Anonymous #1
#21
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#21
(Original post by InArduisFouette)
You really are demonstrating your ignorance here

marking in HE, as it is as GCSE , A level and FE qualifications is criteria based , with an element of norm referenced minor modification to ensure consistency year to year
See I never knew that - I'm glad I started this thread now as I'm starting to gain an understanding regarding my initial question. I genuinely always just believed that raw marks were all that contributed to a degree classification. That's how KCL portrayed it when I studied there.
0
reply
Anonymous #1
#22
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#22
(Original post by EierVonSatan)
The score isn't a true percentage, so try not to think of it as ''getting more than half wrong''. In many subjects/tasks/assignments, getting above 85% isn't a thing, and neither is getting 15% so it is misleading in that sense.

The classification system is not fit for purpose on it's own any longer, in my opinion.
Just figured that out from responses to this thread, thank you! My uni really did project classification as a true percentage type of deal which is why I was struggling to understand. For example, people on my course could never grasp why it was nobody could reach 90%+. In the end, nobody openly stated that they had achieved this score for any piece of work so there's obvious flaws.

I agree with you. Seems very outdated.
0
reply
Anonymous #1
#23
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#23
(Original post by bones-mccoy)
It depends on the masters itself in terms of worth

At my uni, a distinction is 70%, merit is 60-69%, an accredited pass is 50-59% and a regular, University pass is 40-49%. So whilst you only need 40% to pass the degree, you need at least 50% in every module to end up with an accredited pass, meaning you can then go onto further training in order to become a psychologist. Whilst 40% clearly isn't something anyone aims for, it doesn't mean you can't do anything with the degree, just means you're more limited in terms of a career.
Oh wow this makes a lot of sense. I did totally disregard the individual modules in my line of thinking. You're a psychologist? Thats cool. Is this a similar deal with medical degrees then? For your last point I do agree, and I don't want anyone to think I'm looking down on a 3rd class. Degrees aren't everything and it just means a different path in some professions.
0
reply
nexttime
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 week ago
#24
(Original post by Anonymous)
I picked 50% because that would mean someone has passed and met the requirements to prove they're capable of that level of study for at least half of the programme of learning.

Hypothetical: If I was training on a medical course and say needed to learn and pass exams in 10 areas of the body, but only passed 4, that demonstrates I don't know the majority. If I passed 5, then at least what I don't have sufficient knowledge in is equally balanced by that which I do.

Surrey at 50%???
My understanding was that all brick universities held the same grading system - probably why I'm not making much sense.
That just makes no sense. You're ok with your doctors knowing nothing about 50% of the body? Lol, ok.

Some exams are very hard, they can have a lower pass mark. Some exams are very easy, so you need say 90% to even pass. Its really not a hard concept.

Unis grade their own exams, they can do whatever they want really. There is a loose regulator but its more concerned with fairness within the course, not policing what grades are given out. That, combined with the government's ingenious idea of trying to make unis compete with one another, is the reason the the number of firsts has exploded.
0
reply
Anonymous #1
#25
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#25
(Original post by nexttime)
That just makes no sense. You're ok with your doctors knowing nothing about 50% of the body? Lol, ok.

Some exams are very hard, they can have a lower pass mark. Some exams are very easy, so you need say 90% to even pass. Its really not a hard concept.

Unis grade their own exams, they can do whatever they want really. There is a loose regulator but its more concerned with fairness within the course, not policing what grades are given out. That, combined with the government's ingenious idea of trying to make unis compete with one another, is the reason the the number of firsts has exploded.
But that's exactly my point!!!!! You can't pass a medical course without knowing and passing the majority, so why should someone say they're degree-level in biology but only score a 3rd? A 3rd doesn't equal knowing the majority. BUT......

