Failed degree, what next?

[StefanAVFC]

Thread totally derailed as expected. 

 

Some rather amusing generalisations though 

 

DISCLAIMER: My 1 generalisation was born out of satire

[Stevo985]

Tell yourself whatever it takes to make yourself feel better about spending 3 years to get a below average degree.

Wow

Edited July 4, 2013 by Stevo985

[Stevo985]

Aaaanyway, cheers for all the advice chaps.

 

Mods feel free to lock this as it seems to be getting a bit personal.

[Tomaszk]

Aaaanyway, cheers for all the advice chaps.

 

Mods feel free to lock this as it seems to be getting a bit personal.

**** you!

 

----

 

2.1's do certainly open a few doors in terms of being able to apply for job, but I agree that succeeding in a job is totally down to your application and ability to work alongside colleagues.

 

I came 0.3% off a 1.1 which still pisses me off a bit, but I'm 99% sure I'd still be doing the same thing had they bothered to remark one of the bits of work I asked to be done.

 

However, if I had done a slightly more "traditional" degree like Biology or Accountancy it is a fact I'd have been unable to apply for some top jobs/graduate schemes, as they only even consider people who got a first. That would have narked me, as there's no way that 0.3% would mean I'm more suitable for the job, not when it's that small a boundary.

[Eames]

 

 

 

 

 

In fact in this climate anything less than a 2:1 is bad and even a 2:1 doesn't guarantee much.

 

Completely untrue. I may as well not have a degree

 

For the vast majority of good jobs that will give you a career, it certainly is true.

 

 

Again, total bollocks.

 

And anyway, that isn't how you phrased it. You outright said 'a 2.2 is bad' therefore invalidating the degrees of millions of people. What gives you that power?

 

It's not, the only chance you have to get a decent job with a 2.2 is to find somewhere to do a PGCE. 

 

A 2.2 isn't a very good mark, especially if that qualification isn't in a hard science or in computer science, it send a bad signal, i.e. that you spent most of your time getting pissed. 

 

If you look at any graduate job description that pays good money you will typically see  '2,1 or above in a relevant discipline'.

 

 

This is a way of thinking that I just don't understand, or am I misunderstanding it? Having any sort of degree should not nor should it ever be a certainty to a immediate good salary. We see in our industry far too many kids - and that is what they are basically spotty kids - coming straight from Uni thinking that they know everything and expecting the world, all because of a few grades that have typically been decided by a couple of people. A degree surely is nothing more than a extension of education that exposes the person to a few further ideas and get's them thinking and learning. Most times it has little to no relevance on real world issues and challenges and that is why people start at the bottom of the ladder and get recompensed accordingly.

 

The level of degree's from 2:2, 2:1 etc is also big bollox. It goes back again to a lot of what was discussed in the work appraisement thread. The only real exception I can see is people getting something like a first in a course that has a portion of real work experience associated with it, who can then say to prospective employers, look I obviously have some experience in this field of work and I can vouch for my ability to learn

 

Oh God..... I'm agreeing with Drat again. Its the apocolypse.  

[CVByrne]

As I said on the previous page. That's why 2.1 is treated the way it is. Basically that the same student could be a 1.1 student. But any number of factors could have seen him miss out on a 1st.

All this is about getting interviews with no work experience. 3 years down the line it's experience that matters not what grade you got in Uni.

[StefanAVFC]

A 2.2 with work experience = A 2.1 without

[CVByrne]

The level of degree's from 2:2, 2:1 etc is also big bollox. It goes back again to a lot of what was discussed in the work appraisement thread. The only real exception I can see is people getting something like a first in a course that has a portion of real work experience associated with it, who can then say to prospective employers, look I obviously have some experience in this field of work and I can vouch for my ability to learn 

That is a point overlooked in the discussion. It's very relevant. For example a person getting a 1st in Mathematics degree is clearly going to be able to say to prospective employers here I'm good at maths. Similar a Computer Science degree, you can go here I'm good at programming.

