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

Should degree classification boundaries be re-evaluated? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Given that the majority of students graduate with a 2.1, is the current system the best way to differentiate students? I just got a 2.1(as did most people i know) and it feels less valuable given that roughly 50% of graduates get a 2.1 overall.

    Don't get me wrong i'm not complaining about the current system but it wouldn't make more sense to have more grade bands for the higher marks. e.g. 1.1 and 1.2(both first class honours); 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 (all second class honours).

    So for example, a 1.1 would be 75+, a 1.2 would be 70+, a 2.1 would be 65+, a 2.2 would be 55+ and a 2.3 would be 50+. Plus anything above 40 would be a 3rd/pass.

    Given the current employment situation (especially for graduates) it would make more sense if degrees had a more comprehensive grading system.

    Does anyone else agree? or do you think the current system is the best way to do it?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    See, I think splitting the classifications further is just needless complication (generally). Employers don't always know exactly what they even translate to now.

    I think that sort of grading is very good for academic routes - where academic performance correlates or is a necessary prerequisite. It's important to distinguish between the most academically capable.

    For employment in the real world I don't think there's that much difference between two candidates (i.e. 67 vs 63) in terms of their ability to do the job, based on academics. It doesn't really correlate, especially when degrees can be irrelevant to the working area [unlike a PhD in the same field]. Their own assessment centres and interviews will still weight out when they make the end decision. They probably want the person with certain qualities and a bit of common sense, more than anything.

    I think there's a bit of a buffer in the current system too, if you have a poor module or a bad day. The narrower you make the gaps the more likely one module can influence more heavily. It will depend on how they classify at each university, but as that's also different and even the degree content can vary significantly so I don't know, maybe the current system offers a bit of wiggle room?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I'd like to see a way of differentiating between a low and high 2:1, but I think the other classifications are fine as they are.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    my gut feeling is that a gpa type system is coming in

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...ts-system.html

    presumably there'll be some sort of report on the trials after July
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Getting above 70 is difficult enough, so I don't think firsts should be further categorized.

    I agree with above poster though, seems unfair that someone who narrowly missed a 1st and someone who barely scraped a 2:1 should be put in the same boat.
 
 
 
  • 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 newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • 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.