As you and others int he thread have highlighted to me - I didn't understand the grading formats universities used when I first launched this thread. I honestly believed that it was all raw mark and percentage determined as that's how my uni portrayed it to us. I know now that this isn't the case so I do thank you and others on the thread.
0
reply
nexttime
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 week ago
#26
(Original post by Anonymous)
But that's exactly my point!!!!! You can't pass a medical course without knowing and passing the majority, so why should someone say they're degree-level in biology but only score a 3rd? A 3rd doesn't equal knowing the majority. BUT......
???

Yes, there are medical exams where the pass mark is less than 50%. But regardless: your position that 50.0% ok you're fine to pass but 49.9% oh no on no exam could that ever pass... just makes no sense. But if you can't see that already I don't really have anything more to say.

As you and others int he thread have highlighted to me - I didn't understand the grading formats universities used when I first launched this thread. I honestly believed that it was all raw mark and percentage determined as that's how my uni portrayed it to us. I know now that this isn't the case so I do thank you and others on the thread.
Its great that you've learned something, but I don't see why that is relevant to your thread at all. Is it because you've convinced yourself that all 3rds are >50% raw mark just graded downwards?
0
reply
Anonymous #1
#27
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#27
(Original post by nexttime)
Its great that you've learned something, but I don't see why that is relevant to your thread at all. Is it because you've convinced yourself that all 3rds are >50% raw mark just graded downwards?
No, what I'm saying initially I believed that 3rd class degrees were as a result of not meeting the minimum pass requirements for approximately 60% of the course programme. Clearly that's incorrect and it isn't just based on raw marks.

Thanks again for your guidance, I feel I have a better understanding now. I do feel the current classification system is a little outdated though but that's in general and not surrounding 3d class degrees.
0
reply
Catherine1973
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 week ago
#28
I got a 52% in One essay, it didn’t mean I had 50% wrong, it just meant I hadn’t gone into much depth that they wanted. It was technically correct though.
Lots of subjects can be like that if not science or maths. This was law.
So possible to get lots of 50s but still understand the subject, just not go into much depth.
0
reply
Anonymous #1
#29
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#29
(Original post by Catherine1973)
I got a 52% in One essay, it didn’t mean I had 50% wrong, it just meant I hadn’t gone into much depth that they wanted. It was technically correct though.
Lots of subjects can be like that if not science or maths. This was law.
So possible to get lots of 50s but still understand the subject, just not go into much depth.
This is another really valid point. When I started this thread I didn't take into account that the majority of folk don't even see the 80%-100% category so yeah, 50% is a good standard of knowledge.
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#30
Report 1 week ago
#30
(Original post by Anonymous)
I never considered this. Makes sense.

Last paragraph - poorly structured by myself. What I mean is, to obtain a 3rd class degree you need to pass 40% of the course... why does that allow someone to get the qualification when they didn't pass a majority/at least 50% like with a 2:2.

At Masters level, there's pass, merit, distinction. Anything below a pass leads to a certificate. I know this doesn't equally translate to a 2:2, 2:1, 1st but in the eyes of graduate entry jobs a 2:2 seems to be the 'pass' equivalent for job consideration in a lot of fields.

I hope that makes more sense.
Because tradition has always had the pass mark at 40%. I really cant see why anyone would be bothered with this.

You sound like the millionaire who resents someone else having £1.
0
reply
mnot
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 week ago
#31
(Original post by Anonymous)
My understanding is that if you get a 3rd class degree it isn't going to aid your career progression all too much as any 'degree-entry' jobs normally look for a 2:1 up.

Why are third class degrees a thing then? I have friends who struggled enough after getting a 2:2.

Why should anyone who only gets 40% have a degree (i.e. having not met requirements for that level of study for the majority of the course), surely that diminishes the value of one? Is it because of this that people see Masters degree grading more valuable as its pass (2:2), merit (2:1), distinction (1)?
It’s basically a soft fail.

You still need a system to classify where students end up.

Personally id rather just move to a GPA system.
0
reply
Anonymous #1
#32
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#32
(Original post by 999tigger)
Because tradition has always had the pass mark at 40%. I really cant see why anyone would be bothered with this.

