The difference between a 2:1 and a First with regards to career opportunities?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by IrrationalNumber

The ones I met are both clever and remarkably normal people. I think the post above is unfair - they do have a life, even if they like maths.

You could argue that remarkably normal/healthy is abnormal, and that this has given those ones an advantage. The other extreme, the really unhealthy ones have obsessiveness to see them through olympiads. Are there any inbetweens among the ones you've met? I don't mean go to lots of very acceptable societies at uni and make boring jokes. I mean actual normal people.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 61

IrrationalNumber

Original post by schoolstudent

They are actually normal people, just fiercely quick.
By 'remarkably normal' I mean that I was surprised that people who dedicate such a large amount of time to mathematics could lead normal lives (yes, IMO exams involve dedicating a large amount of time)

Reply 62

wanderlust.xx

Original post by PALLO

I think people under-estimate the value of a first-class degree.

As the OP states, they are interested in career opportunities, not academia.

When the graduate recruitment market is full to the brim of students with AAA-AAB with 2:1s from reputable university, you need something different to make you stand out. 80% of graduates in the graduate market have 2:1s, with the same experience of sports teams/societies. So when you apply for a job where there are a 1000 applicants for 20 places, do you think you're 2:1 will increase your chances? No. The 2:1 is the minimum expected to enter the graduate market.

And from personal experience, having a first-class degree from a reputable university helps, regardless of what subject it is in. It massively impresses employers at interviews and will help get through many first rounds.

If the OP gets a first in maths, it will massively increase their chances of a job in the finance graduate market (accountancy, banking, investment banking etc).

However, I stress this point as this is the most important. A first-class degree alone will not get you a job. You must have a solid C.V. of extra-curricular activities, work experience/charity work, good leadership skills and an all-round decent person socially

Thank you for this positive and (frankly) uplifting post.

Since making this post I've spoken to countless people (lecturers, managers, executives, research leaders) and they've all told me that, essentially, if I were to get a first, then I would have more of a chance to stand out and get past inital screening. If I had a 2:1, then I'd need exceptional experience to catch attention.

However, once initial screening is over, I'd need to show off my own interpersonal skills and teamwork abilities, as well as my academic ability.

Reply 63

PALLO

Original post by wanderlust.xx

As I have previously mentioned, the graduate market is so tough. With an unpredictable few years still ahead of us, graduate recruiters are still happy to under recruit than take on too many. Typical graduate markets, such as banking and law, which were traditional stalwarts have been very hard.

The graduate market has significantly changed over the last five years. Even having a 2:1 isn't enough. An example is the steady increase in graduate schemes that want either a first or a "good" 2:1 (which I would assume is 65 and above).

Significantly, Graduate recruiters look beyond the traditional grade boundaries of a first, upper and lower second class, as they are more bothered on the overall average. They rightly so see no sense in seeing that a candidate with a grade of 60 is the same as another candidate with an average of 69. Graduate recruiters have acted on this and a lot of applications want a breakdown of your degree results (i.e. every single module mark including first year) and as a result there is no place to hide in the application process. Therefore scraping a 2:1 doesn't cut it nowadays.

OP, if you can get a first, excellent work. Just don't kill yourself in the process. A 69 is just as good. Try to enjoy your time at university as it comes to an end. It will be your final opportunity to truly enjoy yourself before the daily grind starts. University is a social and cultural experience, not solely an academic one.

I wish you all the best. If there is anything you need, feel free to PM me :smile:

Reply 64

Sollytear

Having been through uni now, BSc and Masters, and having had an internship and now a grad role I feel that I am comment.

I initially thought thats a 2.1 and 1sts were interchangeable. All the banks were asking for 2.1 and those on my accessment days had 2.1s. After spending a few months working at a bank it become very apparent that there were no 2.1 math student, they all had 1st. There were however 2.1 econ, finance, Bs, etc. So for maths, Id recommend you aim for a 1st, work ur socks off for 3years.

That being said, I also noticed that the non-math students understood banks a lot better than the math students; so perhaps this is what the banks look for. A lack of knowledge countered by a harder, better degree.

If you apply for post grade/quant roles, you will need a first unless there is anything else that makes you shine above the others.

Hope that helps
Jx

Reply 65

Jake22

Original post by Sollytear

If you apply for post grade/quant roles, you will need a first unless there is anything else that makes you shine above the others.

If you apply for a serious quant role - surely they are gonna care about your PhD and not give a **** about your undergrad?

Reply 66

Simplicity

How important is it to get a first if you want to get a PhD in pure mathematics?

As I can get good references. However, like 2nd year are likely to be only like 65-75% as I had problems during Christmas.

Read something like the funding is really bad at the moment and that if you don't have 80%+ you are screwed. Also, on funding is it like a loan?

Because, I can't afford 11k a year even if I worked part time. Read you can't even work part time whilst doing a PhD.

Reply 67

Jake22

Original post by Simplicity

How important is it to get a first if you want to get a PhD in pure mathematics?

Fairly crucial.

Reply 68

Physics Enemy

Helooo, my nehm iss Yong, I am invesman bankaaa in London, I drive flash car an party wit my indian fren, we buy big bottle at table.

LOL. Just LOL. :biggrin:

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 69

wanderlust.xx

Original post by Sollytear

Thanks for telling me what I wanted to hear! :tongue:

Just to clarify, by applying to postgrad roles, you mean applying as a normal graduate for a postgraduate role in the finance industry? If so, then do employers really take on normal first class graduates rather than people who've done postgrads?

(On a slightly unrelated topic, I have to thank the person who told me to work harder with the module that I utterly despised - far better level of understanding after a bit of hard graft, even though it seemed nigh on impossible at the time)

Reply 70

Dragon

By postgraduate role I assume he meant studying a Masters or a PhD. You will certainly need a first for a PhD, otherwise getting funding is extremely unlikely. For general graduate jobs, I'd say a 2:1 is enough for most places, although a first would certainly help your cause.

Reply 71

Sollytear

Sorry not replied in a while.

for Quant yes, a PhD or 2 masters is good, but its the way that you think rather than what you know. I personally think that the way that you think is pretty much defined by the time you graduate.

I also assume that if you are doing maths that you will do a 4-yr masters.