Am I not bright? 3rd in my degree.

[OnTrain]

A thread kind of about a thread. More about a post in a thread! Someone slagging off Carol Vordeman because she only got a third in her degree. Saying she wasn’t bright.

I got a third, tbh I’m just glad I passed but I also thought I was bright! Do I need a reality check? Am I a thicko?!

Am doing a tough degree with the stress of family on top of that it’s not easy ...aiming for a first but will be happy with 2.1. Wether I get 2.2 or 3rd will still get a job easily in my field. So not a big deal but I always aim higher

I wouldn’t have been happy to get a third. But then some people would say my degree was in a mickey mouse subject so 🤷‍♀️.

Thanks 5blue yeah, I have been proud of it. But it has stung what people actually think

Someone I know got all A/A*s at GCSE, and all As in A levels. He did a course in just about the hardest bloody thing you can think of (in the region of quantum physics) and got a Third. He's not thick by any means. Some degrees are not equal to others. And some grades are not equal to others.

It’s not great. I wouldn’t employ someone with a 3rd.

I got a pretty bad score too and it does still sting. I had mh problems at the time and had no idea how to ask for support either emotionally or academically.

I eventually went on to get a Masters and a phd and I got a distinction in my Masters so I felt better after that.

Tbh, I’m feeling a little defensive now (although I started this ) so I’m just going own it and be proud of thay fact that I passed all together.

Would be nice to be smarter though, or not get brain ache when trying to write an essay!

But why does it matter what some people (who don’t know you) think? As you said, it’s enabled you to pursue a career in your desired field. You say you’re good at it. So why care what some random on the internet thinks about your intelligence level?

A third isn’t great, but I would say you just weren’t academic, rather than thick. University isn’t for everyone and a lot of people struggle compared with school with the amount of independent thought and study required.

Getting to university at all is still an achievement, even if you didn’t get good results.

Why, what do you do not?

I would have been gutted with a third. On my course, which was a mix of modern languages and business studies, there were about 100 of us. No firsts. About a third got 2:1. The other two thirds got 2:2 with the exception of one person who got a third. No idea whether there were extenuating circumstances but the person with a third didn't attend lectures all year and barely pitched up for tutorials.

It depends on circumstances, surely? So many things can affect marks - someone could suffer a bereavement/serious illness/be a single parent/have to work full time, and would just be more exhausted and not have as much time to revise/attend meetings with tutors than someone for whom university is their main focus.

Also, as snobby as it sounds, it can depend on the institution - a third from a good university can be considered better than a 2.2 or even 2.1 from a rubbish one. I think CV was from Cambridge? Anyway, a third didn't do her any harm!

Also the whole degree marking system is utterly ridiculous - how can it ostensibly be marks out of 100 yet something like 95 percent of those who pass get marks between 40-70, and the vast majority of those get between 60-70? How can there be no difference to the award given to someone who averaged 70, and someone who averaged in the high nineties (technically possible although I know very high firsts are incredibly rare).

Graduating (regardless if what class) is hardly the sole marker of cleverness no matter what grade you get - I'm sure there are complete muppets who just had a talent for one subject and got a first, and, in the same vein, I'm sure everyone knows someone very clever who didn't go to university at all.

umbongo surely you take other things into consideration though.

I know someone with a first from a good university who didn’t know that we don’t have a president and didn’t know that the queen wasn’t in a position of actual power (ie she thought the queen made all the decisions.)

She was very good at regurgitating answers but no actual interest in the world/power of critical thought.

I’m a patent attorney.

No ide soy

Okay, so you need a degree for the role then?

Thanks fanella

It sounds entirely possible that you're bright but maybe not that academic, or you test badly, or panic?
at the ripe old age of 40 something I can say that the most academic people and those with the best degrees have definitely NOT turned out to be the brightest and or most efficient people I've worked with throughout my professional life so far.
With some specific exceptions it doesn't matter much does it?

I got average results in a humanities degree but I think i'm very bright indeed ;-)

It’s a very hard field. We even look at applicants GCSE results.

Your academic ability, as you well know, does not translate into teaching ability.

No a 3rd isn't a marker of 'brightness' or intelligence. For example it depends on how hard you worked, whether you did the bare minimum or worked your arse off. Personally, I did enough to get a 2.1 in my first degree, could I have got a first-yes, but I enjoyed student life a bit too much, but I was willing to sacrifice a 1st for having a good time :-)

It’s important not to beat yourself up - it was a long time ago. A lot of people aren’t academic and do far better in life. I briefly worked in higher education and by contrast some of the most academic people can be utterly devoid of common sense, practicality, compassion.....

not I doubt I’d even get on to a degree related to your role.

I’ve just dug it out and I got 64%

A relative of mine got a third in very difficult circumstances. They'd been getting firsts in assignments throughout their first year, so they're certainly not thick or unacademic. Focus on what you want to do rather than worry about other people's daft notions and prejudices.

That is very true miss