You sound like the millionaire who resents someone else having £1.
I'm not bothered, seems graduate employment opportunities are.

I didn't mean to come across in that way. I have mentioned elsewhere on the thread that I don't see anything wrong with a 3rd class, a degree is a degree, I just wondered why its not recognised by the majority of graduate level opportunities.
0
reply
Anonymous #2
#33
Report 1 week ago
#33
It’s like asking why there’s D and E’s at Alevel. People have to be graded whether they get low or high scores. I mean the first benchmark is 70%, (although sometime a little lower due to scaling )
Over 70 doesn’t really get accounted for except for yearly prizes & for those jobs that care about transcripts or students going for a masters.
Also it can mean a student can progress and graduate with classmates without having to resit lots of exam, graduate later in the year & Get on with life.
A third still means a student has gotten a degree. At my university a student who had taken TW for two years due to severe mental health issues came back this year & got a third & was a massive achievement, rather then dropping out or failing the course they got a degree.
0
reply
bones-mccoy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 week ago
#34
(Original post by Anonymous)
Oh wow this makes a lot of sense. I did totally disregard the individual modules in my line of thinking. You're a psychologist? Thats cool. Is this a similar deal with medical degrees then? For your last point I do agree, and I don't want anyone to think I'm looking down on a 3rd class. Degrees aren't everything and it just means a different path in some professions.
I'm currently finishing my MSc in Forensic Psychology so I'm getting there

The way Forensic Psychology works is this you need an accredited undergraduate degree to get onto an accredited MSc to start the Stage 2/doctorate to become eligible for HCPC registration to work as a practioner psychlogist. So it's jumping through hoops in some ways.

And that's why it's so important for me to get over 50% in everything, as otherwise I won't be able to apply to start the Stage 2. There's plenty of careers out there for those with an unacccredited MSc, such as intervention faciliators, offender managers, probation officers, you just won't be able to become an actual Psychologist without the Stage 2 or doctorate. I know some people on unaccredited MSc's then do the doctorate to get HCPC registration but the accredited MSc cuts out a year.
Last edited by bones-mccoy; 1 week ago
0
reply
_gcx
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 week ago
#35
(Original post by Anonymous)
Yeah I agree about the inflation - it's not something I've ever considered before really. All I know from my parents is that when they were at university-level age, 'barely anyone' went as it wasn't as accessible as it is now.

70% = 1st
60% = 2:1
50% = 2:2.

Why is there an option to award someone with a degree when they don't pass at least half of it to the required standard?

Is a 3rd class degree now outdated? Should we look into 80% + as a 1:1 and 70% as a 1:2 etc. It's an interesting point for debate I think.
That'd definitely make a first exceptional, but would also mean that firsts will be more or less impossible outside of the sciences. (quite a few would get one in maths though I imagine)

Also bear in mind that marks are fairly frequently curved/scaled so a final mark of 80% might not mean they actually got 80% raw and may mean they got considerably less in some cases.
0
reply
Anonymous #1
#36
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#36
(Original post by bones-mccoy)
I'm currently finishing my MSc in Forensic Psychology so I'm getting there

The way Psychology works is this you need an accredited undergraduate degree to get onto an accredited MSc to start the Stage 2/doctorate to become eligible for HCPC registration to work as a practioner psychlogist. So it's jumping through hoops in some ways.

