This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

UK vs US grade discrimination?

I'm an American applying to UK schools for postgrad, and it seems like the required grades for entry are much higher for US students. A few of the top schools say "upper-second class honours degree or equivalent," then list the equivalent as 3.5-3.7 on the GPA scale.

Now, from having cousins who attended a variety of UK unis, it seems that as long as you put a reasonable amount of effort into your studies, you'll leave with a 2:1 degree. One poster on this site said every English finalist in his year at Oxford got 2:1s. So then 3.5-3.7 is definintely not the equivalent in that case. A 3.3 and above from a good US university, within the US, is considered to be good. In certain subjects--anything where the grading is very subjective--3.7 is very difficult to get. I've had professors in history and politics who do not believe in giving As or A-'s (3.7-4.0) unless you have written something worth publishing in an academic journal.

Now, it's fine for the top UK unis to require a 3.5-3.7, but it is not equivalent to a 2:1 at all. I would say 3.6-4.0 is a first, 3.3-3.5 is 2:1, etc. If they are asking for those GPA marks, it seems that the British applicants ought to have a first degree.

Is this just a UK thing, or do all countries do this preferential standard setting? Are there any British students who find that US unis do the same thing? Do they set standards higher for foreign applicants? Seems like this is just a way to favor students from the home country heavily.

Reply 1

Vlad the Frog

1

This is what I found out when I was looking for the required grades for entry to master's degree :

http://www.bris.ac.uk/prospective/postgraduates/eq_qualifications.html

Reply 2

shady lane

OP

16

Vlad the Frog

This is what I found out when I was looking for the required grades for entry to master's degree :

http://www.bris.ac.uk/prospective/postgraduates/eq_qualifications.html

That looks right to me Vlad. So the top unis are just taking liberties with the equivalents. This is from LSE:

Master's degree

A first or upper second class honours (2:1) degree from a UK university or a non-UK equivalent in a subject appropriate to the programme to be followed. Most graduate programmes assume that you will have prior knowledge to degree level in particular disciplines. Competition varies between programmes and the level of grades/marks required will vary. Popular programmes will often look for a first class honours degree or its equivalent.

If you are taking, or have taken, a recognised degree programme outside the UK you will need to have obtained, or expect to obtain, at least 70 per cent of the available marks in your final year examinations. If your institution uses the cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA) system you should normally have obtained, or expect to obtain, a GPA of at least 3.5 (out of 4) or above. For a table of equivalent qualifications from around the world please see Admissions Enquiries System under Graduate Admissions. Summary information is given below (please see Equivalence of non-UK qualifications).

Reply 3

Vlad the Frog

1

It seems that each institution has its own criteria, and it varies also with the particular program you're applying for.
You want to go to LSE ? What do you want to study ?
At the undergraduate level, ther's a lot of competition for places there so I assume it's also the case at graduate level with all the international students applying.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8405-1246616,00.html

Reply 4

shady lane

OP

16

Vlad the Frog

It seems that each institution has its own criteria, and it varies also with the particular program you're applying for.
You want to go to LSE ? What do you want to study ?
At the undergraduate level, ther's a lot of competition for places there so I assume it's also the case at graduate level with all the international students applying.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8405-1246616,00.html

I guess my problem is just claiming that 3.5 and above is equivalent to a 2:1, when it seems like it is not actually equivalent...more like a 3.2/3.3 given how much easier it seems to get a 2:1 in the UK. I mean, Prince William got a 2:1 didn't he, and apparently he's not too bright. Good ol' George W--also not bright--had a C average (2.0) at Yale...see the difference?

So if they were being fair, they would either lower the requirements for US students, or require UK students to have a First for the same program.
But I wouldn't be surprised if they purposely set foreign entrance standards higher to favor British students, being a British uni and all. And I wonder if US universities do the same thing (although our ridiculous tuition fees probably keep many international students away on their own!)

BTW I'm not sure I'm applying to LSE anymore, but if I do it's for MSc in Dev Studies. Not because of grades...I've had friends and/or relatives study at LSE, Kings, UCL, and Queen Mary...LSE is the only one that no one has liked. Don't know why (LSE people please don't attack me for that...those are my friends' opinions!!). I visited another UoL school and two people on the tour who were current LSE students urged me not to even apply to LSE. I love my current university and want to love my next one too. But it's a good school so my parents think I'm being stupid not to apply, so I just might anyway.

Reply 5

Vlad the Frog

1

LSE is very prestigious and way more important it's in London so you should apply, even if you dislike the university I think you will enjoy London. The universities aren't campus based so... BTW do you know London ?
And you will be able to visit Europe for cheap thanks to all the low cost companies.
Why didn't they like LSE ?

Reply 6

lorrybeep

13

shady lane

I guess my problem is just claiming that 3.5 and above is equivalent to a 2:1, when it seems like it is not actually equivalent...more like a 3.2/3.3 given how much easier it seems to get a 2:1 in the UK. I mean, Prince William got a 2:1 didn't he, and apparently he's not too bright. Good ol' George W--also not bright--had a C average (2.0) at Yale...see the difference?

