Talk:British undergraduate degree classification

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A mortarboard This article is part of WikiProject Universities, an attempt to standardise coverage of universities and colleges. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Percentages of students recieving the degrees

It would make sense to report what percentages of students recieve the different grades. The article does state, that approximately 20% recieve a 3rd degree and 10% recieve a 1st degree, but what about a 2:1 and a 2:2. Are these two groups equally big, meaning that those who recieve a 2:1 is the best 45%? - Marc K 19:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Generally the proportions are roughly:

  • 1st - top 10%
  • 2:1 - next 50%
  • 2:2 - next 30%
  • 3rd - bottom 10%

But this varies from university to university. 129.12.200.49 16:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

There are some stats by department from University of Manchester, http://www.student-direct.co.uk/news/degree-classifications-fluctuate-wildly --87.127.117.246 (talk) 23:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Conversion between GPA and honours classification

As an American student interested in pursuing a postgraduate degree in England, I am confused about the conversions of this system. Is there a cooresponding GPA (grade point average) and honours classification?

Check out [1] - FrancisTyers 30 June 2005 18:10 (UTC)
Roughly speaking I think generally a first is considered to a 3.7 or greater GPA, and a 2.1 is 3.3 or greater. BovineBeast 20:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
This is a difficult comparison, as a number of factors in Britain work to counteract the grade inflation prevalent in the US. In the UK, there are nationally approved, standard curricula, and students are not examined by their teachers, but by appointed examiners from both inside and outside the examining institution. Take Harvard as an example, where a majority of students receive a 3.75 GPA or above. These same students would almost certainly not all be eligible for an 'equivalent' first at Oxford or Cambridge. Addtionally, students in the UK spend 3-4 years focusing exclusively on their degree subjects, and the curricula are designed to give them a solid foundation in the core concepts and problems in their area of study; whereas in the US, there is often a balance of elective coursework, and students are given the opportunity to explore coursework outside their area of study. The end result would be that a UK student with a degree roughly equivalent to an American peer in terms of placement in the graduating class (e.g. a UK 2:1 and a US 3.5 GPA) is likely to have a very different command, in terms of quality and quantity, of the subject matter. 216.168.238.7 21:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Second class degrees

Who are these employers that distinguish between 1st/2:1 and 2:2 and below? - FrancisTyers 8 July 2005 14:10 (UTC)

Just a general thing. A job ad might specify a 2:1 or above. That just happens to be where the line is commonly drawn. - 81.174.247.96 00:08, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
I've heard of employers specifying 2:1 but 2:2 would be fine with the appropriate skill set. I've never heard anyone refer to a 2:2 as a drinkers degree. I think this particular part is too cut and dry. The truth is less clear cut. (lol, cutting). - FrancisTyers 08:13, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
KPMG for one. I'm currently applying for graduate jobs and a lot of the dedicated Graduate Training Schemes require a 2:1. Whether they are in fact flexible if anyone without one tries I don't know. I think once people are on the career ladder experience counts a lot more for professional jobs than degree classification, but that 2:1/2:2 split does seem to exist. 82.71.84.41 19:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

The "Drinkers Degree" section is inaccurate and degrading. "Icairns" needs to do his homework before saying such a thing. People with 2:2s can succeed on POSTGRADUATE degree courses. There are schoolteachers with Third Class Degrees ..... only a fool would write these people off. One woman on my degree course got a Third Class Degree, and she wasn't stupid at all. You can't judge someone solely on their degree classification

I got a 2:2 and I'm on a Postgrad course. I knew people who were doing Postgrad study with a 3rd. It really depends on the number of enrolments and the quality of your dissertation I think. Particularly since its possible to tell where you screwed up in your academic transcript. - FrancisTyers 17:00, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
To me it appears that the term "drinker's degree" used in the Guardian link is referring to a 3rd class degree. Although it could be taken to refer to a 2:2 depending on how you choose to interpret it. I have heard it used to describe a 2:2 before. I scraped a 2:1 yesterday woohoo! Well it was Maths, fricking hard work I can tell you. 86.10.102.39 06:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

The term "drinkers degree" is in common use across the UK both in universities and the workplace, the fact some people don't like it is irrelevant. If wikipedia is to represent a full body of knowledge it should be included. (Boddah 12:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC))

