To think that degrees mean less now than they did 20/30 years ago?

[SL11]

I got my degree 15 years ago from a former poly and got a high 1st. It was modular based and at the time I dont believe any credits were doubled or the lowest mark credits dropped or something like seems to happen a bit now. I know a bit as DD is soon to start Uni.
AiBU to think my degree is unofficially better than those gained in similar ranked Uni's in recent years? And on the flipside those gained by people in the 70s when 3 years worth of work was assessed in 12 exams and your final result was a average of those marks are unofficially better than mine?

Think employers think of this?

*earned not event

@SL11

I do know for a fact that classification tinkering goes on as I have a friend that works in a University. So I know factually that a 1st from the University I studied in is 'worth' more 15 years ago than it is now as all 240 credits are were used in the final calculation (first year in most places doesn't count), so I suppose the discussion point now is whether modular type degrees are 'easier' than the degrees event 30 years ago? That was one of my originally posed questions.

So you've answered your own question then-you think your degree is more valuable than one now because you know tinkering goes on. End of discussion surely?

Shall I just ask MN to delete the thread then? FFS.

Is control an issue for you?

If it was the end of the discussion then there wouldn't be 4 pages of answers would there? I knew this information when I posted, I simply wanted to see how people felt. What is your problem, truly? Just because I know this happens in some institutions doesn't mean it happens in all hence the discussion. Also, the discussion evolved (yes that does happen!).

'Mean less' but it's now a requirement for so many jobs - even ones that don't need it. I have a degree and it is relevant to my career - but I see so many job postings asking for a degree when it makes literally no different.

I don't think the standard has dropped totally, but there are more universities than before and some are specialists in certain degrees, so you should be going to those universities rather than others. Like for law, you'd want Oxford over anywhere else really. Medicine, you'd want Edinburgh. Veterinary, London or Edinburgh. You have to investigate which is the best and aim for those first. But an employer isn't ordinarily going to care, you just may get a better standard of education that's all.

‘If you are going around telling people you studied at Oxford, so that they think that you did your degree there, then I do think you are trying to make out you are something you are not. Doing a PGCE there does not mean you would have been accepted to be an undergraduate.’

Doing an undergraduate degree at Oxford does not mean you would have been accepted there to do a PGCE.

If someone says they studied at Oxford, why would you assume they meant undergraduate? How odd.

Mean less' but it's now a requirement for so many jobs - even ones that don't need it.
And this is very bad. Means entry-level jobs are closed off to people with not financial means to attend university.

My undergraduate degree is from one of the top 10 universities. I graduated 30 years ago and the first year modules did not count towards degree classification. I don’t think that means a degree has been ‘tinkered’ with.

I question why any university would include first year marks as the first year modules are usually not as difficult. If your degree classification weights a first year module the same as a later one then your degree is based on a lower standard not higher.

Seems a bit unfair to those who worked really hard for top a levels, got into a great uni and worked really hard while there, but never mind

But many people only have the option of their local uni due to factors beyond their control.

One of my friends spent the later years of school taking a variety of drugs, went cold turkey at 19 when she found out she was pregnant.

She went to college in her 30s and got a good degree from a former poly.

OP

Your first post makes a lot of assumptions, some degrees are modular, some have exams, some have slightly different ways of calculating your degree and it's not down to when they became a uni.

I do know for a fact that classification tinkering goes on as I have a friend that works in a University.

And you say you have a first class degree?

I'd never even heard of 'Russell group' universities until a few years ago, and, yes, I did study at one. It seems to have been a highly successful marketing exercise designed to raise them above all of the newer places.

@Stripesgalore

‘If you are going around telling people you studied at Oxford, so that they think that you did your degree there, then I do think you are trying to make out you are something you are not. Doing a PGCE there does not mean you would have been accepted to be an undergraduate.’

Doing an undergraduate degree at Oxford does not mean you would have been accepted there to do a PGCE.

If someone says they studied at Oxford, why would you assume they meant undergraduate? How odd.

It pretty much does tbh. Pgces are vocational and like things like nurse training are not academically comparable with pure academia nor do they have the prestige.