And that's why it's so important for me to get over 50% in everything, as otherwise I won't be able to apply to start the Stage 2. There's plenty of careers out there for those with an unacccredited MSc, such as intervention faciliators, offender managers, probation officers, you just won't be able to become an actual Psychologist without the Stage 2 or doctorate. I know some people on unaccredited MSc's then do the doctorate to get HCPC registration but the accredited MSc cuts out a year.
Thats so interesting. Is the doctorate you want to apply to in forensic psychology too? Out of interest, how is forensic psychology different to criminology? is it more the science of why someone would commit a crime? You sound very driven so best of luck to you!!!
0
reply
Dechante
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 week ago
#37
I mean I guess it's like how we have D and E grades at A level like it's not the grade anyone wants but not everyone is gonna get As and Bs and there has to be a cut off point somewhere. A 3rd is a grade at the end of the day even though it's not a good one and there needs to be a way of ranking people as having just 1st, 2nds and failing would be a corrupt system.
0
reply
bones-mccoy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 week ago
#38
(Original post by Anonymous)
Thats so interesting. Is the doctorate you want to apply to in forensic psychology too? Out of interest, how is forensic psychology different to criminology? is it more the science of why someone would commit a crime? You sound very driven so best of luck to you!!!
So it's largely an option between the doctorate and the BPS Stage 2 qualification. The doctorate would be in Forensic Psychology, obviously at a uni and very research based, you'd be able to use the doctorate loan too. Whereas the Stage 2 is done via your workplace, where you'd find a registered psychologist to become your supervisor and then self-fund the qualification, but some workplaces will help you out as it means they'll end up with a more qualified employee at the end of it. I'm hoping to do the Stage 2 eventually because I want to do it as I work and I'm getting sick of academia :lol:

Criminology is more research-based, about the theories of offending behaviour and looking at patterns at why people offend. It kind of gives the foundation for the more practical side. Forensic Psychology is more about working directly with either victims or offenders in prisons, community settings or secure hospitals, looking at re-offending, running offending behaviour programmes, doing risk assessments, holding individual sessions, sitting on parole boards and sometimes even giving expert evidence in court.
Last edited by bones-mccoy; 1 week ago
0
reply
KittyN
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 week ago
#39
In many ways, percentages given for things like essays aren't "real" percentages, because the marks aren't really out of 100.
One lecturer in first year openly told us that he doesn't give marks above 85, and I think this is actually true for most lecturers.

The mark scheme for essays on my course says that an essay with a mark of 80+ is "outstanding in all respects" and "demonstrates exceptional ability". It would not be given to someone who misunderstood 20% of the material.
Even for 40-49, so a 3rd, the first sentence is "takes a basic approach to the question, using broadly appropriate material but lacking focus." So I think that still demonstrates some knowledge and ability, more than a fail would. I'm fairly sure that if 60% of the essay was actually wrong, then it would be a fail ("contains basic misunderstandings or misinterpretation, leading to many factual inaccuracies" is listed as criteria for a fail, not a 3rd).
2
reply
Reality Check
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 week ago
#40
(Original post by EierVonSatan)
The score isn't a true percentage, so try not to think of it as ''getting more than half wrong''. In many subjects/tasks/assignments, getting above 85% isn't a thing, and neither is getting 15% so it is misleading in that sense.

The classification system is not fit for purpose on it's own any longer, in my opinion.
Totally agree, and we've been saying this every year.. This year, as in most previous years, we awarded nearly 70% of our cohort a 2i, and the majority of the marks were in the 64-68 range. We had a couple of outstanding candidates, one of whom got 86, and two terrible ones who both got below 50.

We are particularly parsimonious with our I class results, but I think we've all felt for some time that the 2ii class is avoided probably more than it should be. Too much derivative, non-analytical and largely descriptive work gets 60 just through spotting one piece of 'analysis'. The full spectrum of marking needs to be used much more routinely, and marking is far too narrowly bunched in the 62-68 band. However, with the market in HE as it is now, I can imagine each and every candidate awarded a 2ii will go through a lengthy and bitter appeals process which becomes increasingly combative and resentful, often aided and abetted by the by now supposedly 'adult' student's helicopter parents, their eye firmly on that £30,000 of tuition fees.


(Original post by Anonymous)
Why is someone asking a genuine question because they don't understand something a reason for you to call them ignorant?
It isn't OK. Not at all.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

How are you feeling ahead of results day?

Very Confident (7)
4.55%
Confident (14)
9.09%
Indifferent (16)
10.39%
Unsure (37)
24.03%
Worried (80)
51.95%

Watched Threads

View All