University grade inflation - is our degree classification system just a joke now?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-48951653
So in the last 10 years, the number of 1sts has shot up 80%
The University of Surrey now gives out 1sts to 47% of its students.
Other massive increases were seen. To name and shame:
Universities have every incentive to inflate their grades as it can lead to a better reputation and more applicants. This is further emphasised by the new government initiatives to get unis to compete for applicants - the same incentives underlying the explosion in unconditional offers. They want unis to compete, and unis are competing.
My question for you is: How can we trust any of these grades any more? There are still vast numbers of employers out there who just ask for a 2.1 no conditions. If unis are just handing out grades to improve their image... is our job industry in trouble? Will employers have to start resorting to other means of selection?
Are our degrees worth the paper they are written on?
So in the last 10 years, the number of 1sts has shot up 80%
The University of Surrey now gives out 1sts to 47% of its students.
Other massive increases were seen. To name and shame:
•
Imperial College London from 31% to 46%
•
University of Huddersfield: 15% to 40%
•
University College London: 24% to 40%
•
Durham University: 18% to 38%
•
University of East Anglia: 14% to 39%
•
University of Northumbria: 16% to 35%
•
University of West London: 13% to 34%
•
Staffordshire University: 14% to 34%
Universities have every incentive to inflate their grades as it can lead to a better reputation and more applicants. This is further emphasised by the new government initiatives to get unis to compete for applicants - the same incentives underlying the explosion in unconditional offers. They want unis to compete, and unis are competing.
My question for you is: How can we trust any of these grades any more? There are still vast numbers of employers out there who just ask for a 2.1 no conditions. If unis are just handing out grades to improve their image... is our job industry in trouble? Will employers have to start resorting to other means of selection?
Are our degrees worth the paper they are written on?
Scroll to see replies
The whole university system is just a mess tbh.
I knew there was no way someone like me should of got a 1st!
Original post by 999tigger
Everyone should get a first or two 2:1s.
You want to give some people 2.1s?!
Discrimination. Elitist.
(edited 4 years ago)
Original post by MinaBee
The whole university system is just a mess tbh.
Just... no one seems to care though? Education is... was... one of our biggest exports and growth areas. Some kind of sensical regulation might make a bit of sense...
Original post by nexttime
You want to give some people 2.1a?!
Discrimination. Elitist.
Discrimination. Elitist.
Nope im saying they should be awarded 2x2:1, so two degrees so no hurty feelings. I know its out of control at A level, but this is ridiculous.
Surprised UCL and Durham are named, should of stayed, lol.
What would the threshold be?
Seems fair, to be honest I always thought why we need 1, 2:1 and what not.
Original post by nexttime
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-48951653
So in the last 10 years, the number of 1sts has shot up 80%
The University of Surrey now gives out 1sts to 47% of its students.
Other massive increases were seen. To name and shame:
Universities have every incentive to inflate their grades as it can lead to a better reputation and more applicants. This is further emphasised by the new government initiatives to get unis to compete for applicants - the same incentives underlying the explosion in unconditional offers. They want unis to compete, and unis are competing.
My question for you is: How can we trust any of these grades any more? There are still vast numbers of employers out there who just ask for a 2.1 no conditions. If unis are just handing out grades to improve their image... is our job industry in trouble? Will employers have to start resorting to other means of selection?
Are our degrees worth the paper they are written on?
So in the last 10 years, the number of 1sts has shot up 80%
The University of Surrey now gives out 1sts to 47% of its students.
Other massive increases were seen. To name and shame:
•
Imperial College London from 31% to 46%
•
University of Huddersfield: 15% to 40%
•
University College London: 24% to 40%
•
Durham University: 18% to 38%
•
University of East Anglia: 14% to 39%
•
University of Northumbria: 16% to 35%
•
University of West London: 13% to 34%
•
Staffordshire University: 14% to 34%
Universities have every incentive to inflate their grades as it can lead to a better reputation and more applicants. This is further emphasised by the new government initiatives to get unis to compete for applicants - the same incentives underlying the explosion in unconditional offers. They want unis to compete, and unis are competing.
My question for you is: How can we trust any of these grades any more? There are still vast numbers of employers out there who just ask for a 2.1 no conditions. If unis are just handing out grades to improve their image... is our job industry in trouble? Will employers have to start resorting to other means of selection?
Are our degrees worth the paper they are written on?
I strongly agree with what you're saying. Came from an awful home so university applications were messed up due to failing gcses the year before, got A*A*A*A* and went to a university where average grades are probably AAA, tried to keep a positive outlook cause I was a bit peed off I could have been somewhere better. I can average about 90 here and it's downright depressing knowing the only thing I'll graduate with is a "first" along with half the class (not exaggerating in my subject), to be brutally honest this isn't something I'd be proud of. My friend got an offer from oxford and turned it down, he has averaged 85ish here and has a similar complaint. Basically, if you go to a worse uni than you would normally have gone to there is literally no way to distinguish yourself or make up for it.
What really needs to be done is introduce standardised exams at the end and everyone gets a number grade. "1" means you scored in the top 1 percent, "2" means top 2 percent etc. Completely stops grade inflation and gives people a second chance if they under performed at A level to distinguish themselves. Now I know someone will say about option modules, and that isn't a problem. Make the standardised exam count for 50% and then weight scores on the option modules by how well everyone at the university performed on the standardised exam, completely gets rid of this stupid argument.
Rant over.