I agree with Boddah - The term "drinker's degree" was common at the University of Sussex when I graduated in 2005. The 2:2 was also referred to as the "Sportsman's", as the Wednesday away games and partying of a Uni sports team-member tended to impact on study time. It was considered a forgone conclusion that the captain of any team was doomed to a 2:2, as they were expected at every social event, without fail.
Has anyone else heard of the 2:2 referred to as a "Sportsman's"? Unclejimbo83 09:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

"Who are these employers that distinguish between 1st/2:1 and 2:2 and below?" The legal profession definitely seems to distinguish. I went to a Law Society recruitment event in London recently and there were some very disappointed students.The speaking panel made up of City lawyers all agreed that if you wanted to work for a City legal firm you would need to meet a minimum standard of 2.1.

I havent heard anybody calling a 2:2 a drinker. Some people got a 2:1, others got a 2:2, thats it. Some people do well in the exams, others do well in their essays and dissertations, and some manage to keep a balance. Some people are hard working and still get a 2:2, thats what they got. I got a 2:2 and was accepted for a MSc by Research by a reputed UK university. So, I totally disagree that the term :Drinkers degree: is used "widely". If yu got a 2:2 perhaps you should check what went wrong, and learn from it, but only an idio woul;d equate automatically such a student to a drinker. If we were drinkers, we would be out of Uni long ago.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.174.129.162 (talk) 16:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Countries using this system

The first paragraph ends with "It is similar to the Latin honors system used in North America" however this 'British' system is used in Canada and not the Latin honors used in the USA. I have no knowledge of how degrees in Mexico (the other country in North America) are classified.

I don't really know what is used in Canada. I've attended convocations at four different Canadian universities (including my own) and have seen nothing with the level of complexity of either the American or British system.
Typically a distinction is made between "honours" and "general" degree programs, where only the former is suitable as a prerequisite for graduate work. Often, graduates with averages above some threshold are also granted special recognition, e.g. "with distinction" or "dean's honours list". There are usually a couple medals or awards for really outstanding graduates.
I suppose this resembles the British system more than the American: however, I've never heard of the level of stratification seen in the British system. --Saforrest 17:42, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rhyming slang

"An interesting form of rhyming slang has developed from degree classes, relying on the names of famous people that sound similar to the classes"

Perhaps I am just pig-ignorant, but are there any references for this? I've never heard of them, and "'2:1' sounds like 'Attila the Hun'" just sounds... bizarre.

--Telsa 16:13, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard of "Attila the Hun", but I've heard of the others. Damien/Desmond/etc. - FrancisTyers 16:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
this guardian article references "Desmond" at least - FrancisTyers 16:57, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

"Mr Magoo"? This one doesn't even sound particularly like the thing it's meant to reference. Evidence of use? TSP 23:08, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

You're right, I've deleted it. For interested parties, try putting "got a desmond" into google. - FrancisTyers 23:45, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard of an "Attila" - but I can confirm the others are all well-used. In my day a third was a Richard and a 2:1 was a Simon (le Bon).

yeah this whole section is dodgy. Desmond is pukka as far as I know. The sole source for the other rhyming slang is an ancient, unsources website. & I always thought a gentleman's was without honours - ie no effort put in whatsoever.


The Fred Durst reference must surely be at least chronologically wrong, as Limp Bizkit were barely heard of in the UK before the turn of the millennium. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.140.237.105 (talk) 17:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Third Class Degrees

"Few third class degrees are in fact awarded [...] It is therefore rare for a graduating class to include more than a small handful of Thirds."

This seems like too broad a generalisation. Certainly in science subjects at my university (Durham) thirds were fairly common - probably (vying with firsts) the smallest classification, but certainly not rare enough to justify the above description. I understand that thirds (and firsts) are much rarer in arts and social sciences, however. Does anyone have aggregated statistics on the number of degrees of each class given each year? A brief bit of research suggests that the volume "Students in Higher Education Institutions", published each year by HESA, would have the information in; but I don't think it's online. TSP 22:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kenya?

it states in the article "In Kenya, there are First Class Honours, Second Class Honours Upper Divisions and Lower Divisions and Pass instead of Third Class." Is this relevant considering its an article about the British Undergraduate degree classification?Alex 02:09, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

yes. they use the British system.

