Why is 3rd class a thing?

You really are demonstrating your ignorance here

marking in HE, as it is as GCSE , A level and FE qualifications is criteria based , with an element of norm referenced minor modification to ensure consistency year to year

The score isn't a true percentage, so try not to think of it as ''getting more than half wrong''. In many subjects/tasks/assignments, getting above 85% isn't a thing, and neither is getting 15% so it is misleading in that sense.

The classification system is not fit for purpose on it's own any longer, in my opinion.

It depends on the masters itself in terms of worth

At my uni, a distinction is 70%, merit is 60-69%, an accredited pass is 50-59% and a regular, University pass is 40-49%. So whilst you only need 40% to pass the degree, you need at least 50% in every module to end up with an accredited pass, meaning you can then go onto further training in order to become a psychologist. Whilst 40% clearly isn't something anyone aims for, it doesn't mean you can't do anything with the degree, just means you're more limited in terms of a career.

I picked 50% because that would mean someone has passed and met the requirements to prove they're capable of that level of study for at least half of the programme of learning.

Hypothetical: If I was training on a medical course and say needed to learn and pass exams in 10 areas of the body, but only passed 4, that demonstrates I don't know the majority. If I passed 5, then at least what I don't have sufficient knowledge in is equally balanced by that which I do.

Surrey at 50%???
My understanding was that all brick universities held the same grading system - probably why I'm not making much sense.

That just makes no sense. You're ok with your doctors knowing nothing about 50% of the body? Lol, ok.

Some exams are very hard, they can have a lower pass mark. Some exams are very easy, so you need say 90% to even pass. Its really not a hard concept.

Unis grade their own exams, they can do whatever they want really. There is a loose regulator but its more concerned with fairness within the course, not policing what grades are given out. That, combined with the government's ingenious idea of trying to make unis compete with one another, is the reason the the number of firsts has exploded.

But that's exactly my point!!!!! You can't pass a medical course without knowing and passing the majority, so why should someone say they're degree-level in biology but only score a 3rd? A 3rd doesn't equal knowing the majority. BUT......

Its great that you've learned something, but I don't see why that is relevant to your thread at all. Is it because you've convinced yourself that all 3rds are >50% raw mark just graded downwards?

I got a 52% in One essay, it didn’t mean I had 50% wrong, it just meant I hadn’t gone into much depth that they wanted. It was technically correct though.
Lots of subjects can be like that if not science or maths. This was law.
So possible to get lots of 50s but still understand the subject, just not go into much depth.

I never considered this. Makes sense.

Last paragraph - poorly structured by myself. What I mean is, to obtain a 3rd class degree you need to pass 40% of the course... why does that allow someone to get the qualification when they didn't pass a majority/at least 50% like with a 2:2.

At Masters level, there's pass, merit, distinction. Anything below a pass leads to a certificate. I know this doesn't equally translate to a 2:2, 2:1, 1st but in the eyes of graduate entry jobs a 2:2 seems to be the 'pass' equivalent for job consideration in a lot of fields.

I hope that makes more sense.

My understanding is that if you get a 3rd class degree it isn't going to aid your career progression all too much as any 'degree-entry' jobs normally look for a 2:1 up.

Why are third class degrees a thing then? I have friends who struggled enough after getting a 2:2.

Why should anyone who only gets 40% have a degree (i.e. having not met requirements for that level of study for the majority of the course), surely that diminishes the value of one? Is it because of this that people see Masters degree grading more valuable as its pass (2:2), merit (2:1), distinction (1)?

Because tradition has always had the pass mark at 40%. I really cant see why anyone would be bothered with this.

You sound like the millionaire who resents someone else having £1.

Oh wow this makes a lot of sense. I did totally disregard the individual modules in my line of thinking. You're a psychologist? Thats cool. Is this a similar deal with medical degrees then? For your last point I do agree, and I don't want anyone to think I'm looking down on a 3rd class. Degrees aren't everything and it just means a different path in some professions.

Yeah I agree about the inflation - it's not something I've ever considered before really. All I know from my parents is that when they were at university-level age, 'barely anyone' went as it wasn't as accessible as it is now.

70% = 1st
60% = 2:1
50% = 2:2.

Why is there an option to award someone with a degree when they don't pass at least half of it to the required standard?

Is a 3rd class degree now outdated? Should we look into 80% + as a 1:1 and 70% as a 1:2 etc. It's an interesting point for debate I think.

I'm currently finishing my MSc in Forensic Psychology so I'm getting there

The way Psychology works is this you need an accredited undergraduate degree to get onto an accredited MSc to start the Stage 2/doctorate to become eligible for HCPC registration to work as a practioner psychlogist. So it's jumping through hoops in some ways.

And that's why it's so important for me to get over 50% in everything, as otherwise I won't be able to apply to start the Stage 2. There's plenty of careers out there for those with an unacccredited MSc, such as intervention faciliators, offender managers, probation officers, you just won't be able to become an actual Psychologist without the Stage 2 or doctorate. I know some people on unaccredited MSc's then do the doctorate to get HCPC registration but the accredited MSc cuts out a year.

Thats so interesting. Is the doctorate you want to apply to in forensic psychology too? Out of interest, how is forensic psychology different to criminology? is it more the science of why someone would commit a crime? You sound very driven so best of luck to you!!!

The score isn't a true percentage, so try not to think of it as ''getting more than half wrong''. In many subjects/tasks/assignments, getting above 85% isn't a thing, and neither is getting 15% so it is misleading in that sense.

The classification system is not fit for purpose on it's own any longer, in my opinion.

Why is someone asking a genuine question because they don't understand something a reason for you to call them ignorant?