I get that in terms of the prestige from outside it is about undergrad, A grades at A’level, etc. However, once you are there as a postgrad you are fully involved in university/college life/mcr stuff. Most of the people I met were PhD students often with masters and degrees from elsewhere (although my housemates were Oxford and Cambridge degree holders). You are so thrown into academic life and your placement you don’t have much time to sweat the small stuff and there were a good few Oxford graduates on my PGCE course. Internally, when dealing with your subject and research you have to have a particular level of engagement that I think, you find to a greater degree at places like these. I had it, for my subject - English and for teaching it. I think (particularly in light of the wealthy international students who can fund postgrads there) getting a funded place, succeeding when there was a high failure rate on the course, the very demanding standards I saw on that PGCE that I have not heard of on other PGCE courses plus the high table dinners, formals and general, stimulating collegiate environment does take something to handle. (And stay sane!)

PGCE training is of the same level as postgraduate taught courses; the difference is there is no research component.

My mum did a postgraduate diploma at Oxford. She did the same modules as the MA students on an academic course.

And now that so many people get postgrad qualifications, who even cares where someone went as an undergraduate?

I would also say subject knowledge had to be very good and good in a way that you can cope with being challenged by very able, bright children (usually sons and daughters of college staff). To know your subject in an essay or tutorial is one thing, to take it into a classroom and understand such a range of material to different ages and needs and to be able to hold your own is a skill. I was very confident with my subject knowledge because I spent so much time reading and studying.

I did a research based dissertation. Also, the units were all at ‘M’ grade. We can complete a full masters and use our PGCE to get exemption for a third of the course, I think.

My uni made two calculations and applied the most favourable:

• straight average
• papers in the class, where if you had 11/12 papers at one class, the other two were discounted. So if you got 11x v low 2:1 and then an absolute howler of a 12th paper pulling your average to 59%, you would still get a 2:1. However, your % mark was set at the lowest 2:1 (60%) so the bad paper had an impact - but didn’t ruin you for the sake of one bad day.

20 years later, stepson’s degree totally ignored his lowest 2 papers, rounded 69% to 70% for a 1st (not on remark, automatically) and the final project which was worth 30% of the degree was (a) piss easy and (b) pretty craply done. I love him... but he is NOT a first candidate.

Most of Oxford’s role is research and educating postgraduates. The idea that the reputation Oxford has or that attending Oxford refers to undergraduates is particularly incongruous for a high ranking university.

There is a massive split between the undergraduate world and post doc academia.

DonnaQuixotedelaManchester mentions international students, they pay huge, eye watering fees and with that comes immense pressure from faculty management not to fail them (and that is true of all university's including RG, Oxbridge). Cheating/plagerism is taken very seriously today and there's strict protocols about submission, deadlines, etc. DH recently did a teaching certificate for under/post grads. The most valuable bit of the course was when he handed in an essay late and learnt how much the system had changed since his undergrad days 20 years ago.

As an undergrad, you are pretty removed from research, reputation etc. You are a bum on a seat, exchanging money for a course and a certificate. At the end of the day it's what you move onto achieve that counts although there is a huge out of unjustified snobbery from people whose university contact and knowledge stops at this point. I have to fight to ignore my memories from when I applied in 1988!!!

Within academia, it's a small world, so people know who is publishing papers, getting big grants, chasing publicity on the One Show. This builds into more of a gut feeling ranking with departments rather than universities as a whole.

I graduated 25 years ago and I (wrongly) thought that having a degree set me apart. It didn't and never has. It's more unusual NOT to have one imo.

It pretty much does tbh. Pgces are vocational and like things like nurse training are not academically comparable with pure academia nor do they have the prestige.

I passed mine at masters level, I can 'top up' to an MA. The practical side did not contribute to my grade.

The PGCE was harsh. Students literally disappeared - they were failed very quickly and not seen again. It is professional level so your subject knowledge is assumed with a lot of focus on presentation, delivery, etc.

That wasn’t clear - I mean that there is something additional with courses like the PGCE - and Oxford I found there was very little give compared to friends’ experiences on PGCEs elsewhere. It is fast track, designed to propel you through the early years to management early on. You are very engaged with issues in your subject and wider educational issues and as a poster said share many lectures with masters students studying linguistics, international development, etc.

The practical element was important on my course but certainly the written assignments were more demanding than the ones on my current masters (mid tier, European university, ComputerScience topic).

My sister got a first from an ex-poly recently and she is almost literally an idiot.

YANBU.