You are Here: Home

# What is considered a 'high' first class degree? watch

1. For instance a high 2:i is 67-69.. what is a high 1st?
2. I'd imagine anything above 75.
3. Why should you care?
4. 80%+?
6. 75% + I'd say.
7. Google is wrong. I say anything above 0%...
8. (Original post by 4G_dollars)
Google is wrong. I say anything above 0%...
HURR DURR
9. hang on a second,

70 -85 is a 2:1 i.e merit
85 + is a first i.e distinction

or am i worng?

this is how the open university grade it
10. 85+% is the upper band.
11. (Original post by equinoxsolar)
hang on a second,

70 -85 is a 2:1 i.e merit
85 + is a first i.e distinction

or am i worng?

this is how the open university grade it
70+ is a first at most places.
12. Depends on the marking scheme, in some places above about 75-76 is virtually unheard of, so if most firsts there fall in the 73 and below, you could call a 74 a high first. OU uses a different system, where I went it was graded on a scale of 1-22, with 18 and above being a first. If you scored between 17.1 and 17.9, the department could choose to give you a first, and almost all firsts scored 18.9 or less. I scored 19.2, which in percentage terms is about 88ish, but thats probably (infact almost certainly) not comparable to an 88 at some of the universities which give out very few above 75. In short, its hard to generalise.
13. (Original post by equinoxsolar)
hang on a second,

70 -85 is a 2:1 i.e merit
85 + is a first i.e distinction

or am i worng?

this is how the open university grade it
I think it's only the OU that use that system.
14. I've heard one lecturer say:

100% is for the gods
90% is for the angels
80% is for a professor who's spent their entire life studying the field
70% is a very good undergrad

...on the other hand, the highest achieving student in my year got an average of 85%, including a few 100%s (?!?!), so now I don't know what to think.
15. over 100%
16. (Original post by 0404343m)
Depends on the marking scheme, in some places above about 75-76 is virtually unheard of, so if most firsts there fall in the 73 and below, you could call a 74 a high first. OU uses a different system, where I went it was graded on a scale of 1-22, with 18 and above being a first. If you scored between 17.1 and 17.9, the department could choose to give you a first, and almost all firsts scored 18.9 or less. I scored 19.2, which in percentage terms is about 88ish, but thats probably (infact almost certainly) not comparable to an 88 at some of the universities which give out very few above 75. In short, its hard to generalise.
To what extent do departments consider these differences when looking at a postgraduate applicant's academic record? I'm assuming some cases are very cut and dried, like the OU mentioned above, but I hear and have often read on here that marking in different Universities is very diverse and alot of it must be more grey.
I kind of wish I wasn't at a University where very few achieve firsts and of those that are achieved these are usually only in the 70s. Obviously I also don't want to be prejudiced about the quality of peoples' grades elsewhere.
17. (Original post by Svenjamin)
I've heard one lecturer say:

100% is for the gods
90% is for the angels
80% is for a professor who's spent their entire life studying the field
70% is a very good undergrad

...on the other hand, the highest achieving student in my year got an average of 85%, including a few 100%s (?!?!), so now I don't know what to think.
Lecturers don't half talk a load of ******** sometimes.
18. To what extent do departments consider these differences when looking at a postgraduate applicant's academic record? I'm assuming some cases are very cut and dried, like the OU mentioned above, but I hear and have often read on here that marking in different Universities is very diverse and alot of it must be more grey.
I kind of wish I wasn't at a University where very few achieve firsts and of those that are achieved these are usually only in the 70s. Obviously I also don't want to be prejudiced about the quality of peoples' grades elsewhere.
I wouldn't worry too much. I finished top of my year at Aberystwyth with an average of 75/76, so it's not only Cambridge who mark harshly. I also wouldn't necessarily say that Cam is a 'university where very few achieve firsts'. Looking at the stats for my subject (English) 22% of Cambridge English graduates receive First Class Hons whereas at Aber it's only 11%. This seems to be as it should be, considering that Cam is likely to have more capable students.
19. (Original post by Craghyrax)
To what extent do departments consider these differences when looking at a postgraduate applicant's academic record? I'm assuming some cases are very cut and dried, like the OU mentioned above, but I hear and have often read on here that marking in different Universities is very diverse and alot of it must be more grey.
I kind of wish I wasn't at a University where very few achieve firsts and of those that are achieved these are usually only in the 70s. Obviously I also don't want to be prejudiced about the quality of peoples' grades elsewhere.
It's not really as bad as you think. Durham's history department gave out firsts to something like 35% of their students one year, almost twice the level of any other university with 400+ UCAS points for its students, leading to cries within the profession of 'moving the goalposts'. Despite that, no one that year scored above 84 overall. It seemed to not affect however the rate in which their students won scholarships both internally and externally- despite having lots of firsts to pick from. Oxford and Cambridge graduates (within further study) are still amongst the best at gaining funding for various things, despite a lot of them having 'lower' scores than their counterparts at other institutions. My score at university was good, but I didn't just walk in ahead of other students because it was blindly assumed 88 here was better than 84 somewhere else. When applying to Oxford, they phoned me after seeing my results and asked for a marking scheme and if my referees could indicate where my results would place me amongst my peers. If anything like that is used at other institutions, they'll soon realise that it doesn't matter if you get 71, 77 or 89- if you're second in a year of 150 students, you're pretty damn good.
20. At Kingston, the grade boundaries sit at:

70-74 = A-
75-84 = A
85+ = A+

Basically anything above 75 is "excellent", and anything above 85 is considered "genuinely outstanding".

To be honest though, the only thing that matters is the classification, so whether you get 70 or 85 on your CV or postgraduate application form you will be putting a first down regardless.

TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: July 28, 2009
Today on TSR

Get the low down

Poll
Useful resources

## Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki