It’s worrying though isn’t it. The fact that there’s no standardisation, yet some job or grad scheme opportunities are closed to some who went to unis which were much harder to achieve the required degree classification from.
I know there’s a move amongst some firm to degree classification - blind applications, or university attended blind applications. However, it’s hard to see that all academic qualification can be ignored or should be ignored. I fully understand that the experience and letter of application are a vital part too.
We encourage our DC to work hard, to aim for the best GCSEs they can get, best A Levels, best uni, best degree. We probably also encourage them to gain as much experience as poss and to make themselves more competitive in all the ways possible. But then the suggestion is that these achievements are ignored or irrelevant.
Perhaps it’s precisely because often it’s parents who have encouraged the kids to do these things, and not all kids have this encouragement or access to equal opportunities. I get that. But equally, some less advantaged students work hard and are motivated and it seems like their achievements are dismissed too.
What is it that employers are looking at when they recruit?
Are those with the top academic qualifications more likely to perform well on the aptitude tests grad schemes use? Are they more likely to be able to answer the scenario questions etc? I assume there is still a strong correlation between those who’ve been academically successful and those who do get recruited…but maybe I’m wrong.