Do some universities give out too many firsts? Watch

redferry
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 years ago
#21
(Original post by TolerantBeing)
Yeah. I think it is a lot to do with them being easier. At least it worked out fair in the end I suppose in your case
Still bitter that I got a 2:1

*fist shake*
1
reply
stefl14
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 years ago
#22
(Original post by Advice Guru)
I wouldn't say the content in ex poly's is too different from the redbricks.

The difference is made in the coursework percentage. An ex poly will have around 40% coursework per module, while the redbricks can be up to 100% exam or 85% exam.
You must be having a laugh. I study economics at Cambridge and have looked at the content of similar modules in the examinations of some ex-poly universities and the difference in difficulty is staggering.
0
reply
Advice Guru
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 years ago
#23
(Original post by stefl14)
You must be having a laugh. I study economics at Cambridge and have looked at the content of similar modules in the examinations of some ex-poly universities and the difference in difficulty is staggering.
It's not as wide as you think.

They make most of it up in the coursework.
And economics at cambridge isn't all that, what until you do some real econometrics.
2
reply
Saliency
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 years ago
#24
I think some of you are forgetting they are externally marked and some courses like biomed are accredited so have to meet certain expectations.
I think its more course dependent rather than uni dependent in a lot of cases. Although, im not disputing the fact that the top 10 unis are probably more content heavy.


I go to an average ranked plate glass uni and my lecturers were actually told by external boards they were including too much content, that they had to reduce it and go further into detail with certain parts instead of trying to include everything.
1
reply
PerArduaAdAstra
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 years ago
#25
Yes it does tack the piss a bit, but employers are wise to it, which is good news.
0
reply
stefl14
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#26
Report 4 years ago
#26
(Original post by Advice Guru)
It's not as wide as you think.

They make most of it up in the coursework.
And economics at cambridge isn't all that, what until you do some real econometrics.
I know it's not "all that". I actually think it's way too easy to get a first in it as I did so my self in part 1 and 2A with less effort than I think should be necessary to get a first. However, I often ask my friends for papers from their universities and even for the russell group ones there is a noticable difference. I've looked at 1 poly one and their questions are a joke. However the biggest difference comes in marking standards. 50+% of economics students at Cambridge would probably get firsts even at somewhere like LSE.

Edit: How in the world can coursework make up for an exam?
0
reply
The_Internet
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 years ago
#27
So much ignorance here. Parking this to expand on later...
So here I go - partially anecdotal evidence

The way I see it is, for some subjects, they are better done at red bricks, and others are better done at ex polys

ie: engineering is supposed to be really good at Glasgow university, but IT tends to be better at ex polys

I'm on placement, went to an ex poly (and still technically going), and I'm working in a large corporation - what the ex polys have always been good at is industry links

There's a reason why a lot of large companies would rather take someone from universities like:

Staffs, Coventry, BCU, Sheffield Hallam etc... etc.. compared to Oxford, Cambridge, Leeds, Birmingham etc... for IT

It's the way in which the universities deliver the course. Not just that, for my course, because it's networking, there's a heavy amount of Cisco "propaganda" so partially, the qualifications are externally marked, and it relies almost quite heavily on experience

I know there's someone here who went to Coventry doing cyber security and is now working at a large corporate doing cyber security related stuff

I keep referring back to this:

http://staffs.ac.uk/undergraduate/su...orks/index.jsp

What pretty much sold Staffs to me was this:

"Cisco Systems have given Staffordshire University an Educational Achievement award, one of only six in Europe and the only one in the UK."

And the fact that we supposedly get more graduates doing jobs related to our degree - and supposedly earning slightly more than some of those in the red bricks

Again that's only IT. Imo, it depends from course to course. Certain subjects will most definitely be done better at different institutions
5
reply
Sanctimonious
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#28
Report 4 years ago
#28
(Original post by redferry)
Still bitter that I got a 2:1

*fist shake*
I'm in the 2:1 club as well now. :ahee:
0
reply
Smaug123
  • Study Helper
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#29
Report 4 years ago
#29
(Original post by stefl14)
I'd go so far as to say a third in Cambridge maths is a hard as a first in maths at many other universities.
I'd say this is wrong - almost nobody doesn't get a third at Cambridge maths.
0
reply
The_Internet
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#30
Report 4 years ago
#30
(Original post by LilyLouise2)
In general, A 2:1 from a very good uni is much better than a first from a much less well known uni employers do look at university (or at least, A lot do!-)
You might be surprised to know that a lot of large corpororates look specifically at ex Poly's for IT