So if they were being fair, they would either lower the requirements for US students, or require UK students to have a First for the same program.
But I wouldn't be surprised if they purposely set foreign entrance standards higher to favor British students, being a British uni and all. And I wonder if US universities do the same thing (although our ridiculous tuition fees probably keep many international students away on their own!)

BTW I'm not sure I'm applying to LSE anymore, but if I do it's for MSc in Dev Studies. Not because of grades...I've had friends and/or relatives study at LSE, Kings, UCL, and Queen Mary...LSE is the only one that no one has liked. Don't know why (LSE people please don't attack me for that...those are my friends' opinions!!). I visited another UoL school and two people on the tour who were current LSE students urged me not to even apply to LSE. I love my current university and want to love my next one too. But it's a good school so my parents think I'm being stupid not to apply, so I just might anyway.

you shouldnt take grades as measures of intelligence with only 2 examples you listed there.' Prince william had a 2.1 and apprently he's not so bright?'
lolz lets just forget about G.bush. but Bill Gates didnt even finish uni, are you saying hes dumb then.

what is fair? most universities highly praise british qualifications for a reason-high standard.there's also a reason why it takes 3 years to get a bachelor degree and 1 year for a master degree. have you ever thought maybe this is why british uni ask for more from people with foreign qualifications? I also know some people from the US and Canada. they said coming from a british background gives a student more credits when competing for a job back home.

british uni take other things into consideration too, eg. the college your coming from, the course youre doing, your references. I dont see why they cant lower the requirements for you if you are an excellent performer, but i wouldnt expect this from LSE/oxbridge. they have too much pride in themselves :biggrin:

when people say they dont like LSE, its likely because its very difficult to get a decent grade in LSE than with an equal effort elsewhere. My best friend went to LSE. she said you had to work extra hard to get a 2:1 and whoever had a first is absolutely lunatic. she had all As in Maths, accounting and economics for her Alevels. straight As 9 GCSEs. This girl's an expert at exams but i could tell she spent almost 70% of the time studying in LSE just to do alright compared to her peers. Queen mary,Kings and UCL arent that strict with marking. you could apply LSE anyway, n see what happens.

Reply 7

homoterror

The general impression I have is that universities favour foreign students to home students, because of their wallets? Your comparison between a 2.i and GPAs is probably not sensible to make, a 2.i at one British University can be massively different from a 2.i at another. But I'm out of my league when discussing postgrad apps!

Reply 8

Craigy_Boy

4

shady lane

I would say 3.6-4.0 is a first, 3.3-3.5 is 2:1, etc.

Well, it's not for you to say, I don't know who on earth you think you are.

Now, it's fine for the top UK unis to require a 3.5-3.7, but it is not equivalent to a 2:1 at all.

The reason is quite simply that, despite what you might think you or your cousins know, it is in fact harder to get a 2:1 than it is to get a US GPA below 3.5. GPAs measure things of an american candidate that British universities would not consider important in awarding an academic classification (class attendance, class participation), not to mention the very different traditions of assessment (multiple choice tests and "take home" 24 hour exams in the US verses traditional 2 hour unseen written exams in the UK and so on).

I guess my problem is just claiming that 3.5 and above is equivalent to a 2:1, when it seems like it is not actually equivalent...more like a 3.2/3.3 given how much easier it seems to get a 2:1 in the UK. I mean, Prince William got a 2:1 didn't he, and apparently he's not too bright. Good ol' George W--also not right--had a C average (2.0) at Yale...see the difference?

Wow, for a Stanford student that is a surprisingly terrible, ill-thought out and lazy argument. Does that get you a 3.7 where you study?

Do they set standards higher for foreign applicants? Seems like this is just a way to favor students from the home country heavily.

You don't seem to understand. These entrance requirements do not favour home students (just for the record, we Brits in my master's course at LSE were in the minority, there were far more foreign students, and this is a common LSE experience). They are an equalising measure to ensure that British universities take US students of a calibre on par with those educated elsewhere. The US liberal arts model, for all its advantages (and it does have many) simply does not provide the same focus of study that a European degree would. Despite your undergrad degree being 4 years, you will have only studied your minor for 2, and taken all sorts of other unrelated classes along the way, whereas although a british degree is only 3 years in total, those 3 years are focused on one field only, and that is the grounding deemed sufficient for post-graduate study.

Reply 9

Font

you do not need to be smart to get a good degree - its all about hard work. a Genius can fail if they do not put in the effort

Reply 10

shady lane

OP

16

Craigy_Boy

Well, it's not for you to say, I don't know who on earth you think you are.

I don't see why people on this website are so confrontational! I was asking a question about grade comparisons. I was not insinuating that I am the goddess of GPA comparisons.