EDIT: If it was unclear I mean standardised exams across all universities nationwide
(edited 4 years ago)
You don't think its useful to have some kind of discrimination? I know pass/fail is kind of what its become, but doesn't mean it has to be that way. I mean, the US actually releases the full GPA right!
One possibility is to use grade quotas e.g. 25% get a 1st, 25% get a 2.1 etc, no matter the uni you're at. The traditional argument against this is the best unis would be disadvantaged and degrees would become incomparable... but that's the case anyway isn't it?
One possibility is to use grade quotas e.g. 25% get a 1st, 25% get a 2.1 etc, no matter the uni you're at. The traditional argument against this is the best unis would be disadvantaged and degrees would become incomparable... but that's the case anyway isn't it?
It really is ridiculous
Thanks to all of this, my classification gives me no confidence in my abilities nor satisfaction or sense of achievement
Thanks to all of this, my classification gives me no confidence in my abilities nor satisfaction or sense of achievement
I quite appreciate the whole 1st, 2.1, 2.2, etc. system. But it’s so obvious that nearly everyone gets at least a 2.1, and that quite a few universities ‘round’ up percentages. My best friend’s cousin was I believe 3% off a 2.1, and somehow talked her way to it. Perhaps a quota would be good, but that still has cons.
Original post by kjnkjnlknjlmklnm
I strongly agree with what you're saying. Came from an awful home so university applications were messed up due to failing gcses the year before, got A*A*A*A* and went to a university where average grades are probably AAA, tried to keep a positive outlook cause I was a bit peed off I could have been somewhere better. I can average about 90 here and it's downright depressing knowing the only thing I'll graduate with is a "first" along with half the class (not exaggerating in my subject), to be brutally honest this isn't something I'd be proud of. My friend got an offer from oxford and turned it down, he has averaged 85ish here and has a similar complaint. Basically, if you go to a worse uni than you would normally have gone to there is literally no way to distinguish yourself or make up for it.
What really needs to be done is introduce standardised exams at the end and everyone gets a number grade. "1" means you scored in the top 1 percent, "2" means top 2 percent etc. Completely stops grade inflation and gives people a second chance if they under performed at A level to distinguish themselves. Now I know someone will say about option modules, and that isn't a problem. Make the standardised exam count for 50% and then weight scores on the option modules by how well everyone at the university performed on the standardised exam, completely gets rid of this stupid argument.
Rant over.
What really needs to be done is introduce standardised exams at the end and everyone gets a number grade. "1" means you scored in the top 1 percent, "2" means top 2 percent etc. Completely stops grade inflation and gives people a second chance if they under performed at A level to distinguish themselves. Now I know someone will say about option modules, and that isn't a problem. Make the standardised exam count for 50% and then weight scores on the option modules by how well everyone at the university performed on the standardised exam, completely gets rid of this stupid argument.
Rant over.
The national exam idea. Its a good one with lots of advantages - medicine is actually implementing this right now, to start in 2022.
Problem is, it is quite against the current educational culture, and would be seen as quite 'draconian' i think. The current thought is that if one uni has some experts in one special area that area should be able to be represented in exams. To enable that on a national level you'd be looking at unis having to offer hundreds, potentially thousands of options within each course, it could be insane, with quality control being no better. So you'd inevitably have to limit options.
I think maybe there is a compromise here though: First year, and maybe even second year, is standardised across the country (with a few options of course), then second/third year is back down to individual unis? The final grade is awarded by the university. However, the distribution of final grades awarded must be proportional to how the uni as a whole did in the first part? So a uni whose students do very badly in part 1 can only award say 10% firsts, whereas a uni that does outstandingly well can award up to say 50%? What do you think?
True
Universities have their own methods of grading but it is a shame
At my university, you had to hit the minimum mark to get the classification. No nonsense rounding up or excluding your worst module results and other sorts of madnesses
Universities have their own methods of grading but it is a shame
At my university, you had to hit the minimum mark to get the classification. No nonsense rounding up or excluding your worst module results and other sorts of madnesses
Original post by Sinnoh
I remember seeing a post on here about dodgy rounding practices that allowed people who had very obviously missed the boundary for a first get a first.
Ridiculous. That person got a 2:1, so should be awarded a 2:1
Actually, we do not know how much this person has been negotiating their marks throughout their degree - perhaps they did some more of this percentage grabbing in 1st and 2nd year. Perhaps they actually got a 2:2 or worse
Actually, we do not know how much this person has been negotiating their marks throughout their degree - perhaps they did some more of this percentage grabbing in 1st and 2nd year. Perhaps they actually got a 2:2 or worse
Original post by anonymous1231231
I quite appreciate the whole 1st, 2.1, 2.2, etc. system. But it’s so obvious that nearly everyone gets at least a 2.1, and that quite a few universities ‘round’ up percentages. My best friend’s cousin was I believe 3% off a 2.1, and somehow talked her way to it. Perhaps a quota would be good, but that still has cons.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Should university grades be switched to a pass/fail system for all degrees?
- Why is a 2:1 'good' when it's technically average?
- QMUL Chances?
- University Classification
- what can you do with a 3rd class degree?
- Failed assignments
- Importance of degree classification in pharmacy
- Calculation of final grade
- University Final Grade
- Does each year at uni count
- Graduate Entry Medicine with a 2:2
- Foundation degree results
- Appealing degree classification
- The Education system more like the biggest scam
- how does compensation work at uni?
- Medicine entry
- grading system for a medical degree!
- Does first year of university grades matter at Cardiff University?
- Support for those with pending results
- Low grades in second year
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