[edit] Diploma

I am very doubtful about the latest addition about the diploma. Here no "consolation prize" is given if you fail the 3rd year. Someone from Britain may confirm? Maybe editors can cite their sources or give examples of universities who act this way? i.e. an undergraduate course supposedly leading to a degree giving out certificates and diplomas. VodkaJazz 19:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

It is not so much a consolation prize for someone who fails their exams, but is intended as an exit point for those who do not wish to progress further. Davidkinnen 21:20, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notation

Two different forms of notation are used in this article for second class honours. The first is used almost throughout - the 2:2 and 2:1 notation, the other is used in the non-bulleted portion of the "Undergraduate degree honours slang" section - 2:i and 2:ii. Elsewhere, I have seen 2:2 written as II.2. Why are there different forms of notation? Do different universities use different notation? If not, what is the "correct" notation? 86.137.199.185 13:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I think probably they're all acceptable. My university uses IIA and IIB in its exam results, which is completely different. But everyone still calls it a 2.1 and a 2.2. BovineBeast 09:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Attilla???

Never heard of an Attilla the Hun – has someone just made this up?!

I thought that a 2:1 was the only one without a rhyming slang alternative. 195.188.183.124 13:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rachel Orr?

Who is Rachel Orr and there is any objective evidence (i.e. from the Cambridge University Reporter) that she got a triple starred first? I'd also like more substantive evidence of Maurice Zinkin's triple starred first than a Telegraph obituary. Pmcray

I'm with you on the Rachel Orr point; IMHO we should just delete that point as non-notable and lacking sources unless someone comes up with something soon. OTOH, I think the Telegraph should sufficiently research its sources to meet WP:V --Harris 12:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

How is it possible to obtain a triple starred first? Surely degrees like history do not have a part III?

At Cambridge, all subjects except history and english have examinations at the end of every year. There is typically Part IA in first year, Part IB in second year and Part II in third year. For some subjects this is Part I, Part IIA and Part IIB. Some subjects such as physics are a four year course, so I suppose it's possible for someone to actually get a quadruple starred first.

[edit] Degree classification boundries

Is it not common for degree classifications to be calculated as:

  • >=70% - 1st
  • 60-69% - 2:1
  • 50-59% - 2:2
  • 45-49% - 3rd
  • 40-44% - Pass
  • <40% - Fail

I'm sure there are Universities that do not use this system and there are some that base you overall mark more on your work over the course of the degree than the exams but is this not the system used in the majority of universities in the UK? Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article? --AlexSpurling 11:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that's fairly normal. Plus at Oxbridge ~25% get a first, so it can't be entirely based on percentile. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BovineBeast (talk • contribs) 12:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC).
I think he is talking about "marks", not percentile. Which University fails 40%?
These marks are standard at Bristol and everywhere else (Birmingham, Cambridge, Sheffield, Nottingham and Loughborough) that I know, including the 40% pass mark. 78.150.58.174 (talk) 20:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
University of Manchester (at least the physics dept) has: first class honours = 70-100%, upper second class honours =60-69.9%, lower second class honours = 50-59.9%, third class honours =40-49.9%. Undergraduate Student Handbook. People on the boundaries can get vivas, and may be moved up. --87.127.117.246 (talk) 23:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
At Oxford the boundaries were slightly different. To get a first, 2.1, 2.2, third, one had to get, for my School at least, an average of 68.5, 58.5, 48.5, and 38.5, I think (though the lower boundaries may have been higher than this my 0.5 to 1.5 marks), but in addition a certain number of papers had to be at certain marks, so one couldn't get a first with an average of 68.5 or above unless something like three papers were at 70 or above and no papers were below 50 - something like that. So there somebody could get a 2.1 with a higher average mark than somebody with a first depending on what marks were obtained in particular papers. Thus at Oxford, at least, classification is based on more factors than average mark. However, 70, 60, 50, 40, were seen to be equivalent to 1, 2.1, 2.2, 3.
The Pass School was rather different. It wasn't awarded to somebody who got very low average marks in the Honour School but somebody who took a considerably reduced number of papers. So whereas one would take maybe seven or eight papers for an Honour School one took four or five, perhaps, for a Pass School. I think the idea was that one decided before taking the exams that one was going for either the Honour School or the Pass School, but I suppose the examiners might exceptionally award a Pass degree to somebody who took the Honour School but failed several papers.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 14:34, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suffixing 'Hons'

