Graduate Jobs, is it worth applying ?????

marisa

I have got a 1st class degree in a technical subject, worked lots of diff jobs, voluntary placements, bit of travel etc. Everything they say employers want, and I am struggling to find a graduate placement, so am temping instead.

I wouldn't like to be in the place of having a 2:2, not that there is anything wrong with it, I think Uni grades don't count for much as the difficulty and workload varies so much subject to subject Uni to Uni.

It does seem unfair, but so many people are looking for places on graduate schemes, if you ain't the best of the best, you have to find another way in.

The_One_Who

SUPERMCNATURAL wrote: »

i have one observation though, many posters have said if you got a 2:2, you must be markably less academic than someone with a 2:1, having looked at her grades again, can you honestly say, for example, someone who receives 58.% compared to someone who gets 60% that there is a huge difference between these two students??????

It's not quite as simple as that, I'm afraid. The jump between a 58 and a 60 or a 68 and a 70, is quite large. What makes something of a first class standard is very different to something of a upper second class.

aqueoushumour01 wrote: »

maybe he or she could go back for a masters. will be difficult getting on a grad scheme with 2:2.

Sadly, even with a Masters, the 2.2 could still hinder, and that's if they can even get on to a Masters degree programme with a 2.2. There is also the fact that they would most likely be funding the entire year themselves, unless they want to take out a CDL.

SUPERMCNATURAL

marisa, just wanted to say i didnt think all grads with a 1st were like that lol, hope you werent offended by that, was just an example my uncle gave

Torby

while I agree, experience and ability and many other things come into play, it's so easy to fall at the first hurdle...just check out any law firm that offers training contracts (or did before the cutbacks)...if you don't meet their criteria...you don't get to the next stage...

marisa

SUPERMCNATURAL wrote: »

marisa, just wanted to say i didnt think all grads with a 1st were like that lol, hope you werent offended by that, was just an example my uncle gave

I can't see anything to be offended by (did I miss something :think: ) :cool:

I think the reason they put the 2:1 on it is to try and cut out the majority of the coasters. Not everyone with a 2.2 is a coaster, but you have far more coasters at that level than above, and you have to put the bar somewhere.

However from my exp, anyone can get a degree, lots in my class managed to pass a software developing degree at various grades up to and including firsts, and they couldn't program a calculator!

This means you can have one grad with a 2:2 who can do the actual job really well, but wasn't great at referencing and writing reports up, or someone who just got a 2:1 and paid and got lucky blagging it on presentation day.

So degrees themself (and the grades to an extent) proove nothing, but they are hoping by placing the grade bar high enough they ill cut out at least the majority of the useless ones and be left with some ok and some good candidates to pick from.

Doesn't work though, they should scrap it, judge application forms on skills and life experienced, then an interview that includes either a test on can they do the work, or a unpaid days trail.

Job experience is another one, where people who were rubbish at role A still have it o their CV and can walk into another Role A job, yet someone potentially amazing at it doesn't have any exp so they can't get any!

Blacksheep1979

marisa wrote: »

Doesn't work though, they should scrap it, judge application forms on skills and life experienced, then an interview that includes either a test on can they do the work, or a unpaid days trail.

Do you know how much it costs to interview someone?

For example a larger company will generally put you up overnight (if needs be) and pay your travel costs - this can easily run to several hundred pounds. Add in 2-4 days of interviews with up to 8 people interviewing you each day and you've got 4 man days cost as well. These people will frequently be fairly senior and if you factor all costs to the company this interview process can cost several thousand pounds.

Their view will be the chance of taking someone on with a 2:2 will be say 2% and 2:1 10% therefore opening up the catchment to people with 2:2s increases the cost fivefold - you may doubt this but there's a reason all the major large companies set the boundaries at this point (as in a 2:2 doesn't filter out enough people).

Rosie75

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

I'll call bull on that - both Universities I've attended (both redbrick so that may be the issue here) have given marks over 80%

The last university I worked at didn't give out marks over 80 (assessment was simply marked out of 80, rather than as a %). My current university defines work over 80 as "approaching publishable standard". Both are top-10 universities (but not redbricks).

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Rosie75 wrote: »

I assume this is the OU? The marking scale is simply different, not harder. A lot of universities don't even (or very rarely) give out marks over 80.

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

I'll call bull on that - both Universities I've attended (both redbrick so that may be the issue here) have given marks over 80%

Same Quality Assurance people - same standard, and apparently monitored much more than with other Universities - according to the lecturers who have more than one job, they are subject to far more scrutiny and a more rigorous marking scheme with the OU.

To quote from the Complete University Guide:


Teaching standards

'Of the 24 subjects assessed by the Quality Assurance Agency, 17 were placed in the top ‘Excellent' category.
The Open University has been highly ranked for overall satisfaction in all three of the National Student Surveys to date.
The OU is one of only two universities in England to have been awarded the leadership of four Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning by the Higher Education Funding Council for England.'

And the average quality of the research produced by the OU is actually rated higher than Oxbridge.

Rosie75

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

Same Quality Assurance people - same standard

Yes, I understand that - I'm not saying that a first at the OU is not the same as any other top university. I'm simply pointing out that marking schemes are different in virtually every university. If students had to average 80 at the University I work at now in order to get a first, no one in my department would have got a first in the last ten years (at least!). This discrepancy is actually a huge problem for students who want to go on to postgraduate study - or it was until the research councils changed their funding system to block funding. Since the AHRC (and, I assume, other research councils as well) can't or won't distinguish between a university which effectively marks out of 80, and one which marks out of 100, students in the former kind of university end up losing out in funding competitions.

Strapped

If they apply, they probably won't get the job. But if they don't apply, then they definitely won't get it. The only thing they have to loose is time and effort, and that's only an issue of they have "other things" to apply for instead.

It's not easy getting your first grad job but most people find a fit eventually.