Best courses for 1st class hons. graduate?

[BGG]

Maybe, but I imagine that's not how they see it.

It's really, really not.

You could barely be more wrong.

[big2cats]

I can understand how some unis may not be more favourable to people with first class degrees, however i have no idea how or why they would prefer people with 2.1 (i presume the person who wrote that/ thinks that got a 2.1 when really they wanted a first). certainly when applying for dr jobs, such as reg/consultant posts they give you more marks for having a first compared to a 2.1.

the people i know who have been most successful in their medical careers have been those with first classes not 2.1's, of course that it only the people i know and not any sort of national stats.

when i was at uni i played music, sport, worked, sat on the student union, went out and got married and managed to get a first. whereas lots of my friends did nothing extra circular and sat at home watching neighbours twice daily and got 2.1's.

[Phizzle]

yeah no im sure it was just a joke in passing, but the point of the comment was that it inferred 2.1s arent at a big disadvantage in comparison to a 1st.

[Bambi]

Or, you could take the traditional but unfashionable arguement that 1st class degree holders are simply more able than their 2:1 holding counterparts?

Very few people actually believe that, for science degrees anyway. For science and similar topics a certain amount of knowledge is required, not knowing it may just mean you never picked up a book and certainly doesn't mean you aren't as clever as someone who did who got a first. If 2 people worked equally hard and one got a 1st and the other a 2.1, then fine, the one with a 1st is more able. With humanities degrees or any degree that is more to do with how you think rather than what you have memorised then I would agree that a higher degree class is more likely to equal greater intelligence.

[Bambi]

I don't buy into the whole 'a 1st is indicative of a poor work-life balance' argument. I would say I am just as 'rounded' as many of my fellow graduates who attained a 2.1, and that my 1st is evidence that I am able to make a substantial commitment to academic endeavour. I just spent less time watching Jeremy Kyle in my pants at 11am.

Now, back to the original question - with which other universities will my 1st carry some weight?

Thanks,

Jack

It's not my argument, I just said I wouldn't be surprised if that is how they think especially considering med schools always go on about wanting well rounded individuals. Also, not everyone sits around watching tv in their spare time. Plenty of people I know only got a 2.1 because they played sports at national level etc so were really very busy, it doesn't mean they are less capable of getting a 1st if given the time. I on the other hand do watch a lot of Jeremy Kyle, it relaxes me for some reason! Of those people that I know with 1sts, the majority don't actually seem to realise how much more work they do than their 2.1 peers so although you may think you are just naturally more intelligent if you really looked at things you would realise most people did half the work you did. (obv this isn't the case in all circs)

Plenty of people, myself included who have 2.1s have a poor work/life balance. In my case there was too much life. I did the absolute bare minimum until my 3rd year. Got 2.1s all through 1st and 2nd year with a few 1sts but the second I picked up a book/notes in my 3rd year I was suddenly getting 1sts in everything. A 1st (in science) shows a better work ethic which is obviously good for medicine but doesn't necessarily mean amazing intelligence. Also different degrees are not comparable and neither are unis. A sociology degree is easier than a biochemistry degree, it is easier to get a 1st at Thames Valley than it is at Oxford but going by what some people say on here a 1st in sociology from Thames Valley is better than a 2.1 in Biochem from Oxford which is nonsense.

[Bambi]

It's really, really not.

You could barely be more wrong.

And you are? A mind reader? Best friends with every person on every med school admissions panel? Fair enough give an opinion but you can't claim to know for sure exactly how they all think.

[chris5656]

Now, back to the original question - with which other universities will my 1st carry some weight?

Thanks,

Jack

Birmingham GEP

[Bambi]

I can understand how some unis may not be more favourable to people with first class degrees, however i have no idea how or why they would prefer people with 2.1 (i presume the person who wrote that/ thinks that got a 2.1 when really they wanted a first). certainly when applying for dr jobs, such as reg/consultant posts they give you more marks for having a first compared to a 2.1.

the people i know who have been most successful in their medical careers have been those with first classes not 2.1's, of course that it only the people i know and not any sort of national stats.

when i was at uni i played music, sport, worked, sat on the student union, went out and got married and managed to get a first. whereas lots of my friends did nothing extra circular and sat at home watching neighbours twice daily and got 2.1's.

When it comes to consultant jobs people barely care if you have a BSc let alone what class it was.

Generally people with 2.1s actually do better career-wise apparently, or so people say anyway, I think it's more of a stereotype, lack of people skills among super bookworms etc. There will always be exceptions, among my friends it is probably totally equal. In reality what you get in your BSc has no bearing on how you do in med school or later. People change massively. During my Bsc like I said, I really did bugger all, in med school however I do a lot more and am always in the top few % in my year. Whether or not good grades in med school will mean I am better later than those with lower grades I don't know but someone having a 1st in a law degree compared to my 2.1 imm degree certainly doesn't mean they will be more successful.

[AimsRJ]

Very few people actually believe that, for science degrees anyway. For science and similar topics a certain amount of knowledge is required, not knowing it may just mean you never picked up a book and certainly doesn't mean you aren't as clever as someone who did who got a first. If 2 people worked equally hard and one got a 1st and the other a 2.1, then fine, the one with a 1st is more able. With humanities degrees or any degree that is more to do with how you think rather than what you have memorised then I would agree that a higher degree class is more likely to equal greater intelligence.

The trouble is you have answered simply by giving another reason that people with 1sts should perhaps be given preference. Even if they are not naturally more able, surely the fact that they did pick up the book gives them a higher standing than those that didnt. Of course there are examples of people that could have got a 1st and didnt, and that is why universities accept those with 2:1s and will be impressed by good extra curriculars. There are also plenty of examples, like one of the posters here, who managed to do many more 'other things' than most and still achieved a 1st. Of course there are also examples of people who did nothing but study to get those grades- this is what the interview/ ps is for the further segregate those who achieved well academically. People and their histories are complex and it is always going to be nigh on impossible to distill their abilities into a list of letters. However, I believe it is naive to think that the majority of graduates with 1sts did not get it because they are more natually academic and/or put in more graft than those with lower classes. Universities generally have enough candidates to chose from to be able to select the best all-rounders from those with the highest academic backgrounds.

[AimsRJ]

The whole arguement is academic anyway as without statistics to back up either side, all you have is individual's experiences, of which there will be many on all sides. Some dont feel a class other than a 1st means they couldnt have achieved one, others dont want to be strerotyped as a 'geek' simply because they managed to achieve the best grade.