Are 1st Degrees getting easier to achieve?

[JellyPopz]

I graduated in 2009 with a 2:1 which I was very happy with. Only a handful of people across my wider course achieved firsts.

Let year, an older but non-academic family member achieved a 2:1 but for a large part of their course they were on track for a first (I was shown their marks, it wasn't a fib).

I've noticed now in the last year or two on social media lots of people my age (late thirties) that are graduating, are achieving firsts.

I can think of two reasons that may be the case - 1. Older people have emote focus and drive if they return to study and 2. People may have had more time to get stuck into their courses during lockdown.

I'm definitely not here to take anything away from people getting firsts, I know they are still not given out like sweets. I've definitely noticed more people graduating with them and wondering if its coincidence, one of the reasons above, another reason or if parameters have been shifted?

In the mid 90's a 2:2 indicated you were in the lower half of the cohort, but not in the bottom 10% (who mostly 3rds or pass degrees). A 2:2 was generally taken to mean you were vaguely competent but either had partied too hard or weren't particularly bright. As such, a 2:2 was sufficient to get a place on most graduate training programmes, or to continue to an MSc. or equivalent.
Now, the top 35% get firsts and the next 50% get 2:1's. So a 2:2 indicates you've really done quite badly and are in the bottom 10-15% of your cohort. So a 2:2 is the new third/pass degree and will not suffice to get onto many graduate training schemes or postgrad courses.
graph from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_inflation attached

The same Wikipedia article I linked above also has the raw numbers for degrees awarded. Two facts jump out:

In 1995/6 around 17,000 firsts were awarded. There are around 600k people in each age cohort in the UK, so between 2 and 3% of each year cohort of the general population were graduating with firsts. In 2020, the number graduating with firsts was 140,000. That's 8 times as many: nearly a quarter of the general population.
In other words, if you took an all-ability comprehensive school with 8 sets and 200 kids per year group: in the mid-90's, half a dozen or fewer would be on course to get firsts - the top quarter of the top set. Whereas nowadays, nearly 50 kids - the entirety of the top two sets - would be on course to get firsts.

Secondly, back in 1995, only 120,000 got firsts or 2:1's. So the next 83000, with 2:2's only had had compete with 120k people with better degrees than them. Whereas in 2020: 340,000 got firsts or 2:1's, and the 60000 kids with a 2:2 had to compete with them for graduate positions. In short, with a 2:2 these days you are much further down the pecking order.

The kids who are mainly disadvantaged by this grade inflation are the ones in the top 7% who would have got a first under any criteria used in the last 30 years, but who are now left undistinguished from the herd. I think the best way to deal with this would be to introduce latin honours (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_honors) as already used in other countries, for the top 5-10%.

the 8-fold increase in numbers of firsts awarded from 1995-2020 as a graph

You've just made me feel better about my first I got in 2007 op! 😂

Same - I graduated with a 1st a few years before 2007 so I shall feel superior for the rest of the day 😆

What happened in 2014 that suddenly no one failed anymore?

That is a very good point.
The 'jump' in the wikipedia chart actually occurs going from 2014 to 2015.
Tuition fees were raised to £9000 with effect from 2012. Students starting a bachelors degree in 2012 would first graduate, having paid at least 27,000, in 2015.
Marketisation of higher education says that if you've paid for the product you "deserve" the product (even if you haven't worked, learned or acquired the competencies that are supposed to be a given for those that hold the qualification.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuition_fees_in_the_United_Kingdom

Someone upthread commented that the teaching had unproved leading to more firsts.

Maybe it’s the choice of words, but when I went to uni , you ‘read’ for a degree. You attended lectures and had to take notes, then do a huge amount of reading around the subject. Some people struggled with the transition from school where you were taught, to university where you w were lectured.

I think you do still 'read' at Cambridge. At least that's what it seemed to me when DS went. Studied English and seemed to read everything! Contemporaries at other red brick universities which I shan't name seemed to get by on hand outs!
It infuriates him (semi jokingly) that some of those contemporaries came out with the same class of degree as him without it seems putting in the hours.

My dd is at a top 10 uni. On track to get a 1st or 2:1. She works a lot harder than I did.

I got a first in 1985 - it was awarded solely on my performance in 10 3 hour papers taken over a week. Frankly it was probably an award for stamina as much as anything else. Also as I was a historian it was a very significant test of my ability to memorise and retrieve very large amounts of information. DD has just started a degree in the same subject and there are no in person exams at all. Assessment is by essay, dissertation, presentation and in the case of one module anything you want to submit so long as its not an essay. It does mean that those who are really good at their subject but not great at exams, or who are ill/suffer a bereavement at exam time still stand a good chance of getting a first.

I think there are a number of factors. There have always been people who went to uni for the experience.

The increasing numbers of students who come from working class backgrounds and are much more likely to be taking vocational subjects.

Linked to that subjects that would not be taught at uni are now eg nursing and most recently policing.

If you are going to come out of uni with ££££ of debt you are incentivised to work.

More students see their first degree as a step before a masters and again are incentivised to do well.

Increasingly students are attending their local uni and living at home.

My sister in law has been a nurse since the 1980s, a couple of years ago she did a degree, 30 years of nursing will have helped a lot with a degree.