But I have heard different numbers of what a 2:i equals from LSE, Bristol, Manchester, UCL, KCL, and SOAS. LSE has the highest number as an equivalent. So clearly they are taking liberties if everyone else has it listed as 3.2-3.3. It is very confusing for a foreign student to know what our grades mean if every school says something different. So I just wanted to see if anyone had anectodotal experience of top UK schools favoring UK students. Seems like the answer is no. Fine! I got my answer, there is no need to be so rude and assume that I think I am the queen of the world, insult my intelligence, etc.

Reply 11

riccardo

All I know is that on a four year Masters degree here, where the 3rd year can be spent in America, it is spent in fourth year classes in America. This suggests that after 3 years of study in Britain the same body of knowledge has been acquired as in four in America. Obviously this is more intense, maybe that is why you need to do less brilliantly on a British degree than in an American one in order to gain admission to a graduate programme here, if your comparisons are correct.

Reply 12

shady lane

OP

16

riccardo

All I know is that on a four year Masters degree here, where the 3rd year can be spent in America, it is spent in fourth year classes in America. This suggests that after 3 years of study in Britain the same body of knowledge has been acquired as in four in America. Obviously this is more intense, maybe that is why you need to do less brilliantly on a British degree than in an American one in order to gain admission to a graduate programme here, if your comparisons are correct.

That doesn't really make sense. If you spend your 3rd year in UK doing what Americans do in the 4th year, everyone would still have had the same education at the end of their degree, right?

Also, the difference between the systems is that US grading is cumulative. If you have one bad term, or a few professors who grade very tough, it can be quite difficult to get your GPA up. So even if your GPA is 3.7 in your major subject, your cumulative might be 3.4 because of some poor marks in a science requirement, or a rough transition to college in your first year, etc. In the US grad school admissions system, they judge highly on test scores (GRE, GMAT, MCAT, LSAT), so that can make up for deficiencies in your GPA. But there is no such mechanism in the UK for foreign students, with the exception of economics courses at LSE.

Anyway, these debates over whose education is better are so tedious. Everyone has their own opinions. In my experience studying abroad at Oxford, I did not find the work challenging at all. I go to Stanford and I think Stanford classes are harder both in what they expect of students and in how exams and essays are marked. But I think UK students read much much more than US students and know all of the major thinkers in the fields at the end of their degree. If I were an employer, I would favor the UK student for research and academia, but favor the American for finance, marketing, etc. It's depth of knowledge vs. critical thinking and project-oriented education. Both can be good for different things.

And before people want to have angry responses, look how lovely and diplomatic I was. I am not saying UK students are stupid or that UK schools are bad...I am just relaying my experience and opinions. I do not need proof or facts because that's just how I feel.

Reply 13

riccardo

No, many of us do 4 year degrees for undergraduate here. My degree will be 4 years long anyway.

Reply 14

saz_1989

2

American universities are very different. It is easier to do well. LSE is one of the top universities along with Oxbridge and I know for a fact it's really really difficult to get a 2i at Cambridge compared to lesser universities.

Reply 15

Elles

17

shady lane

In my experience studying abroad at Oxford, I did not find the work challenging at all.

were you a 'visiting student' or a summer school student as opposed to reading for an entire degree though?

the visiting students don't just slip into the work their subject/year counterparts are doing at Oxford - it's an entirely different programme, so the standard aren't necessarily comparable. apparently. :smile:

Reply 16

shady lane

OP

16

Elles

were you a 'visiting student' or a summer school student as opposed to reading for an entire degree though?

the visiting students don't just slip into the work their subject/year counterparts are doing at Oxford - it's an entirely different programme, so the standard aren't necessarily comparable. apparently. :smile:

I was a visiting student, with Oxford lecturers and tutors. The tutor would write a report to my uni saying what marks I would get if I were an Oxford student, and then my uni turned that into grades. So at the end of the term, I met with each tutor and they said, "if you were an oxford student you would receive an alpha" or whatever. I don't see why they would just give out all high marks to visiting students just for fun, especially since several of my friends who studied as visiting students in Oxford have gotten great recommendations for graduate school in the UK from their Oxford tutors.

Reply 17

Pigmy Goat

my friend was american and her education was worse than uk

Reply 18

Elles

17

shady lane

I was a visiting student, with Oxford lecturers and tutors...

no need to be so defensive!

i was just wondering. & imho, the fact that you were on a designated 'visiting students' scheme means that you can't necessarily extrapolate from that how "challenging" a whole degree there would be.
i.e. visiting students don't sit any public exams, as far as i know?

I don't see why they would just give out all high marks to visiting students just for fun, especially since several of my friends who studied as visiting students in Oxford have gotten great recommendations for graduate school in the UK from their Oxford tutors.

did i actually say they did? :confused:

i just commented that the standards aren't necessarily comparable. although now you come to ask - a cynic might suggest the financial aspect in answer to that? :wink:

as well as the fact it seems to be recognised academics aren't necessarily the sole purpose & benefit of such visiting schemes.

Reply 19

riccardo

Everybody on this site seems to take unnecessary offence at erm... everything :confused:

UK vs US grade discrimination?

Related discussions

Articles for you