How difficult is it to get above 70%?

[Deleted User]

Its a lot easier to get 1st class on science courses as your either right or wrong hence i got a 1st class in electronics at top 5 uni.

Its harder to do so in other subjects but not impossible. One girl at my uni got a 1st class in law and is now earning 6 figure wages. Im a bit jealous as im a chartered engineer and only get 24k but hopefully with my first job move i should get about 30k+.

If you want a first class degree in a arts subject you will need to go to a top uni as i believe lesser unis will be less likely to give them due to the fact that it may lose them credibility if they give top degrees to lower calibre students.

eg you would get headlines like a top uni gives a 2.2 to someone with five As at A level, while a former poly gives someone a first that got an E in history.

Gingernutmeg

Yant1 wrote: »

Its a lot easier to get 1st class on science courses as your either right or wrong hence i got a 1st class in electronics at top 5 uni.

Its harder to do so in other subjects but not impossible. One girl at my uni got a 1st class in law and is now earning 6 figure wages. Im a bit jealous as im a chartered engineer and only get 24k but hopefully with my first job move i should get about 30k+.

If you want a first class degree in a arts subject you will need to go to a top uni as i believe lesser unis will be less likely to give them due to the fact that it may lose them credibility if they give top degrees to lower calibre students.

eg you would get headlines like a top uni gives a 2.2 to someone with five As at A level, while a former poly gives someone a first that got an E in history.

I don't mean to sound rude but it really annoys me when people assume that if you're at a 'lesser uni' you are automatically a low calibre student. As a student who's on course for a first (in a social science, where it's almost as difficult to get a first as it is in the arts) I chose my uni because I felt that it was a place where, as a mature student, I'd fit in better. I could have applied to Oxford - and indeed I was encouraged to - but I felt that I'd be uncomfortable in an environment that consists of, according to the last lot of statistics, 0.8% mature students. My current uni, although a 'low calibre' institution, is made up of 33% mature students, and is far, far more racially and socially diverse than many of the highly ranked universities. That is what influenced my decision, and I believe that through my hard work, I've had an education that is as good as at other universities, in an environment where I'm surrounded by people who've also had to work hard to even get to university, and so don't take it for granted. In my field, my uni is recognised worldwide as being excellent, and again that was something that influenced my decision, and not simple snobbery about names and places. I do admit that going to a high-ranking uni can make some aspects of life easier, but for me, that's not what education is about. I'm not saying my uni is 'better' than others - heaven knows, I'd be the first to list its faults - but I don't think it's that much worse than a lot of far more highly ranked places.

A-Levels are not really a good indicator of how well you will do at university, as it's a completely different style of learning. One of my tutors second marks at a top five uni in London, and she says that the standard required for a first is broadly the same, and what differs is the proportion of students who obtain a first. At my uni, it's about 5%. 'Low calibre' universities, contrary to what you may believe, don't simply hand out firsts on a plate. I would argue that maybe it's even harder to get the really high marks at lower ranking unis, partly because it's not common and partly because they do have this fear of being seen to over-mark.

Anyway, rant over, sorry It simply annoys me that my hard work constantly gets devalued.

Bamber19

At my uni and specifically on my course there is a 70% cap "if you were to write the best essay imaginable you'd still get a 70%" according to alecturer back in first year. the worrying thing about thios is that in th esubject i do there is a high expectancy to go on and do a specific diploma, but they only run it at 1 in 3 uni's so you're competiung with more people and some of them come from universities that don't have a 70% cap so it's misleading for entrance to the diploma

TeaBoy_2

thats two people who have said their uni caps the top mark. i dont believe that for a second. surely they dont do that?

3plus1

TeaBoy wrote: »

thats two people who have said their uni caps the top mark. i dont believe that for a second. surely they dont do that?

For the record, I really don't appreciate being accused of being a liar. I've always tried to make useful contributions to this site and have no reason not to tell the truth. You have no idea who I am in real life, and as such, I have nothing to gain by disclosing this information.

I am studying foreign languages at one of the UK's most prestigious universities, and I know for a fact from first hand experience, that marks in core language and translation modules are capped at 80%. It is possible to get over 80% in some literature modules which are examined in English, but pretty much anything marked in a foreign langauge is capped.

I didn't make the rules.

They're stupid, but I'm not responsible.

I often think the reason why they are so reluctant to award firsts, is that a graduate with a first in languages from a top university is likely to be perceived as 'fluent' in those languages, and it's rarely the case. Most people on my course only started speaking languages at secondary school, and it takes well over 10 years to honestly achieve proper fluency. I have been speaking French for around 14 years now, and whilst a layperson might describe me as fluent, I still don't have the same level of French as English, and I wouldn't describe myself as fluent. Have high standard, maybe. Fluent, no.