The relevance of the degree hasn't been mentioned. I've no doubt getting a 1st in some degrees is easier than others and also not as relevant to many prospective employers.

[Eames]

As I said on the previous page. That's why 2.1 is treated the way it is. Basically that the same student could be a 1.1 student. But any number of factors could have seen him miss out on a 1st.

All this is about getting interviews with no work experience. 3 years down the line it's experience that matters not what grade you got in Uni.

This is total bollocks.  

 

For my degree anything over 75% was a 1st, 65% and above a 2:1, 60% and above a 2:2, 50% and over a 3rd and less than 40% was a fail.

 

In no way can you say someone with 66% "could be a 1st class student". They are nearer a low 2:2 than they are a 1st.  

 

Besides when you actually do recuritment the grade means **** all. Qualifications is a yes/no thing when shortlisting. I've never looked at grades and shortlisted candidates based on 2:1 and above. I'd far rather have a well rounded human being with decent soft skills and a personality over an exam passing robot anyday of the week.

[CVByrne]

A 2.2 with work experience = A 2.1 without

No it doesn't. No degree can be the equal of relevant work experience. Plain and simple.

[Genie]

2 people apply for a good job. They both have the same level of experience, and wage demands but one has a degree and one doesn't.

 

Which one gets hired?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The sexy blonde without the degree of course

[Tomaszk]

A 2.2 with work experience = A 2.1 without

Just not true I'm afraid.

 

As frustrating as it is, some jobs will not even consider you if you don't have a 2.1, even if you've got experience and would be better at the job immediately as you walk through the door.

 

They want people with that hard proof that they can apply themselves to a task to a certain level, then they'll look to train them up the way they want. As I mentioned up there though, it's muddy waters because people can pass or fail on decimals of percentages.

[Genie]

Some companies will only fill technical roles such as engineering with degree qualified people for insurance purposes.

[Eames]

Where does the notion that a 2:2 means you can't apply yourself come from?

 

You may have busted a gut at the very limit of your intellectual ability to get that 2:2, it could even demonstrate massive OVER achievement..... looking at someones degree grade simply saying "yep you got pissed for 3 years and did **** all work" is a far bigger reflection on the person making such a subjective judgement rather than the person with the grade.

[CVByrne]

A 2.2 with work experience = A 2.1 without

Just not true I'm afraid.

As frustrating as it is, some jobs will not even consider you if you don't have a 2.1, even if you've got experience and would be better at the job immediately as you walk through the door.

They want people with that hard proof that they can apply themselves to a task to a certain level, then they'll look to train them up the way they want. As I mentioned up there though, it's muddy waters because people can pass or fail on decimals of percentages.

This isn't true when we get to the higher levels of experience ie 5+ years.

I don't even list my grade on my cv. My education is at the bottom of page 2 in order of professional qualifications, masters degree then degree.

I got 1.1 in my Degree. So if people actually cared I'd put it on there. They don't. All interviews are on experience. I've 8 years of work experience.

Eventually college grades fade into irrelevant.

[Tomaszk]

Where does the notion that a 2:2 means you can't apply yourself come from?

 

You may have busted a gut at the very limit of your intellectual ability to get that 2:2, it could even demonstrate massive OVER achievement..... looking at someones degree grade simply saying "yep you got pissed for 3 years and did **** all work" is a far bigger reflection on the person making such a subjective judgement rather than the person with the grade.

 

 

Don't know where it comes from, I don't think many employers think like that.

 

 

 

A 2.2 with work experience = A 2.1 without

Just not true I'm afraid.

As frustrating as it is, some jobs will not even consider you if you don't have a 2.1, even if you've got experience and would be better at the job immediately as you walk through the door.

They want people with that hard proof that they can apply themselves to a task to a certain level, then they'll look to train them up the way they want. As I mentioned up there though, it's muddy waters because people can pass or fail on decimals of percentages.

