Previous OU Study Grant vs SLC elligibility?

shegirl

Exactly.OU is very well taught,almost too taught in my opinion but still! Normal uni is very different with a huge workload and I do wonder why someone who failed first year of uni twice and then manages to pass OU modules (yet states it's extremely difficult) then decides they're first class material,will sail through first year of uni and it will be easier than OU...

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

I second that comment.

Although it was a long time ago I studied social science based subjects for 4 years with the OU, whilst working full time and running a home and raising my son single handedly. I consistently got 1st class passes.

I decided that I wanted to study law, which wasn't available with the OU in those days, so I successfully applied for a place at a normal uni - I didn't have the necessary A levels but they accepted my OU passes instead which was great for me.

But i can tell you without any shadow of a doubt the work at the 'normal' uni was far more demanding. We had to do our own research (no internet then so hours and hours spent in the law library) and turn up to lectures, seminars etc. And although the pass grade for a 1st was lower than with the OU, actually achieving those marks was more difficult. I ended up with a 2:1 and was very happy with my decision to go to an 'normal' uni. But don't expect it to be easier than the OU!

melancholly

just to add that when marking, people tend to make categorical decisions about whether something is a 1st, 2:1, 2:2, 3rd or fail, then decide if it's high, middle or low. then you go to the marking scheme and put down whatever percentage it says for that grade. some places have firsts as 72, 75, 78 while others have 75, 90 and 100. if it's just into a first you go with whatever percentage the uni uses. having different cut offs makes pretty much no difference except that at some places, a high first can pull up an average by more (although a lot of unis do it on number of modules in each category rather than an absolute average).

i really think any discussion of the cut offs being easier based on the specific numbers is missing the point somewhat!

GothicStirling

melancholly wrote: »

i really think any discussion of the cut offs being easier based on the specific numbers is missing the point somewhat!

QFT.

I remember when I started at Stirling, it was like 'you mean I've got to go to the library and find it myself? LOL

Of course now, I know to use the library alongside the material the OU supply.

The only thing I can fault the OU for is their referencing system which is far too simplistic. When faced with the Harvard Referencing, its a reality check.

Oldernotwiser

shegirl wrote: »

Exactly.OU is very well taught,almost too taught in my opinion but still! Normal uni is very different with a huge workload and I do wonder why someone who failed first year of uni twice and then manages to pass OU modules (yet states it's extremely difficult) then decides they're first class material,will sail through first year of uni and it will be easier than OU...

I am so glad that you were the one to point this out rather than me!

lee1985

shegirl wrote: »

Exactly.OU is very well taught,almost too taught in my opinion but still! Normal uni is very different with a huge workload and I do wonder why someone who failed first year of uni twice and then manages to pass OU modules (yet states it's extremely difficult) then decides they're first class material,will sail through first year of uni and it will be easier than OU...

Wonders may never cease to amaze you, eh.

lee1985

Taiko wrote: »

Might be worth sticking to the OU. Face to face, people may be more inclined to punch you in the face.

Thanks for the subtle dig.

You're right, but only morons like you.

lee1985

GothicStirling wrote: »

QFT.

I remember when I started at Stirling, it was like 'you mean I've got to go to the library and find it myself? LOL

Of course now, I know to use the library alongside the material the OU supply.

The only thing I can fault the OU for is their referencing system which is far too simplistic. When faced with the Harvard Referencing, its a reality check.

Not sure what you mean? I interpret it as the OU referencing system is easy but the Harvard Referencing is difficult to follow? But the OU uses the Harvard Referencing system. Nonetheless I find it easy to use as I've never used other referencing systems before. But I guess you get used to it.

lee1985

shegirl wrote: »

What is it you found so 'extremely difficult' about getting mediocre grades with OU and why do you seem sure that you'd get around the same,but leading to higher classification,at a normal uni?

Make sure you are prepared.My experience of OU and what I see many others doing (although on some courses I know it takes more),is that myself and others could read the given book (you won't have it all handed to you like that at uni) in a short time,watch a DVD or listen to an audio if you could be bothered,write an essay in a short time and get high grades.It's why I got fed up.Just remember the differences,workload and study and research skills that aren't as used in some OU courses (no way could you read one book for normal uni,only reference one book and get a decent grade).

What have you and will you be studying?Look into the differences fully to see what is best for you.

I won't disrespect the open uni as there is a lot to be said for it,but I have seen sides that put me off personally,but there are different positive qualities stemming from both type of degree study.

Don't expect it to be easier to achieve a first at normal uni though!!

To be honest, I expect it will be easier, but that's my opinion.

I failed the first year through a bad choice. The course content wasn't as anticipated, I received high marks for 11 of the 12 modules, the one I consistently failed on was Java, of which I had zero previous experience. I found it very hard to grasp, so decided to change to a more IT based course, and passed with ease, but didn't go into the second year because I thought it would be great to leave University to spend more time with my other half.

But we all make daft decisions at some point.

shegirl

lee1985 wrote: »

To be honest, I expect it will be easier, but that's my opinion.

I failed the first year through a bad choice. The course content wasn't as anticipated, I received high marks for 11 of the 12 modules, the one I consistently failed on was Java, of which I had zero previous experience. I found it very hard to grasp, so decided to change to a more IT based course, and passed with ease, but didn't go into the second year because I thought it would be great to leave University to spend more time with my other half.

But we all make daft decisions at some point.

Then you're rather daft.But,in all honesty,given your attitude on here towards others,your inability to listen to anything,your lack of comprehension skills and the fact you think nobody understands what you've blatantly said,your daft 'opinion' doesn't surprise me in the slightest!!!

shegirl

lee1985 wrote: »

Not sure what you mean? I interpret it as the OU referencing system is easy but the Harvard Referencing is difficult to follow? But the OU uses the Harvard Referencing system. Nonetheless I find it easy to use as I've never used other referencing systems before. But I guess you get used to it.

OU uses several referencing systems depending on each module.But,when you only have to read the book (or books for each part of each module) they send you to get a first then there isn't really much referencing to be done and there certainly isn't much use of ways of referencing different authorities/books/journal articles etc etc