I'm not even going to try comparing a 2:1 in modern languages to a 2:1 in engineering. Both subjects assess very different parts of the brain and cannot be compared like for like. The skills gained are completely different.

reehsetin

chezza262 wrote: »

I know all uni's are different but I am finding there seems to be a real reluctance to award an essay over 70%. Surely there shouldnt be the "i never give a 75%" attitude that I have been hearing over the last few weeks?

How much should we expect lecturers to help us get the higher marks?

grrr some take the pee though, got an essay back on monday and theyd crossed out 70 and wrote 69 :mad::( i would rather have a 68 than a 69 it does just seem like pure reluctence to give a first

TeaBoy_2

3plus1 wrote: »

For the record, I really don't appreciate being accused of being a liar. I've always tried to make useful contributions to this site and have no reason not to tell the truth. You have no idea who I am in real life, and as such, I have nothing to gain by disclosing this information.

I am studying foreign languages at one of the UK's most prestigious universities, and I know for a fact from first hand experience, that marks in core language and translation modules are capped at 80%. It is possible to get over 80% in some literature modules which are examined in English, but pretty much anything marked in a foreign langauge is capped.

I didn't make the rules.

They're stupid, but I'm not responsible.

I often think the reason why they are so reluctant to award firsts, is that a graduate with a first in languages from a top university is likely to be perceived as 'fluent' in those languages, and it's rarely the case. Most people on my course only started speaking languages at secondary school, and it takes well over 10 years to honestly achieve proper fluency. I have been speaking French for around 14 years now, and whilst a layperson might describe me as fluent, I still don't have the same level of French as English, and I wouldn't describe myself as fluent. Have high standard, maybe. Fluent, no.

I'm not even going to try comparing a 2:1 in modern languages to a 2:1 in engineering. Both subjects assess very different parts of the brain and cannot be compared like for like. The skills gained are completely different.

all lies!!

melancholly

reehsetin wrote: »

grrr some take the pee though, got an essay back on monday and theyd crossed out 70 and wrote 69 :mad::( i would rather have a 68 than a 69 it does just seem like pure reluctence to give a first

you're very unlucky there - a lot of unis will only give certain marks - 62, 65, 68 then 72, 78, 85 is a mark scheme at a couple of unis that i've done marking at (why the firsts don't go up in the same way is a beyond me - but it means one really good mark can pull up your average). going from 70 down to 69 really is tough! what is probably means is that when moderated, the second marker decided it was good but just not quite enough for a first........... the idea of moderation is to make sure that one marker isn't too generous or too harsh..... but they really shouldn't have left the original mark crossed out! it'd definitely go see a tutor about it and ask for specific feedback on what made your essay so borderline.

incidentally, having a marking scheme like the one i mentioned above does mean that the top mark is effectively capped (this can only apply to essays though). but that's not really the point - you get a grade when you leave university, not a percentage. i can mark something and think top first, then give 85% (admitedly rarely ), or mid 2:2, so I'll give 55%. the actual percentages for each of these grades are irrelevent - if a first was set at 50% then it would still be just as hard to get!

melancholly

Yant1 wrote: »

Its a lot easier to get 1st class on science courses as your either right or wrong

that's not always the case - in a maths exam at uni i got all the right answers, but the lack of 'beauty' in them (no joke!) meant that i got a low mark. it's not just essays where style matters! (and i then did drop maths!)

cupid_s

studentphil wrote: »

There seems such a pressure to get a 1st nowadays that to get less is almost like end of the world to some people.

But it wouldn't matter. A first is the top degree (unless you count exceptional first). It goes to about the top 5% of students at courses in our department. If everyone was getting over 70, suddenly you'd need a higher mark to get a first because they can't have half of the students on one course getting a first.

The top 5% or so, on average, will probably get a first (obviously it varies from year to year), if you're not in that top 5% of students then you don't stand much chance really of getting the highest marks.

And whilst there is pressure to get a 2:1 or above, I never felt pressured to get a first by anyone but myself.

And regards capping the top marks. We were going over model answers in a lecture and the lecturer said 'this is a perfect answer, I couldn't do better myself. It would get 72.' I asked why not 85/90 if it is perfect. I was told we never give marks higher than 75 for scientific essays - you just will never be given one no matter how great your answer is. With MCQs it was similar, I got 96% of the answers right in one, but that meant is was deemed to easy so everyones marks went down and I ended up with a much lower mark (so did everyone else so they weren't happy with me!)