This isn't true when we get to the higher levels of experience ie 5+ years.

I don't even list my grade on my cv. My education is at the bottom of page 2 in order of professional qualifications, masters degree then degree.

I got 1.1 in my Degree. So if people actually cared I'd put it on there. They don't. All interviews are on experience. I've 8 years of work experience.

Eventually college grades fade into irrelevant.

 

 

Agreed on college stuff fading away. 

 

With a masters and 8 years of experience you're probably applying for some higher level jobs. There are a lot of jobs where you need a certain degree to apply though.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Tomaszk

[CVByrne]

As I said on the previous page. That's why 2.1 is treated the way it is. Basically that the same student could be a 1.1 student. But any number of factors could have seen him miss out on a 1st.

All this is about getting interviews with no work experience. 3 years down the line it's experience that matters not what grade you got in Uni.

This is total bollocks.

For my degree anything over 75% was a 1st, 65% and above a 2:1, 60% and above a 2:2, 50% and over a 3rd and less than 40% was a fail.

In no way can you say someone with 66% "could be a 1st class student". They are nearer a low 2:2 than they are a 1st.

.

In Ireland we have 4 year degrees and 70% is 1.1 60% is 2.1 50% is 2.2 and 40% is a pass.

So saying someone getting 66% is close to a 1.1 is true. One bad exam in a tough year could easily be 4% also the grade itself is bounded by set %. So is a 70% student much better at the relevant job than a 66% student?

That's why 2.1 is considered the way it is. It's still not a 1.1 but excluding 2.1 applicants is inevitably going to exclude many talented people. From the perspective of employers that's the way they see it.

[CVByrne]

Agreed on college stuff fading away.

With a masters and 8 years of experience you're probably applying for some higher level jobs. There are a lot of jobs where you need a certain degree to apply though.

Ok I do agree that seeing Degree in Mathematics and Masters in Statistics will help a prospective employer create an idea of me as much as my experience will. This only serves to get an interview where you live or die by. I come in and they are expectant and it's possible to disappoint.

But all interviews are about relevant experience. All of them and it's how well I respond that will get me the job. Not what degrees I have from almost a decade ago now.

I personally think CV gets you an interview. Interview gets you the job.

Basically a good degree just gives you a head start. I know many excellent people I've worked with who have had all kinds of different education backgrounds.

It's not a science. People should not treat it as such. Good workers and talented workers come from many places.

Edited July 4, 2013 by CVByrne

[Kwan]

I don't know if I'm much help, but I dropped out and didnt get my degree either. It was also going to be too much money trying to get one without my parent's help.

1) She needs a job. Any job will do but preferably she needs a job at a company where there are opportunities to move on elsewhere and not something in retail or food. It doesn't even have to be in her field, only has to be slightly related. Her job will suck. It will be some paper pushing or running errands for people or any sort of shit that will be mind numbing day in and day out.

But she needs a job. The "experience" she can put on her CV and not having an employment gap will help immensely.

After that, she has to show some initiative and be chummy with some of her co workers in various departments. Maybe she gets a job as a clerk somewhere in the government and gets to know someone in policing. People like hiring friends and people they know. It's easier that way. Big up her resume with experience and any sort of 'certifications' she can get for something related to that role.

Anyway, that's what I did. Took a job fixing printers and copiers and taking page counts with a big printer company. It was easily one of the most depressing years in my life. But I made friends with one of their IT vendors and they had a spot open up and they got me a much better job.

Sometimes things happen and you can't get your degree. Obviously it's easier to get one, but if she can't, it's not the end of.

I was in a similar position as your sister. Lazy and indifferent. I don't know when the switch will go off for her but she'll have to start working hard and going out of her way to try and move up.

Just gotta get her there.

[Dr_Pangloss]

Even having  a master's does not improve your job prospects that much. You would think it would, but it doesn't.

Completely depends on what your masters is in, for some jobs they are a prerequisite.