Perceptions of BA without hons?

bestpud

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I'm interested as to why you think that group work and presentations are so so important. I can see it for subjects like Business Studies but don't see any place for them in more traditional academic subjects.

In my experience of presentations, most students seem to just read out things they've written in advance and I feel very strongly that group work discriminates against mature students and is rarely graded fairly.

It seems to be something employers see as a useful skill in my experience. Certainly in areas such as housing, the third sector, education (obviously!) and our local council.

Don't applicants with more traditional degrees need, even more, to demonstrate what they can can do?

Errata suggested people who could not cope with exams would not cope with pressure in the workplace either, and, while I see the point, I don't think it is necessarily the case. Also, there are other useful skills an exam cannot demonstrate.

For that reason, I feel they should be one assessment among others iyswim?

Don't get me started on group work! I hate it and quite agree!! I was just using it as an example.

I imagine the students who 'read' their presentations would receive a low grade though? High grades = better student? But then, I suppose employers don't want a breakdown of the award anyway?

I hadn't thought about cheating though, and that must be an important consideration for universities today.

It is rife in some departments at my uni - sports students are the worst, I am led to believe! They make them submit an electronic copy of their dissertations now, so they can scan them!

We were told by the psychology department that they still use predominately exams for that reason too.

I don't know the answer but I do feel final exams may not be the best method of assessing academic worth, and more importantly, employability. I do think we maybe need more emphasis on them than there is now though.

Oldernotwiser

bestpud wrote: »

It seems to be something employers see as a useful skill in my experience. Certainly in areas such as housing, the third sector, education (obviously!) and our local council.

Don't applicants with more traditional degrees need, even more, to demonstrate what they can can do?

Errata suggested people who could not cope with exams would not cope with pressure in the workplace either, and, while I see the point, I don't think it is necessarily the case. Also, there are other useful skills an exam cannot demonstrate.

For that reason, I feel they should be one assessment among others iyswim?

Don't get me started on group work! I hate it and quite agree!! I was just using it as an example.

I imagine the students who 'read' their presentations would receive a low grade though? High grades = better student? But then, I suppose employers don't want a breakdown of the award anyway?

I hadn't thought about cheating though, and that must be an important consideration for universities today.

It is rife in some departments at my uni - sports students are the worst, I am led to believe! They make them submit an electronic copy of their dissertations now, so they can scan them!

We were told by the psychology department that they still use predominately exams for that reason too.

I don't know the answer but I do feel final exams may not be the best method of assessing academic worth, and more importantly, employability. I do think we maybe need more emphasis on them than there is now though.

Yes, don't let's get started on group work - the devil's work, more like!

I suppose it depends whether one signs up to the utilitarian view of education as to be about preparing people for employment - which I don't. Whilst I could see the idea of a Literature or History student doing a mini lecturer to peers, I just can't see how group work fits in with those sort of subjects, unless you're set on dumbing down.. Surely seminars are a reasonable enough example of group work, without having to go off in little groups with one or two people doing all the work?

I also wonder how many people actually have to give presentations in real life? I've had a long and varied career and have only used these skills as a lecturer and in careers work. As far as grades are concerned, I don't think that the "readers" have done particularly poorly as long as the content has been ok. I would certainly have downgraded my BTEC students if they hadn't talked off the cuff, or at the very least, with the aid of notes. Didn't seem to work like that on my last degree.

Errata

bestpud wrote: »

I would hope every HE student does it during their course, but were you graded on it?

How much did it affect your final classification?

No we weren't graded on it, it was part of applying what we were learning. If I'd been graded on it I would have got a first without breaking into a sweat !

bestpud

Errata wrote: »

No we weren't graded on it, it was part of applying what we were learning. If I'd been graded on it I would have got a first without breaking into a sweat !

Not all students would though. Some would find it very difficult, whereas they may pass an exam easily.

JoeyG

I had the same dilemma when I was at uni 10 years ago... I decided to drop my dissertation and instead found some part-time work in the field I wanted to work in after graduation.

It definitely paid off because I was offered a full-time position at the same company after I graduated, and I havent looked back since!... It may have been a different story though had I intended to continue post-grad study.

bestpud

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Yes, don't let's get started on group work - the devil's work, more like!

I suppose it depends whether one signs up to the utilitarian view of education as to be about preparing people for employment - which I don't. Whilst I could see the idea of a Literatire or History student doing a mini lecturer to peers, I just can't see how group work fits in with those sort of subjects, unless you're set on dumbing down.. Surely seminars are a reasonable enough example of group work, without having to go off in little groups with one or two people doing all the work?

