a series of figures.
I know viva are not really a ting any more- that is my point. When people were on a border then they gave them a viva now they do it a different way. The result is however the same people on the border are looked at and some are given the higher grade.
I know viva are not really a ting any more- that is my point. When people were on a border then they gave them a viva now they do it a different way. The result is however the same people on the border are looked at and some are given the higher grade.
Original post by mnot
The problem is almost all UK unis do this so you don't have a choice (and 'this issue' is not normally mentioned in the normal grade classification description, but tucked away in a long list of policies no one ever reads).
Universities are not doing it because student deserve it. It's often because the data used on CUG, Guardian, Which Uni promotes % of students achieving higher grades, and many employers ask for grades as a check box exercise rather than looking at transcripts or the students record of academic quality, hence they want the stats boost.
Vivas for undergrad degrees aren't a thing of any importance any more, some might have to do one for their dissertation project but its overall influence is minimal.
I think its either QAA or Dept for Education who need to do something about University marking standards.
Universities are not doing it because student deserve it. It's often because the data used on CUG, Guardian, Which Uni promotes % of students achieving higher grades, and many employers ask for grades as a check box exercise rather than looking at transcripts or the students record of academic quality, hence they want the stats boost.
Vivas for undergrad degrees aren't a thing of any importance any more, some might have to do one for their dissertation project but its overall influence is minimal.
I think its either QAA or Dept for Education who need to do something about University marking standards.
Perfectly normal
At Cambridge you can even get 56%/66% and still get rounded up to the next classification
At Cambridge you can even get 56%/66% and still get rounded up to the next classification
(edited 4 years ago)
Original post by lucabrasi98
What does that even mean.
In the real world no one cares if you got anything more than a 2:1.
Sure some people care about getting a first, but personally academics is just a means to an end to me, a small part of my life.
Oxford rounds up students' grades too if there are 'exceptional' or 'mitigating' circumstances. I know people who got their grades rounded up by 1.5%.
Original post by Nichrome
What is most concerning is rampant grade inflation across all universities except Oxbridge. The fact that so many firsts and 2.1s are awarded now really devalues Oxford and Cambridge degrees, as it is now far, far harder to get a first at Oxbridge than at other universities for an equivalent course. This fact is still unfortunately not widely known or acknowledged. I now advise Oxbridge offer holders that they should very seriously consider rejecting their Oxbridge places and taking up a place at a RG uni where a 2.1/first will be far easier to come by. This is especially so for Cambridge scientists which have a worryingly high rate of people obtaining a 2.2 or a third.
I always feel the same way when stuff like that happens. Unfortunately devaluing attainment by inflating that of other is a trend much bigger than any single institution, although it happens in different ways. There are many reasons for this, mainly this trend of equating students to consumers, and the obsession with rankings
Original post by Maid Marian
Just a little rant...
I've worked hard throughout uni and have come out with a strong low First, as I knew I would from receiving consistently high 60s and mid/low 70s and working out my scores.
However, many many many of my course friends were lazy with working and would get a mix of scores from 50s to 60s to 70s (when they actually tried). They have almost all come out with Firsts now, which I found very strange as my very rough estimates of their grades (what they had reported getting, anyway) gave them mid 60s.
So my housemate printed off her scores and left them on the table so I worked out what her grades equalled to and she should have got 67.9. So our University rounded her up by 2.1 marks.
Is that normal? It seems a bit much to me and doesn't feel fair.
INB4 you're a terrible friend and should be happy for her. I am, but I am also competitive and I like people to get the marks they 'deserve'
TLDR: Is it normal for Universities to round up by over 2 marks?
I've worked hard throughout uni and have come out with a strong low First, as I knew I would from receiving consistently high 60s and mid/low 70s and working out my scores.
However, many many many of my course friends were lazy with working and would get a mix of scores from 50s to 60s to 70s (when they actually tried). They have almost all come out with Firsts now, which I found very strange as my very rough estimates of their grades (what they had reported getting, anyway) gave them mid 60s.
So my housemate printed off her scores and left them on the table so I worked out what her grades equalled to and she should have got 67.9. So our University rounded her up by 2.1 marks.
Is that normal? It seems a bit much to me and doesn't feel fair.
INB4 you're a terrible friend and should be happy for her. I am, but I am also competitive and I like people to get the marks they 'deserve'
TLDR: Is it normal for Universities to round up by over 2 marks?
Original post by Maid Marian
Just a little rant...
I've worked hard throughout uni and have come out with a strong low First, as I knew I would from receiving consistently high 60s and mid/low 70s and working out my scores.
However, many many many of my course friends were lazy with working and would get a mix of scores from 50s to 60s to 70s (when they actually tried). They have almost all come out with Firsts now, which I found very strange as my very rough estimates of their grades (what they had reported getting, anyway) gave them mid 60s.
So my housemate printed off her scores and left them on the table so I worked out what her grades equalled to and she should have got 67.9. So our University rounded her up by 2.1 marks.
Is that normal? It seems a bit much to me and doesn't feel fair.
INB4 you're a terrible friend and should be happy for her. I am, but I am also competitive and I like people to get the marks they 'deserve'
TLDR: Is it normal for Universities to round up by over 2 marks?
I've worked hard throughout uni and have come out with a strong low First, as I knew I would from receiving consistently high 60s and mid/low 70s and working out my scores.
However, many many many of my course friends were lazy with working and would get a mix of scores from 50s to 60s to 70s (when they actually tried). They have almost all come out with Firsts now, which I found very strange as my very rough estimates of their grades (what they had reported getting, anyway) gave them mid 60s.
So my housemate printed off her scores and left them on the table so I worked out what her grades equalled to and she should have got 67.9. So our University rounded her up by 2.1 marks.
Is that normal? It seems a bit much to me and doesn't feel fair.
INB4 you're a terrible friend and should be happy for her. I am, but I am also competitive and I like people to get the marks they 'deserve'
TLDR: Is it normal for Universities to round up by over 2 marks?
I mean you are being a terrible friend. You don’t read someone else’s grades without their permission ever - forget even ‘calculating’ her overall mark. You’ve guessed what people will get by what they’ve told you occasionally. Did you take into account if a module gets dropped in the final result, the weighting etc.? Honestly just have a good hard look at yourself.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Do uni's round up degree class percentages?
- University Final Grade
- Rounding up final degree grades
- I got a 68.5% in my second year of University, will it get rounded up?
- Calculation of final grade
- How bad is it to get 65?
- Medicine course advice urgent !!!!
- Parents making us go up by train when I move to uni
- Failed a unit with 39.90% out of 40%
- Do I resit my final A Level history exam before reapplying to uni?
- Grades
- sticky situation of my predicted grades and aspiration
- Journey to being a barrister
- Uni grade 69.67
- cambridge after a gap year! how does it look to admissions staff?
- Avoid Universities of Applied Sciences
- Please help - Politics/Economics/International Relations
- LLB first year tips
- How to choose unis in UCAS application for CS undergraduate course?
- english literature coursework
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 weeks ago
Got a third in my second year and the highest I’ve achieved in third year was 55%Trending
Last reply 3 weeks ago
Got a third in my second year and the highest I’ve achieved in third year was 55%
