**** you universityFollow

**** you and your 2:1s.

It's like the equivalent of a B, I guess, Ari.

we have 1:1, 2:1, 2:2, 3:3

which is 1st class degree
upper second class degree
lower second class degree
3rd class degree.

Most employers prefer looking for a 2:1 and above

get my results in about 12 hours =/

Edited, Jun 24th 2010 2:53pm by Wisedeath

...do universities and colleges lower the standard of learning as the high schools are doing? I used to have to get at least a 95 for an "A", my two boys can get an "A" with as low as a 90 in the next year or so if some new standard passes with the school board.

From my experiences, most colleges do increments of 10% for each letter grade. A is 90-100, B 80-89, C 70-79, D 60-60, F 0-59.

To be more specific, college and university professors have more flexibility in how they handle grades. Most often my Professors chose to allocate a pool of maximum points on an assignment relative to its weight with a total pool of points being somewhat arbitrary and more reflective of the sum of individual assignment pools than a specific goal.

For example, one of my classes might have a total maximum of 1000 points (100%, A+ stuff). Each of the four exams might be worth 150 points (totaling 600), three projects might be worth 100 each (totaling 300), and the remember of the in class quizzes and misc. stuff is equaling up to 100.

The professor would then select the intervals of points for each letter grade and possibly sub letter grades. An "A" could be from 900+ or 930+, depending on the professor's preference.

In my opinion, a system of intervals of 10 percentages points (with lower than 60 failing) is probably better than the traditional model of intervals of about 7 percentage points (70 failing (3+ for an A). I'm not suggesting than a 60 point passing cutoff with 10 percentage intervals is the optimal system, but I'm trying to be conservative about changes making only minor potential improvements.

The problem I see with systems with a narrower pass window and smaller intervals is that they tend to cap to early. In a system where a 95 or 93+ equals an A, it's often very realistically achievable to get a 100 on most tests-too achievable. A test where everyone gets a 100 is a bad test.

When I was in high school they told us our number grades.. If you got a 96 you got a 96. If you got an 84 you got an 84. If you got a 103 you got a 100. There were curves for some classes depending on the teacher- Like in physics whoever scored the highest on a test got a 100 and everybody else gained the same amount of points he did.

College so far is mostly standard deviation. For physics it was something like top 5% of the class got an A, next 5% A-, next 5% B+, etc... or something like that.

and they do.

At my college it was that weird thing, like A was 100-93, B = 92-87 or something, really sucked...