There are a few problems with OP's idea. Take two similar universities, who would be the better candidate:
1st out of 10
15th out of 120
Difficult to compare. All the people in the first case could be poor students, so being first doesn't mean anything.
Why not just use percentage points, like many people suggested?
x
Turn on thread page Beta
-
crunchychips
- Follow
- 0 followers
- 1 badge
- Send a private message to crunchychips
Offline1ReputationRep:- Follow
- 41
- 15-04-2013 01:31
-
- Follow
- 42
- 15-04-2013 09:42
Although I agree that the problem outlined by the OP is huge and fundamentally unfair, I don't think this is the way to go about it. There would still be some sort of arbitrary cut off point (i.e. you'd have to come in the top 50% of your year regardless of institution), which wouldn't go to solving anything. Furthermore, Cambridge already operate something similar to this (i.e. your class rank determines your grade) for NatSci and I can tell you it makes for an extremely unpleasant university experience. You start viewing people in lectures as your enemies, people to overcome. You do the same with your friends, hoping that they do badly in their exams. The worse they do, the better your grade is.
I think the way to solve this problem is to have university exams set centrally (i.e. the IoP would set exam papers for all university physics). This would allow fair comparisons of student performances between institutions. -
LexiswasmyNexis
- Follow
- 4 followers
- 11 badges
- Send a private message to LexiswasmyNexis
Offline11ReputationRep:- Follow
- 43
- 15-04-2013 10:12
I really don't think it's a great idea to totally abandon the current system in favour of rankings.
However, I see no reason why the ranking in order couldn't be included on the transcript as well as classification/%s. Perhaps those in the top 5% should receive special recognition?
Most big employers ask for degree % and possibly module scores anyway, which goes some way to remove the issue about overly broad boundaries.
Posted from TSR Mobile -
TurboCretin
- Follow
- 37 followers
- 16 badges
- Send a private message to TurboCretin
Offline16ReputationRep:- Follow
- 44
- 15-04-2013 10:23
(Original post by Upper Echelons)
I am suggesting that yes, that each year group for each subject it's ranked. I'll add it to the OP.
The purpose is for employers, yes, as well as academic interviewers.
I highly doubt that LSE teaching is better than Cambridge's! The attention which Oxbridge students receive from their teachers is enormous, whereas LSE students frequently complain about a lack of contact with their lecturers, and a complete lack of care from them about their undergraduates.
Perhaps LMU is an extreme example, but only last year I spoke to an employer at a Magic Circle law firm (if you don't know the Magic Circle, they are the most prestigious firms in the UK, with an incredibly competitive hiring process) about the issue of the 2.1, and he bluntly replied that a 2.1 from Liverpool would be superior to a 2.2 from Cambridge, that the Cambridge 2.2 would be ruled out.
Now, I think it's ridiculous that 1% in exams at completely different universities (the Liverpool grad could have just scraped the 2.1, and the Cambridge grad just missed it) can lead to such an enormous influence on job prospects. -
- Follow
- 45
- 15-04-2013 10:43
(Original post by crunchychips)
There are a few problems with OP's idea. Take two similar universities, who would be the better candidate:
1st out of 10
15th out of 120
Difficult to compare. All the people in the first case could be poor students, so being first doesn't mean anything.
Why not just use percentage points, like many people suggested?
That's a very valid point, I don't think there's an easy solution.
I think the implication by the OP that non-oxbridge students haven't worked hard for their degree is ridiculous tbh.
I think no matter what happens HR departments will assign arbitrary cut offs to make their jobs easier. In many ways degree classification is fairer than many of the 'tricks' I've come across over the years.
I think Oxbridge undergraduates need to learn that getting in is just one of many hurdles to getting a great career. Getting a good degree is the next one. -
- Follow
- 46
- 22-04-2013 13:47
When I read the thread title I thought the OP would suggest a point system where both the grade and the institution are considered.
His suggestion however is quite ludicrous. -
- Follow
- 47
- 22-04-2013 14:12
I don't know how this would work for my degree...there are about 20 people doing it, and my "branch" there are only 5!
However, surely the best thing to do is to give a ranking AND the classification and combine these 2 into one number. That way Universities that award lots of 1sts and 2:1s would overall have a similar number of people with a certain rank.
