Is the current degree classification no longer fit for purpose?

[Twiglet 10]

what was once prerequisite is now becoming the subject of first year courses, and syllabuses are pruned accordingly.

 

And very much so on your point too This is part of the problem that leads to the brighter students not working. Entire first years of science courses are spent covering A-level biology, chemistry, physics and maths. Those brighter students get bored, stop turning up to lectures that cover material they are very familiar with, and fall into bad habits.

 

We also no longer follow traditional degree patterns; we are getting students coming through to their final year having never read a journal article and indeed not being aware of how to. They are still being taught advanced 'knowledge' based subjects, not interpretative and critical thinking using the knowledge they've gained over the previous two years. Graduate employers are getting increasingly despondant because a degree is no longer a marker of ability. Many students coming out of university don't have even the basic skills a degree used to provide - many are also incapable of writing in clear english.

[*carrie* 10]

Absolutely. Group work's only redeeming factor is/was the ability to submit performance and contribution ratings on your fellow group members.

 

You don't always get this option. I know we didn't in my final year, as ridiculous as it sounds.

 

And the stupid excuse that you will have to work in groups in a real job doesn't wash - it's an excuse for tutors to be lazy and mark less work!

[*carrie* 10]

And very much so on your point too This is part of the problem that leads to the brighter students not working. Entire first years of science courses are spent covering A-level biology, chemistry, physics and maths. Those brighter students get bored, stop turning up to lectures that cover material they are very familiar with, and fall into bad habits.

 

We also no longer follow traditional degree patterns; we are getting students coming through to their final year having never read a journal article and indeed not being aware of how to. They are still being taught advanced 'knowledge' based subjects, not interpretative and critical thinking using the knowledge they've gained over the previous two years. Graduate employers are getting increasingly despondant because a degree is no longer a marker of ability. Many students coming out of university don't have even the basic skills a degree used to provide - many are also incapable of writing in clear english.

 

 

I am sick of journals, so this clearly doesn't apply to my uni!

[SHsheff 10]

Absolutely. Group work's only redeeming factor is/was the ability to submit performance and contribution ratings on your fellow group members.

 

Yes and a) everyone says that everyone has contributed 100% out of some feeling of loyalty or b) you mark someone down as 0% (yes I did, really) and it's ignored 'cos they get the same mark as you.

 

[SHsheff 10]

And the stupid excuse that you will have to work in groups in a real job doesn't wash - it's an excuse for tutors to be lazy and mark less work!

 

Yup - the major difference is that, in work, if someone wasn't pulling their weight they'd be a) on warning and b) be sacked for not being at work when expected.

 

It's an artifical situation. I understand the principle (let's make it like the World of Work) but in actual fact because there are no sanctions, there's no incentive and no teeth. So, the idle get away with doing nothing, and the ones who want to get good results end up doing the whole shebang. Which ain't a prob, except somehow it's not only unfair but, actually, had everyone pulled their weight, the overall mark would have been higher.

[Jessica23 10]

I am SO glad that assessed group work didn't feature in my degree.

 

I'm not sure that it's just tutors being lazy, though. It is one of those things that apparently looks good on a CV - in my department we have certain types of (non-assessed) group work that exist purely because students have rated them highly in terms of transferrable skills in their evaulation reports and post-graduation satisfaction questionnaire thingies.*

 

 

* thingies being a technical term

[Guest]

...And the stupid excuse that you will have to work in groups in a real job doesn't wash - it's an excuse for tutors to be lazy and mark less work!

Which neglects the fact if you contribute zero time and effort to a group project at work, you're likely to face rather more than a poor grade and the wrath of your fellow group members.

Yes and a) everyone says that everyone has contributed 100% out of some feeling of loyalty...

Not in my groups.

...or b) you mark someone down as 0% (yes I did, really) and it's ignored 'cos they get the same mark as you.

 

My experience of the assessment was, fortunately, more positive. Group work itself, not so much.

[*carrie* 10]

The people who would say group work was useful are the ones who did very little and got a lot from it.

 

In fact, I would say it has put me off working with others rather than inspired me to it.

[Chelle01 10]

Although I have a 2.1 honours, I have long had my doubts about the system.

 

I do think something could be done to take into account a person's efforts, for example, one could argue that a mature parent student may well have worked harder to achieve their grade,or someone who does voluntary work shows more commitment, but how this could be assessed to be fair to others, I'm not sure, so perhaps such recognition should be left to potential employers.

 

I'm not sure about the idea about assessing group work, personally, I hated it, I suppose some people like it, like they like open plan offices. I agree that the excuse that you will have to work in a group in "real life" doesn't wash, because in real life, if you had someone in your team who wasn't pulling their weight, both the team and the manager would do something about it, where as most lecturers ignored the badly put together teams and marked everybody the same. It certainly didn't encourage me to want to work in a team.

[Conker2 10]

... in real life, if you had someone in your team who wasn't pulling their weight, both the team and the manager would do something about it ...

 

I wonder. Real life is probably sometimes like this as well and the slackers at University will probably try and get away with it later as well.

 

I never had group work, I did an Open University arts-based degree which as far as I can see, looking back several years later, was really an advanced essay-writing course. My final grade was determined by my essay and exam grades, and these were supposed to be determined by fixed marking criteria and backed up by an external examiner system. But there must be a big subjective element in interpreting marking criteria, and I bet most external examiners don't like to rock the boat by saying things like 'in my department this would only get a 50' etc. So I think my grades and therefore my degree can't be completely comparable with other universities.

 

I would have thought that hard subjects like maths and science wouldn't have this problem though. Either you know XYZ or you don't - much less scope for subjective and therefore fallible judgement.

[Saff 10]

Oh, and the abolition of any kind of assessed group work contributing to final marks would help too. I worked my ass off to carry several people last year and I resent having to do it just for me to retain my good grades.

 

Rant over.

 

I go into a lot of different lectures and seminars for my job and I was interested to hear that in the group work for one session I was in, the students had to rate each other on their contributions. This was a big part of the reflective side of their group work. I think they did get a group mark in the end though.

[mkent 10]

I agree,

 

I think that the marking system needs a rethink, but I think it can vary a great deal between universities and so would need to be managed carefully.