To think academic success isn't worth that much

[MeJuly]

Can anyone persuade me I am wrong?

If I get a top 1st in English, say, is it actually worth anything compared to getting a 2.2? What difference will it actually make to your life?

Maybe that is the problem with arts degrees but even if I am doing chemistry or physics, unless I want to go into academia, what difference does it make how well I do in my degree?

It’s used by graduate employers to filter out potential recruits.

Some expect a 2:1 and some a first

Presumably it depends on what kind of jobs you are going to go for, how high the standards they are looking for and what kind of competition you're up against. I guess it often doesn't make that much difference though.

I'm a secondary school teacher with a 2:1 from Oxford (and a PGCE). When I applied for my first job 30 years ago, that would have given me an edge at good schools (and I started on a slightly higher salary due to it). These days any school would bite my arm off with a 2:2 from anywhere.

I got a first and it really did open up every door (which I failed to go through and went to work in a Waterstone's. I was burnt out.)

Some ask for at least 2:1 but prefer a first.
depends on the job.

Why do you ask? Did you get a 2.2?

2:1 is a filter for lots of competitive graduate recruitment.

Once you are a few years into a career, no one cares about your degree (let alone your A-Levels or GCSEs) because they have actual work examples to assess you by and that is more relevant for moving companies, getting promotions etc.

But it does matter at the start of a career, much like A-Level grades matter for achieving entrance to a specific university but then don't matter at all once you are in

So I would buckle down and get studying OP. If you are on track for a 2:2, you have time to lift it to a 2:1.

Personally I wanted to do the very best I could, so I chose subjects I was fascinated by. I got a first, and it seemed easy for me. I got distinctions in both my masters courses, and though these were very intense I still enjoyed the work. I wouldn’t say it made a lot of difference work wise, but I would have been disappointed in myself not to have done as well as I was able.

We had several lectures about why getting a first wasn't desirable! This was alongside "managing expectations" but effectively warned us no one wanted to employ candidates who get a first because the are rarely "team players".

This was 2016. Everyone now has expectations through the floor in HE. 3 people in my cohort got a first, only one of them I would trust to actually work in the arena and to have actually read a single study in it's entirety. Half of the population gets degrees now, so of course they don't signify the top %, particularly when you consider the cost that is prohibitive to anyone who doesn't want debt. To a certain extent you buy your degree and as long as you bother to read the notes given on each topic you should be able to pass (you can retake exams as often as you like for every topic without it even being recorded as a fail) if you don't go to the lectures, as was evidenced in my cohort.

A 1st will open more doors. Some employers specify it. Others make a 2:1 a minimum requirement, but would usually prioritise applicants with a First other things being equal/comparable. Personally, my experience and anecdotal evidence is that it's more important for STEM professions for applicants to have a First if it's for a particularly complex/demanding job/profession.

My son is a trainee actuary with one of the UK's biggest insurance firms. Although some of his cohort don't have Maths degrees, some have economics, some Physics, they all have Firsts in their chosen degrees. He doesn't know of anyone among his cohort with a 2:1 or below. Even though the job advertisements specified 2:1 as minimum requirement.

Obviously, other jobs/careers/employers aren't bothered at all - many are happy with "a degree" - any subject, any classification, as long as it's a pass. So it really depends on career aspirations.

Badbadbunny If you get a graduate job offer while still at uni they sometimes don't even require you to complete the degree! The rounds and rounds of tests and interviews are seen as a better filter than the degree class.

MojoMoon If you are applying for jobs while still at uni then I think they really trust their own tests and interviews more than the class of degree. It is true they often ask for a 2.1 even after offering you the job but I don't know if they would really rescind the offer if you didn't get it.

UnderHisEeyore Wow! That's amazing to tell you that people who get 1sts aren't team players. It doesn't even make sense (at least to me).

Hang on, who gave you those ‘lectures’ telling you graduate employers didn’t want Firsts? Your university department?

I think lots of companies employing new graduates will filter out 2:2 and below, so that makes a difference. I doubt the difference between a 1st and a 2:1 is so much and the further on in your career the less it matters too. Your impressive cv at 40+ is standing on the back of the opportunity you had at 21 to a certain extent, so while nobody might care about your 20+ year old degree classification, they may care what you did with the doors it opened.
It’s like gcse maths and English - you may be perfectly capable at doing the job that requires them, but you will be filtered out of the selection so it matters.

That's because it used to be "academic" people that taught, but nowadays they've realised that although subject knowledge is important, it's the person that is more important, so you don't need a 1st class degree to be an outstanding teacher. You need someone that can inspire kids to be the best versions of themselves.

The headmaster at the secondary school I attended was a Cambridge graduate with a 1st class degree in maths but sitting through his A Level further maths lessons was like watching paint dry. He was SOOOO dull. I ended up teaching myself most of it.

Lots of companies miss out on really good candidates (not just teaching) by refusing to take on someone without a 2:1 or even a degree. My DH is a brilliant engineer but as he did an apprenticeship and not a degree he is gets instant rejection from most jobs.

Arseynal But don't you typically apply for jobs before you have the degree?

Many large corporations only recruit from certain top uni’s and they also only recruit at the 2:1 or 1:1 level. My company is one. Law is another area where degree classification and uni matter.

for many other firms it is fairly irrelevant, it really depends on where you’re aiming.

Yes! As one of the high achievers in the group I was actively ridiculed in both lectures by both the lecturer and peers; they said how hard it is to work with people who had high standards, who might struggle to explain ideas (i.e in group work when no one else had done any work or been to the lecture, so it was left to the able students to teach the ones who cba how to reference studies - even why we needed studies in 2 cases from personal experience). We were also referred to as "the ones with autistic tendencies" and therefore "less empathy skills to work with".

Like isn’t as linear as that. It’s not a race, with the fastest person being the one who has succeeded most. Life is about finding your niche. That means knowing where you are most comfortable and succeeding in that space. For some that might need too academic grades. For others it certainly doesn’t.

Without typos:

Life isn’t as linear as that. It’s not a race, with the fastest person being the one who has succeeded most. Life is about finding your niche. That means knowing where you are most comfortable and succeeding in that space. For some that niche might need top academic grades. For others it certainly doesn’t.

Most companies require a 2:1 and they filter applications based on that so you won't even be considered with a 2:2.

Getting a 1st is always going to be preferable to a 2:1, and definitely better than a desmond (which David wilty got).

Having said that it shouldn’t affect life too deeply. It’ll depend on where and what you studied, what other things you did / do.

So it’s a very nice to have but probably not much more than that, past graduate years.

It matters more for graduate schemes where you don't have experience.

A lot of companies, mine included, expect a 2:1 or better for entry level positions.

A few years into a career it becomes much more about work experience.

Yeah - they would and do. It's not like these companies are short of applicants.

So I used to work for a top university bringing employers onto campus to meet students.

The overwhelming consensus was that grades didn't matter too much (nor did degree subject) unless it was a technical role. It was being able to demonstrate skills, attributes and experiences. If your goal is to get a good job, then focus on extra curricular experiences that will help you.

The most popular targeted university by top employers was Manchester not Oxbridge, because employers valued well rounded students very different experiences rather than purely academic.

Some large employers are removing grade requirements altogether with the emphasis being on skills and values.

I got a 1st and proud that I did but I was very burnout and it's never really come up since my career but I'm proud of my achievement. So consider what matters to you.