For example: 1st = 20, 2:1 = 15, 2:2 = 10, 3rd = 5. Then top 10% = 20, 11-30%= 15, 31-60/70%=10 61/71%-100%=5.
So A who graduates from Oxford with a 2:1 and 32nd out of 200 students gets 30"points".
B who graduates from LSE with a 1st and 41st out of 200 students gets 35"points"
C, Oxford, 1st and 3rd out of 200 gets 40"points"
D, LSE, 2:1 and 70th out of 200 gets 30"points".
It would work for the majority of courses, and it would remove some of the difficulty with relating grades across different years, as the classification would stay the same, even if the rank moved. You could always add more rank brackets to make more distinction between students as well. -
- Follow
- 48
- 22-04-2013 14:55
(Original post by Katie_p)
I don't know how this would work for my degree...there are about 20 people doing it, and my "branch" there are only 5!
However, surely the best thing to do is to give a ranking AND the classification and combine these 2 into one number. That way Universities that award lots of 1sts and 2:1s would overall have a similar number of people with a certain rank.
For example: 1st = 20, 2:1 = 15, 2:2 = 10, 3rd = 5. Then top 10% = 20, 11-30%= 15, 31-60/70%=10 61/71%-100%=5.
So A who graduates from Oxford with a 2:1 and 32nd out of 200 students gets 30"points".
B who graduates from LSE with a 1st and 41st out of 200 students gets 35"points"
C, Oxford, 1st and 3rd out of 200 gets 40"points"
D, LSE, 2:1 and 70th out of 200 gets 30"points".
It would work for the majority of courses, and it would remove some of the difficulty with relating grades across different years, as the classification would stay the same, even if the rank moved. You could always add more rank brackets to make more distinction between students as well. -
Observatory
- Follow
- 21 followers
- 17 badges
- Send a private message to Observatory
Offline17ReputationRep:- Follow
- 49
- 23-04-2013 14:32
Out of the frying pan, into the fire.
-
- Follow
- 50
- 24-04-2013 00:03
(Original post by Katie_p)
I don't know how this would work for my degree...there are about 20 people doing it, and my "branch" there are only 5!
However, surely the best thing to do is to give a ranking AND the classification and combine these 2 into one number. That way Universities that award lots of 1sts and 2:1s would overall have a similar number of people with a certain rank.
For example: 1st = 20, 2:1 = 15, 2:2 = 10, 3rd = 5. Then top 10% = 20, 11-30%= 15, 31-60/70%=10 61/71%-100%=5.
So A who graduates from Oxford with a 2:1 and 32nd out of 200 students gets 30"points".
B who graduates from LSE with a 1st and 41st out of 200 students gets 35"points"
C, Oxford, 1st and 3rd out of 200 gets 40"points"
D, LSE, 2:1 and 70th out of 200 gets 30"points".
It would work for the majority of courses, and it would remove some of the difficulty with relating grades across different years, as the classification would stay the same, even if the rank moved. You could always add more rank brackets to make more distinction between students as well.
What if you were the only person on a particular combination? If this proposal were rolled out might there be a sudden dash to ill matched joints like 'drama production and quarry management' to game a higher ranking for the gradschemes? -
- Follow
- 51
- 24-04-2013 00:18
I'd just like to say i agree with scrapping degree classifications. As it stands at my university, St Andrews, 90% of students graduate with a 1:1 or a 2:1!!! 20% get a 1:1 which is reasonable, but 70% get a 2:1. This makes a 2:1 absolutely 100% meaningless. You could be in the top 30% of your class or the bottom 30% and no one could tell the difference...
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Related discussions:
- General Elections 2015 : Green Party Scrap Student debt!! ...
- We should shut down the lower ranked universities and bull ...
- The "Is this university/course good enough for banking ...
- Open University Chat Thread
- Open University Chat Thread
- Graduate Entry Medicine 2017
- Medicine Graduate Entry 2015!! :)
- Warwick Medicine A101 2018 Entry
- What do you want to know about Oxford?
- What do you want to know about Oxford?
TSR Support Team
We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.
This forum is supported by:
Updated: April 24, 2013
Share this discussion:
Tweet