@faffadoodledo A degree from Cambridge is superior to most other degrees and often sets you up for a better career. Instead of feeling hard done by, he should look at his career earnings. He should make the most of his reading. It’s also not entirely true others don’t read. Totally depends on degree. At other good unis you are required to do the work and there’s minimal hand holding. At others, it’s a continuation of school.

OP yea it’s easier, because the financial model has changed. Once university became a market economy, reliant on funding from students/customers rather than government, one of the market measures became how many firsts your university hands out. Thus universities were incentivised to increase the number of these they awarded, and they duly have, across the board.
Statistical modelling has not been able to explain around half of the grade inflation happening. Doesn’t mean it’s not still a fantastic achievement involving a lot of hard work but realistically no students are not all a load more hard working or smarter than 20-30 years ago.

I think the big issue is where previous educational markers would not lead anyone would think a first was possible. Then out of the blue, the student gets a first and is suddenly top of the education tree. So are they really!?

Quite frankly, years ago, this didn’t happen very much. Clearly what’s required to get onto a degree has changed as A levels get higher passe grades too. Dsis got AAA in the early 80s. AAA is now common. In her grammar it was still only a handful who got this . Many polys took degree students with EE at A level. A handful on any course got a first. Employers could trust the classification. Now we have Dc getting a first who are nowhere near getting the pass mark to get to a Bucks grammar, have medium grades at gcse and CCC at A level. How bright are they? Is their first the same as a first from Oxbridge? They would not have got into many highly respected unis at all . These students do find a niche but when the subject is the same as an A level, are they truly that good?

I’d back someone with a more rounded (great results at every stage) and less spiky education profile to be generally more intelligent. If I need a science specialist, it might not matter but too many firsts does give a hugely false impression of overall ability. I’ve also noticed how quickness of thought and ability to express ideas is often not rewarded by unis. Plenty of people with a 2:1 are just as good when you take other attributes into account such as ability to write well, think quickly and problem solve. A first doesn’t guarantee a student is the best. They just ticked the right boxes at uni which, as some, was a generous interpretation of intelligence and skill.

I agree with that @TizerorFizz . Obviously there are outliers who develop late and shine late and out of the blue. But I'd rather see consistent grades and high achievement over time

Looking back again to 1987 there wasn't a single first on my course at UEA. On a closely related course there were a dozen or so. Which is probably not right either! So maybe inconsistencies have always been around

I would say easier. I got a 1st class law degree in 2020 and it really wasn't that difficult. I was older (28 when I started the degree) but I had children so my time was limited. The volume of reading was tough but the work less so.

Much, much easier!
My husband got a 1st and was the only person I knew who did. He was one of 2 people that year in a cohort of over 200.
That was in the 80s though.
All our kids got 1sts and would have been disappointed not to (2005-2012).
Changed times.

my cousin got a first last year. No way did he work harder than I did in 1995. I got a 2:1. I did a Masters 5 years ago and a distinction and did not work harder than I did as a young student as I did not have the time being that I had children and was working. I think nowadays get far more guidance and hand holding from lecturers, a huge amount of guidance online following lectures, being able to submit essays for guidance before final marking, having so much online resources, completing work online so it could be changed as you went along. When I did my degree everything was handwritten. Lecturers being far more accountable due to high tuition costs

I wouldn't say that the "less able" are preferring other routes. A large majority of those not going to Uni often have clearer ideas of what they want out of life. Also it's not just "more academic" students going to Uni. Despite student debt and tuition fees many, many teenagers still just go to Uni because it's either expected/they don't know what else to do. You should not class people as less able for making often more mature decisions about their futures. I knew a girl who left school at 16 while everybody else stayed on in 6th form or went to college. I remember it was seen as really unusual and the implication was she was going nowhere... She clearly had a plan as she started as an Office Junior, worked her way up and within 10 years had her own company and a house worth millions... while sone of her Uni peers were 5 years out of uni without a graduate job.

In the early 80s/90s there were also far fewer university places.

Far fewer places and far fewer firsts. So you knew only the best got them.

Im bemused at the idea you submit work snd it’s reviewed before a final mark. DDs never had this 10 and 8 years ago. Surely employers don’t want Dc who need this constant help? I’ve found self starters do get on much better overall.

Fees and loans have enabled far more Dc to go to uni. The cap on numbers was removed in 2013. So numbers have exploded. Definitely not fewer going and degree apprenticeships are a drop in the ocean by comparison. 5000 school leavers on degree apprenticeships and it was far less. Apprenticeships are mostly taken by adult employees. I think around 250,000 go to uni each year. Many of them would be better off on apprenticeships but each one is a separate application and quite an onerous process. Plus you must know your career choice. No time to explore careers at uni.

@slowsundays Im guessing not Oxbridge?

I don’t think there’s any realistic dispute that degree grades have cheapened (maybe not at Oxbridge).

But then I think curricula and public exam setting and grading has been dumbed down generally.

Not all of it is because of lack of rigour in teaching and marking. Some of the effect is positive: children and young people are more likely to apply themselves in a world where ‘A’-levels and degrees are commonplace. But a lot of it is undoubtedly a drop in standards.

Anecdotally, when I was at school in the ‘80s barely anyone did four ‘A’-levels and straight As in three was unusual. Straight As in four was exceptional. Seems pretty common now.

@WhileMyDishwasherGentlyWeeps Few got AAA in the early 80s. Didn’t need to of course. In the early 70s my friend did medicine with BCD. Perfectly adequate!