This discussion is no longer active so you won't be able to reply.Check out other Related discussions

# 59.4 2:1 or 2:2

Hi. I am 3rd year student of University of York. I got overall 60% from 2nd year and 59 percent from 3rd year. According to handbook, the final result will be decided according to the ratio of 40:60 and the equal will be my final result. In this case, my grade should be 59.4 which is a 2:2. However, I read progression rules in the ‘Guide to University’s Rules for Progression’, it said the ratio will be changed if that might have the award becomes better. The content in the guide is as following :If your award mark is more than 0.5 percentage points but less than 2 percentage points away from the above class boundary, we look to see if you would have a higher classification if we apply a different ratio to the weighting of the stages. Example Stage 2 mark= 59 Stage 3 mark = 41 Programme mark using 2:3 ratio = 48.2 Programme mark using 1:1 ratio = 50 Programme mark using 1:2 ratio = 47 The mark of 48 will appear on the transcript. As the 1:1 ratio mark is 50, you will be awarded a lower second-class degree. So if the above mention account is really the case, then in case of 1:1 my final will be 59.5 or 59.6 in the ratio of 1:1 or 3:2 ( literally 2:2 but will bump up to 2:1) . I feel really confused now.
Sorryi dont have much advice but i have a general comment

This ridiculous grade inflation is getting out of hand. We are talking about universites here changing around the contributions towards degrees in the 2nd and 3rd yearto allow students to get higher classifications

This is just proposterous, and this is only one of the many techniques that are in use by universitiesto bump peoples classifications up

Im sorrybut if someone gets a 2:2, they should be awarded 2:2. None of this rubbish tampering please. Is there any surpise at the ridiculous amounts of students getting a 2:1 and a first

Oh my days. This needs to stop
York's borderline rules are pretty simple. Normal stage weighting is 2:3 (stage 2 to Stage 3). If you are within 2 marks of the classification boundary then alternative weightings of 1:1 or 1:2 are considered. If either would raise the classification then you get the higher classification (your award mark always remains the 2:3 weighting).
Other universities use all sorts of subjective 'special cases/extenuating circumstances' considerations for raising award which could be considered unfair.

Universities have always had secondary and in some cases tertiary rules for classification and to suggest this is a new thing is rather naive.
Original post by jms2000
No they don’t. St. Andrews explicitly states in its regulations that there are no discretionary boundaries - there’s one calculation and that’s it. As it should be in my opinion