I can't say this for all subjects ofc
0
reply
stefl14
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#31
Report 4 years ago
#31
(Original post by Smaug123)
I'd say this is wrong - almost nobody doesn't get a third at Cambridge maths.
I don't know why I said a third when I meant 2.2. I think it genuinely is true for a 2.2. Not for all universities but certainly for many of them. And it probably is true for a third as well. What are you talking about nobody gets a third at Cambridge maths? This year there were 15. I'm pretty confident that most of these people are better than maths that some of those who get firsts in maths at the really bad universities. After all they passed step and 15 is too high a number for all of them to be explained by complete lack of effort since they got into Cambridge in the first place.
1
reply
LilyLouise2
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#32
Report 4 years ago
#32
(Original post by de_monies)
You might be surprised to know that a lot of large corpororates look specifically at ex Poly's for IT

I can't say this for all subjects ofc
Ah, maybe- I guess I'm mainly referring to Law, as that's what I'm going to study (hopefully!)
0
reply
Mike93L
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#33
Report 4 years ago
#33
(Original post by Advice Guru)
It's not as wide as you think.

They make most of it up in the coursework.
And economics at cambridge isn't all that, what until you do some real econometrics.
Looking at some past papers. It seems that it's also that the style of question from 'lower' unis tend to be more like A level where you are guided through and everything is straight-forward if you learned the content.

From what I hear Cambridge economics includes a lot of econometrics and is very maths heavy...
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#34
Report 4 years ago
#34
@OP, just because someone is not ****ting out A* in everything at A-level does not mean they are stupid or that they can not improve in their subject of choice at uni.
10
reply
redferry
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#35
Report 4 years ago
#35
(Original post by de_monies)
So much ignorance here. Parking this to expand on later...
Apologies if this refers to me I didn't mean to come off as ignorant of was just what I found doing my masters, I had covered a lot of the material previously whereas people from Polys had done very little/none of it. People from other red bricks fell in between.
0
reply
redferry
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#36
Report 4 years ago
#36
(Original post by Sanctimonious)
I'm in the 2:1 club as well now. :ahee:
1.2% off *mutter*

I overrode my 2:1 with a distinction in my masters
0
reply
LilyLouise2
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#37
Report 4 years ago
#37
(Original post by Kirboz)
Outside of law and banking, they really don't. I have never been questioned on my alma mater throughout the course of applying for jobs - just my degree classification.
I don't know; my dad's a senior policeman who's very high up in the Met and they have a programme to enlist the brightest people in this special programme where they have the ability to rise up the ranks faster than others. Other factors are considered too ofc, although my dad says they will nearly always value a 2:1 at a very good university above a first at some unknown ex polytechnic, as they acknowledge the difficulty of the course.

I think it really depends! Although I guess I was mainly referring to law which is what I'm hoping to study.
0
reply
Hal.E.Lujah
  • Study Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#38
Report 4 years ago
#38
To be honest this is all just anecdotal ranting.
2
reply
stefl14
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#39
Report 4 years ago
#39
(Original post by Kirboz)
Outside of law and banking, they really don't. I have never been questioned on my alma mater throughout the course of applying for jobs - just my degree classification.
This is where you are very wrong. It may not be explicit but Oxbridge is favoured by virtually all top employers. Law has a very strict Oxbridge preference whereas banking has less of an Oxbridge preference than you might expect. The fact that lots of banks have tons of Oxbridge grads is more about self-selection and Oxbridge graduates just being more dedicated and likely to be better at their job. Roles in economics for government think tanks and the civil service strongly prefer Oxbridge graduates. The Bank of England hires a huge proportion of its graduates from Cambridge. In management consultancy there is an extreme preference for Oxbridge grads too - some only hire Oxbridge grads. It is quite rational for employers to be biased towards grads from better universities for certain professions so stop feeding yourself the bull**** that Oxbridge, or any other top university for that matter, is not an advantage in employment. A lot of the people hiring at the very top firms went there themselves so they will be biased.
0
reply
Caedus
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#40
Report 4 years ago
#40
(Original post by Kirboz)
Colour me unconvinced. Besides, even law is not just a case of 'higher prestige uni = more likely to get a training contract'. There are other factors, including transcripts, work experience, and firm/ chamber location. Graduates of Liverpool and Manchester are some of the most likely to secure pupillage, though I imagine you wouldn't have guessed that.
Liverpool and Manchester are respectable red-brick universities, I doubt anyone (outside of investment banking) would question them. I should think both of them would fit the criteria for the London Met accelerated promotion programme.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (487)
79.97%
Leave (122)
20.03%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed