Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by curiousquest)
    Actually Oxford was "key" in four subjects, not seven.

    English language and literature, philosophy, modern languages and geography. Are they all more"key" than Civil Engineering?
    Civil engineering is a proper subject whilst english language is a waste of time.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by curiousquest)
    Actually Oxford was "key" in four subjects, not seven.

    English language and literature, philosophy, modern languages and geography. Are they all more"key" than Civil Engineering?
    No. The issue is what is 'key' and 'not key'. What is 'more key' has nothing to do with the article.

    An English Language student would appreciate the difference.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sharp910sh)
    Civil engineering is a proper subject whilst english language is a waste of time.
    Bit harsh.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LexiswasmyNexis)
    Bit harsh.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    What good does a civil engineer do and what good does a person who has studies english do?

    Yes I am a civil engineer...
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sharp910sh)
    What good does a civil engineer do and what good does a person who has studies english do?

    Yes I am a civil engineer...
    It depends on your point of view and upon what value each graduate takes from their degree.

    You cannot logically label one a waste of time based simply on 'what good' each might do.

    Again, an English student would probably appreciate this.

    FAOD I am not an English graduate.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    as much as i would love to one day do a PHD at Newcastle as it is a lovely university I am currently at northumbria studying biomedical science

    I will have far more chance of being employed at the end of my course even if we both got 2.1 as this is accredited at northumbria but not at newcastle

    being a high rated uni doesn't mean you have a higher right to a job
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olie)
    You may be right, though I do find it surprising that employers would completely disregard the fact they managed to get into a top uni because they just missed out on a 2.1, but like has been pointed out, that's just the system.
    I could of gone to Durham, much higher 'rated' than the uni im at, I chose not to as the uni doesn't suit me at all (I felt very uncomfortable there with all the grade snobbish people ive met)

    someone getting a 2.2 from Durham wouldn't automatically mean i couldn't of got better in there place
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sharp910sh)
    I can follow your the conversation but clearly you speak rubbish. If you want to look up to people from Oxford and Cambridge who got 2.2 so be it not my problem. A man who has a 2.1 from a lower end university is better, by far. Have you ever been to Oxford or Cambridge? No. So you cannot say the course is harder. If a man is getting a 2.2 at Oxford or Cambridge he is clearly not pulling his weight of has some issues.
    Again with the misquoting. Stop trying to insinuate I'm making claims that I am most definitely not. It's see through and a pathetic way to debate something. I have CLEARLY stated that oxbridge was merely an example to represent top or the table, and stated CLEARLY that a 2.2 is far from ideal from anywhere. I certainly wouldn't aspire to a 2.2 anywhere. That doesn't mean I can't consider a few percentage points as less important than 100+ places in the league tables.

    We're talking about a matter of a couple of percent. They wouldn't be "better by far" even if the results were from the same university, let alone opposite ends of the scale. Do you only think in 10s? Is a 63 "better by far" than a 61?

    I don't have to go to any particular university to have an informed opinon on another. My friend group went to a wide array of universities, and I've worked with a diverse group of grads as well. This, alongside pretty common knowledge, is where I'm forming my opinion from.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sharp910sh)
    Civil engineering is a proper subject whilst english language is a waste of time.
    As any scientist knows, the correct way to plot a line of best fit on a graph is first to plot the points, then draw a line of best fit, not the other way round.

    It seems for this argument of "key" or not, the journalist has chosen those subjects which Oxbridge are top and then defined them to be "key"!

    Given the need to get more students to do STEM subjects, I cannot see how any of the subjects Oxford came top in are key.

    Even the Cambridge subjects, only maths should be defined "key".
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    Again with the misquoting. Stop trying to insinuate I'm making claims that I am most definitely not. It's see through and a pathetic way to debate something. I have CLEARLY stated that oxbridge was merely an example to represent top or the table, and stated CLEARLY that a 2.2 is far from ideal from anywhere. I certainly wouldn't aspire to a 2.2 anywhere. That doesn't mean I can't consider a few percentage points as less important than 100+ places in the league tables.

    We're talking about a matter of a couple of percent. They wouldn't be "better by far" even if the results were from the same university, let alone opposite ends of the scale. Do you only think in 10s? Is a 63 "better by far" than a 61?

    I don't have to go to any particular university to have an informed opinon on another. My friend group went to a wide array of universities, and I've worked with a diverse group of grads as well. This, alongside pretty common knowledge, is where I'm forming my opinion from.
    Well there is a cut of point, 50, 60 and 70. Just because 59 is close to 60 doesn't mean you have got 2.1. Nor does it mean getting 59% from the top uni is better than 59 from the bottom uni. This is the reason there are cut off points.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lotsofq)
    As any scientist knows, the correct way to plot a line of best fit on a graph is first to plot the points, then draw a line of best fit, not the other way round.

    It seems for this argument of "key" or not, the journalist has chosen those subjects which Oxbridge are top and then defined them to be "key"!

    Given the need to get more students to do STEM subjects, I cannot see how any of the subjects Oxford came top in are key.