I also wonder how many people actually have to give presentations in real life? I've had a long and varied career and have only used these skills as a lecturer and in careers work. As far as grades are concerned, I don't think that the "readers" have done particularly poorly as long as the content has been ok. I would certainly have downgraded my BTEC students if they hadn't talked off the cuff, or at the very least, with the aid of notes. Didn't seem to work like that on my last degree.

Whether I sign up to a utilitarian viewpoint or not, universities do! It is all about skills for the workplace. There is a retired gent on my course and it drives him potty as he has no intention of working afterwards (paid anyway; he already does various voluntary jobs). He's in his late 70s!! Most students don't learn for the love if it any more imo.

I don't know about doing a job but it certainly seems to be part of the interview process for many, and my friends have been asked if they would be able to deliver presentations - that is in the job areas I mentioned above.

The grade depends on the lecturer as well, in my experience. Some are more tolerant than others when it comes to using notes and/or reading, but, in general, you cannot get a B or above at my uni by reading a presentation.

The size of the seminar group determines the amount of small group work. Sometimes there can be nearly 30 people and it is much easier to discuss in smaller groups.

I guess it all depends on whether employers automatically assume a graduate will have done all this? Probably they do?

I only have my experience to go on so I can't make any comparisons with other, or older styles.

How many people have to sit exams as part of their job though? I can see the benefits mentioned by Errata and there is obviously less chance of cheating, but what use are they other than showing a knowledge of the subject?

If a job is directly related then it matters more though, obviously. But for a history graduate, for example, the knowledge they have of C18th Britain won't matter a jot - it is the skills they have used which matter, surely?

I think few would argue standards haven't dropped so I guess the traditional way was better; I just don't know if it fits with ethos of HE today iyswim?

It's sad really. I like that more people have the chance but we have gone too far the other way haven't we?

Oldernotwiser

bestpud wrote: »

Not all students would though. Some would find it very difficult, whereas they may pass an exam easily.

But I don't see why someone who might be a brilliant historian, for example, should be graded on his/her ability to give a presentation, particularly as someone far less competent academically, but more outgoing and confident, might be able to do it with ease.

bestpud

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

But I don't see why someone who might be a brilliant historian, for example, should be graded on his/her ability to give a presentation, particularly as someone far less competent academically, but more outgoing and confident, might be able to do it with ease.

I agree, but as I said, it isn't about proving you are a brilliant historian now - not at my uni anyway and I don't think it is all that different from many others.

It's all about proving you have the transferable skills someone has decided we need to survive in the workplace.

It is difficult to study my subject in any depth, as the system is not set up for this. It is bits of this, and bits of that, which all add up to a list of skills.

omelette451

bestpud wrote: »

Most students don't learn for the love if it any more imo.

Too true. I always thought I became a student in order to study, but knew all along I was in the minority. I've always chosen subjects because I've been interested in them and actually want to learn things, not because I've thought it would get me somewhere. In that respect I was lucky because at my particular university I was able and encouraged to study pretty much anything I wanted within my chosen field, even if it meant I was the only person doing it that year, as long as there was a tutor willing to supervise me for it. At the other end of the spectrum, my sister says that 90-95% of people in her year take at least one course in business and/or management, despite not doing anything else even remotely related, simply because they're planning to get a job in marketing or something. It's a problem that starts at school: most teachers teach the syllabus rather than the subject, so it's hardly surprising young people don't develop a love for what they study.

As for the exams vs. coursework debate, I'd be tempted to suggest that some sort of compromise would be better. I agree that 'final' exams should form the backbone of a student's grades, but dissertations and presentations, if done properly, do have a place. Some of the best students don't cope well with exams, and the psychological pressure of knowing everything rests on just a few written papers can be too much for some very bright people. If I'd had an 'off week' or been ill during my exams the only way I could have salvaged anything would have been to defer a year and take the whole lot again. That said, given the choice of all exams or none, with nothing in between, I'd always go for the exams.

Oldernotwiser

bestpud wrote: »

I agree, but as I said, it isn't about proving you are a brilliant historian now - not at my uni anyway and I don't think it is all that different from many others.

It's all about proving you have the transferable skills someone has decided we need to survive in the workplace.

It is difficult to study my subject in any depth, as the system is not set up for this. It is bits of this, and bits of that, which all add up to a list of skills.

I agree with all that you've said, having seen it myself; sometimes it almost breaks my heart to see what has been done to what was once such a wonderful education system. I feel that you need to go to one of the really good universities nowadays to get anything resembling a university education.


However, I do agree with Errata about the importance of being able to work under pressure that is tested by examinations. It also shows that a graduate can synthesize materials from a variety of sources and produce something new from them in a short time, which is a skill that anyone who has ever had to write a report will be familiar with.