When a candidate is awarded a degree with honours, adding '(Hons)' is an unofficial practice and not part of the official degree designation. As a compromise I have left out the reference to it being an affection which I agree is POV. BlueValour 17:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

But surely it's no more 'unofficial' than abbreviating the degree to BA in the first place since there aren't any 'official' abbreviations. My uni certainly used the (Hons) suffix in the titles of their courses, though of course my degree certificate has the full 'Bachelor of Arts with Honours'. My postgrad uni did the same. - Green Tentacle 22:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I have completed a BA(Hons). Some years later, I completed an MA by thesis alone. I notice that classmates who combined their Honours-level papers with their thesis (and not graduating BA Hons) use the abbreviation MA(Hons).

Now, I completed an MA by thesis alone so naturally cannot do that. Those that passed their thesis with the award of Distinction I have observed using the following: MA(Dist). However, I was awarded the next level down, Merit. How should this be abbreviated? MA(Merit)? No-one seems able to tell me. I ask for use in professional correspondence and documentation. 203.89.172.110 (talk) 20:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

That's an utterly unofficial means - I've never seen anyone put the mark in their postnominals (and it gets very confusing as different universities use different outcomes, especially when it comes to "Merit" for Masters).
As for "combining" postnominals this is an area that generates a lot of confusion. In other fields, such as the Order of the British Empire, the various honours and awards are very clearly regarded as ranks, so anyone who is a Member (MBE) and is made a Commander (CBE) is now not a "Member" anymore and only lists "CBE" after their name and not "MBE" as well.
Traditionally universities regarded degrees conferred as ranks - so strictly speaking "Bachelor of Arts" mean "someone who has been admitted to the Faculty of Arts at the level of Bachelor" and someone who then got an MA was "raised" and not a BA as well. ("Faculty" in this context doesn't strictly mean "combination of university departments" as very often the "Faculty" named in the degree is not the same name as used for the ever changing internal university structure. I for example graduated with a BA and later an MA from a university that has never had anything called the "Faculty of Arts".) Oxford and Cambridge still follow this system, but as virtually all of their undergraduate degrees are in a different "faculty" from their higher degrees, it's generally only the no work MA that this applies to. (This system can get incredibly complicated if someone has degrees from different institutions...)
However most universities tend to regard degrees as qualifications in and of their own right, so will list the degrees separately (the Oxbridge MA is the main exception but given the lack of study an understandable one). A combinational postnominal would be out of the question.
When it comes to the undergraduate programmes that end in a Master's degree, this is primarily just the Bachelor's and Master's courses combined and tailored. The graduates only have Master's degrees. Your correct postnominals are "BA (Hons), MA". Timrollpickering (talk) 20:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'm still not sure. I imagined that my completion of the MA superceded the BA(Hons). Those in the class that did their thesis immediately following their four honours-level papers had their degree judged on a combination of their honours paper grades and the thesis grade to determine which level of honours they would use. These people use the post-nominal MA(Hons).

Those of us that had completed a BA(Hons) and then some years later went back to write a thesis are marked solely on the thesis itself. Depending on your mark your thesis is then given an honours-type award. Thus it's not a grade as such. 'Distinction' equals First Class and 'Merit" which I got equals a 2:1. Hence I have noticed people using MA(Hons) and MA(Dist). However, MA's awarded with Merit seem to be reasonably rare from my university (I was the only one at my graduation!) as most people either pass without further recognition, MA, do the MA(Hons) deal or pass with Distinction, MA(Dist).