    Even the Cambridge subjects, only maths should be defined "key".
    I think the point is that those listed are the only subjects in which the UK has a number 1 institution. All but one of those are Oxbridge. Natural UK bias will label them all 'key'.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LexiswasmyNexis)
    I think the point is that those listed are the only subjects in which the UK has a number 1 institution. All but one of those are Oxbridge. Natural UK bias will label them all 'key'.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If the point is to emphasise UK unis coming top, then why not quote "Oxbridge / Imperial are top in 8 "key" subjects"?

    I recall a year when UCL was the second ranked UK uni in the world (4th overall).

    The headline in the papers was "Oxford drops from the top two."

    It could have easily read "UCL is in the top two in the UK."
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    My question is if A levels are only relevant for vetting purposes, do many grad schemes actually take into account GCSEs? I havent got the best set of GCSEs with mainly C's but I then got A*A*A at A level and currently study at Cardiff University, so will I be disadvantaged?
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    This is still going on, then. Again.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mushpantsbc)
    My question is if A levels are only relevant for vetting purposes, do many grad schemes actually take into account GCSEs? I havent got the best set of GCSEs with mainly C's but I then got A*A*A at A level and currently study at Cardiff University, so will I be disadvantaged?
    No I've never seen gcse's used as criteria in grad jobs, except the standard B in English and Maths.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mushpantsbc)
    My question is if A levels are only relevant for vetting purposes, do many grad schemes actually take into account GCSEs? I havent got the best set of GCSEs with mainly C's but I then got A*A*A at A level and currently study at Cardiff University, so will I be disadvantaged?
    I have been asked to list my Standard Grades with results multiple times in grad scheme applications. They count towards your UCAS tariff but to be honest, with three A*s at A-level, you're going to be passing these tariffs pretty comfotabley.

    Another thing. People who have actually gone out and worked with a range of people from different universities, know that it doesn't really matter which one you went to. The best person I ever worked with didn't get great grades at school, I don't think got absolutely top grades at university, and didn't go to the best university in his city, never mind the country. But he is absolutely fantastic at what he does and I'd hire him for any job in a heartbeat. And if I had to give him a reference, it would be glowing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    As usual, TSR looks down on people with 2:2.

    Most people I know got 2:2 and not 2:1 (in my class 4 people got 2:2, 1 says he got 2:1 but actually got 2:2 and another got 2:1; in my COURSE (not the class) 1 got a 2:2, I know 3 that got a 2:1 and 1 got a 1st but I also know 2 people with 3rds [one from course,one from class], and two of my friends from another course got 2:2 while one got a 1st). So that's 7 2:2s, 4 2:1s, 2 1sts and 2 3rds.

    Anyway, it's still better than a pass.

    Something like 70% of graduate employers want a 2:1 but that still leaves 30% of graduate employers open to 2:2s and below.

    2:2 is also better than HND merit/pass-HND merit and above will still land you a good job (not at this point in time but when the market picks up)
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lotsofq)
    If the point is to emphasise UK unis coming top, then why not quote "Oxbridge / Imperial are top in 8 "key" subjects"?

    I recall a year when UCL was the second ranked UK uni in the world (4th overall).

    The headline in the papers was "Oxford drops from the top two."

    It could have easily read "UCL is in the top two in the UK."
    Probably because a lot of the general public have never heard of Imperial.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ronki23)
    As usual, TSR looks down on people with 2:2.

    Most people I know got 2:2 and not 2:1 (in my class 4 people got 2:2, 1 says he got 2:1 but actually got 2:2 and another got 2:1; in my COURSE (not the class) 1 got a 2:2, I know 3 that got a 2:1 and 1 got a 1st but I also know 2 people with 3rds [one from course,one from class], and two of my friends from another course got 2:2 while one got a 1st). So that's 7 2:2s, 4 2:1s, 2 1sts and 2 3rds.

    Anyway, it's still better than a pass.

    Something like 70% of graduate employers want a 2:1 but that still leaves 30% of graduate employers open to 2:2s and below.

    2:2 is also better than HND merit/pass-HND merit and above will still land you a good job (not at this point in time but when the market picks up)
    Wtf is the point of this post? There are also a lot of very dim people in the world. That doesn't make dimness 'good'.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    2:1 from a met.

    Although, someone will just look at your CV and see "2:1" etc and won't really notice it unless it's Oxbridge.

    On my internship at a uni they told me that at the end of the day the degree is just a piece of paper and it's more what you do after.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources

    Articles and guides:

    Hands typing

    Degrees without fees

    Discover more about degree-level apprenticeships.

    A-Z of careers Advice on choosing a careerCV writing helpCovering letter helpInterview tips

    Featured recruiter profiles:

    CGI logo

    CGI is open for applications

    "Offering a range of apprentice and sponsored degree positions."

    Deutsche Bank logo

    Deutsche Bank is recruiting

    "Thrive in an international banking environment"

    ICAEW logo

    Merck

    "Merck is a global leader in specialized pharma & chemicals – join us!"

    Army logo

    The Army is recruiting now

    "With hundreds of roles available, there’s more than one way to be the best."

    Bianca Miller, runner-up on The Apprentice

    Handle your digital footprint

    What would an employer find out about you on Google? Find out how to take control.

    Quick links:

    Unanswered career sector and employment threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.