How are third and pass degrees regarded these days?

melancholly

elisebutt65 wrote:

Personally I think it's a lot harder dealing with the intangible business stuff as science seems to be a lot cleaner - IYKWIM??? You do an experiment and it either works or it doesn't, gravity never changes, the speed of light and sound are pretty much constant, Shroedingers cat is dead (or is it?)
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

i think whenever you get to a high level in any subject, people start to disagree. and with any experimental result, it's all in the interpretation!! the 'interesting' stuff is always the contraversial stuff!
(and i'm a scientist, so i am biased in thinking that it's not easier )

anewman

I wouldn't aim for any type of a classification. Just do the best you can. Sometimes there is some predictability if you know all your results and have your exams, you know what you can aim for then. But otherwise you can only aim to do your best.

I think it would be best to keep what other people think out of the list of reasons to do a masters. If you do it you do it for yourself and because it helps your employment prospects and so on. There's no point throwing a few thousand down the drain.

I can appreciate some of whats being said about the whole ability to write essays and do exams and so on not always being reflective of ability. If I was asked to do all my exams and essay questions verbally I would have a third or fail, but as I am better with writing I managed to scrape a first. Unfortunately writing and reading is what most of university is about.

studentphil

I think the really odd thing is no matter how unhappy I feel about my studies I could never tell my tutors as they just are the sort of people that are very judgemental on weakness. I find them some of the the most impersonal and romote people I have ever known.

elisebutt65

anewman wrote:

I can appreciate some of whats being said about the whole ability to write essays and do exams and so on not always being reflective of ability. If I was asked to do all my exams and essay questions verbally I would have a third or fail, but as I am better with writing I managed to scrape a first. Unfortunately writing and reading is what most of university is about.

LOL - If I had to do it orally - I'd get A++'s all the time - The one I did get was for my seminars - such a gobby and opinionated cow :rotfl: :rotfl:

That's what I love about my classes and lectures - we're also marked for participation in class and can't just sit there like lemons listening to them drone on.

Think that why there were a few fails this year as well, cos a lot of them couldn't be !!!!d to turn up and got marked down for absence.

studentphil

My tutors to me are strangers that I could never talk to about anything to be really honest. Me and them share no common ground at all and they are just strangers to me.

elisebutt65

studentphil wrote:

My tutors to me are strangers that I could never talk to about anything to be really honest. Me and them share no common ground at all and they are just strangers to me.

Aww that's really sad. I get on with all my tutors and we all went out together when we went on a field trip to Prague. It's probably the age thing cos I'm about the same age as most of them.
They're all really approachable tho to all the students and they really come across as wanting us to do well. There's so much encouragement it's hard to see why peeps fail really.

pavlovs_dog

studentphil wrote:

My tutors to me are strangers that I could never talk to about anything to be really honest.

ive experienced both sides of this coin. doing a joint honours degree, where one subject was unpopular (ergo small department where everyone knew everyone) and another where you were just a face in the crowd (the only reason any of the tutors knew my name was becuase i was on the staff/student panel)

studentphil

elisebutt65 wrote:

Aww that's really sad. I get on with all my tutors and we all went out together when we went on a field trip to Prague. It's probably the age thing cos I'm about the same age as most of them.
They're all really approachable tho to all the students and they really come across as wanting us to do well. There's so much encouragement it's hard to see why peeps fail really.

Lets see one moaned about having to do SEN training openly in a lecture, one is so frightened of the word disability he will not even talk about it.
Others moan if people can not understand readings and set hard exams just out of being wicked, so what is there to like about them?

wigginsmum

melancholly wrote:

i think whenever you get to a high level in any subject, people start to disagree. and with any experimental result, it's all in the interpretation!! the 'interesting' stuff is always the contraversial stuff!
(and i'm a scientist, so i am biased in thinking that it's not easier )

Very true - my degree was in French and German but particularly focussing on medieval literature. There was no right or wrong answer, just the ability to interpret the text and argue your point.

Barcode

It's surprisingly difficult to get a third at my university, it would mean consistently scoring between 30-40 on everything. If that happens, you're simply doing the wrong subject or are stupid. If you have personal difficulties, then take a break and come back when you're feeling better.

I have strong reservations about the current classification system. A 2:1 may be 'standard', but there is a big difference in ability between somebody who achieves an average of 61, and somebody with an average of 69. Yet, some people will treat their degree as being the same since they are both 2:1's. Similarly with other classifications. A 59 is a bit better than a 55 or 50. Far better to show the breakdown of marks in my view.