Thus, is MA(Merit) the proper postnominal form? 203.89.172.110 (talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

You could put MA (Merit) but it would look a bit silly. Maybe if you were advertising your academic services, e.g. as a private tutor, it would be a good idea. But in any setting that isn't self-advertising I don't see why you would. Indeed, I don't see why you would be putting the letters after your name unless you're advertising yourself somehow. In a social or even professional setting it looks a bit daft. When I had a proper job all my colleagues had lots of qualifications but only listed relevant ones, e.g. MIPPM for a payroll mananger who also had the letters BA, BD, AKC, FRSA to use if he wanted to. It's more classy to be understated!
If you have a BA (Hons) and MA from the same university just say MA, if from different universities put BA Name of University, MA Name of University.
I'm against (Hons). For one thing virtually everybody who has a degree has an honours degree, at least in England. A Pass School is very rare indeed (that is the Oxford terminology - I don't know about elsewhere; I know UCL has non-honours degrees that are awarded very rarely indeed). Whenever I see (Hons), which is thankfully rarely, I regard it with a degree of distaste. I have never put BA (Hons) after my name. Indeed, I have only put BA or MA after my name when writing to The Times on academic matters where it indicates membership of the university and explains my particular interest in the topic. There was a spate of letters in The Times a few years ago which had people signing letters John Smith MA (1st-class hons) (Edinburgh) etc. It was a series of letters about degree classification or something. My advice is just say MA. It's enough.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 16:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Just "MA" for a BA and MA from the same institution is confusing (other than Oxbridlin), especially as whether or not one gets a ..A or ..Sc can be pot luck in this day and age. Most universities regard degrees as qualifications in their own right and have never had the old "ranks in a faculty" set-up. The main use of letters is to indicate the qualifications one has achieved, so arbitarly limiting some and not others would be confusing. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't disagree, but it's a matter of context. If you're a schoolteacher or academic then by all means in the staff list you would perhaps want to appear as John Smith, BA, MA, PGCE, or Professor John Smith, BSc MSc (London), PhD ScD (Manchester), FRS, to show the full range of your qualifications. That said, at my school the Head Master and the head of English, to name but two, were both BA and MA of the University of Wales and just appeared as MA. The Head Master on his writing paper uses just the letters MA, although he does of course have a BA. Presumably he assumes that anyone will know that he also has a BA - indeed a BA (Hons). And also, having reached the dizzying hights of a headmastership, he probably doesn't need to advertise his credentials.
There is also a question about when it is appropriate to use initials for degrees anyway. As I said, I use mine only when writing about an academic concern. If you are writing to the local council about bin collection you do not need to advertise that you have a degree. If you are writing to The Times about the Higgs boson you may find your letter is more likely to be published if your writing paper advertises you as John Smith, ScD (Cantab). I have long puzzled over the reviser of my Cassell's German dictionary, Harold T. Betteridge, M.A. (Birm.), Ph.D. (Lond.) My guess is that he is a BA and MA of the University of Birmingham; but what does it profit him to tell us so? The style guides tell us that socially only DD is used. For other doctors just put Dr John Smith.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 12:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Good reference source for article

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0749444835/ref=A9/?%5Fencoding=UTF8&keywords=%22third%20class%22%20degree%20pass%20honours&p=S030&checkSum=LZvZ%2bVwSHFZrYJ1gJc80vy9xPm6kx%2b2r%2fFm9ehI0H8U= Bwithh 02:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neil Ascherson's triple first

Neil Ascherson only did History, which means it would have only been possible to get a double first. Is there any evidence he got a triple first? A UK Student forum member apparently emailed Kings and they said he only got a double first: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/archive/index.php/t-237719.html Unadopted 16:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Drinker's degree

A minor point, but the article refers to a Third as being called a Drinker's Degree, and provides an appropriate reference. However, in this case the reference is wrong. A quick google search suggests that a 2:2 is commonly referred to as a Drinker's Degree. The author of the Guardian article got it wrong.--Victim Of Fate 13:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Difference between "with honours" and without

I'm not sure this is a clear cut matter. In Scotland the non honours degree takes three years, the honours degree four, whilst Open University has an "ordinary degree" that requires 300 CATS points and an honours degree requiring 360; but otherwise in my experience of England & Wales a Bachelors degree without honours is one that has been specifically denied honours for whatever reason - failing a year and having to retake is one but I'm not sure this is a universal application - rather than a distinctive different set of study.

Consequently I don't know if it's always the case that "first", "second" and "third" only apply to Honours degrees - I suspect some universities may apply them to all Bachelors degrees. Does anyone know of any clear sources on this? Timrollpickering 10:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC)