Talk:British undergraduate degree classification/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Suffixing 'Hons'

When a candidate is awarded a degree with honours, adding '(Hons)' is an unofficial practice and not part of the official degree designation. As a compromise I have left out the reference to it being an affection which I agree is POV. BlueValour 17:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

But surely it's no more 'unofficial' than abbreviating the degree to BA in the first place since there aren't any 'official' abbreviations. My uni certainly used the (Hons) suffix in the titles of their courses, though of course my degree certificate has the full 'Bachelor of Arts with Honours'. My postgrad uni did the same. - Green Tentacle 22:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I have completed a BA(Hons). Some years later, I completed an MA by thesis alone. I notice that classmates who combined their Honours-level papers with their thesis (and not graduating BA Hons) use the abbreviation MA(Hons).

Now, I completed an MA by thesis alone so naturally cannot do that. Those that passed their thesis with the award of Distinction I have observed using the following: MA(Dist). However, I was awarded the next level down, Merit. How should this be abbreviated? MA(Merit)? No-one seems able to tell me. I ask for use in professional correspondence and documentation. 203.89.172.110 (talk) 20:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

That's an utterly unofficial means - I've never seen anyone put the mark in their postnominals (and it gets very confusing as different universities use different outcomes, especially when it comes to "Merit" for Masters).

As for "combining" postnominals this is an area that generates a lot of confusion. In other fields, such as the Order of the British Empire, the various honours and awards are very clearly regarded as ranks, so anyone who is a Member (MBE) and is made a Commander (CBE) is now not a "Member" anymore and only lists "CBE" after their name and not "MBE" as well.

Traditionally universities regarded degrees conferred as ranks - so strictly speaking "Bachelor of Arts" mean "someone who has been admitted to the Faculty of Arts at the level of Bachelor" and someone who then got an MA was "raised" and not a BA as well. ("Faculty" in this context doesn't strictly mean "combination of university departments" as very often the "Faculty" named in the degree is not the same name as used for the ever changing internal university structure. I for example graduated with a BA and later an MA from a university that has never had anything called the "Faculty of Arts".) Oxford and Cambridge still follow this system, but as virtually all of their undergraduate degrees are in a different "faculty" from their higher degrees, it's generally only the no work MA that this applies to. (This system can get incredibly complicated if someone has degrees from different institutions...)

However most universities tend to regard degrees as qualifications in and of their own right, so will list the degrees separately (the Oxbridge MA is the main exception but given the lack of study an understandable one). A combinational postnominal would be out of the question.

When it comes to the undergraduate programmes that end in a Master's degree, this is primarily just the Bachelor's and Master's courses combined and tailored. The graduates only have Master's degrees. Your correct postnominals are "BA (Hons), MA". Timrollpickering (talk) 20:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'm still not sure. I imagined that my completion of the MA superceded the BA(Hons). Those in the class that did their thesis immediately following their four honours-level papers had their degree judged on a combination of their honours paper grades and the thesis grade to determine which level of honours they would use. These people use the post-nominal MA(Hons).

Those of us that had completed a BA(Hons) and then some years later went back to write a thesis are marked solely on the thesis itself. Depending on your mark your thesis is then given an honours-type award. Thus it's not a grade as such. 'Distinction' equals First Class and 'Merit" which I got equals a 2:1. Hence I have noticed people using MA(Hons) and MA(Dist). However, MA's awarded with Merit seem to be reasonably rare from my university (I was the only one at my graduation!) as most people either pass without further recognition, MA, do the MA(Hons) deal or pass with Distinction, MA(Dist).

Thus, is MA(Merit) the proper postnominal form? 203.89.172.110 (talk) 19:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

You could put MA (Merit) but it would look a bit silly. Maybe if you were advertising your academic services, e.g. as a private tutor, it would be a good idea. But in any setting that isn't self-advertising I don't see why you would. Indeed, I don't see why you would be putting the letters after your name unless you're advertising yourself somehow. In a social or even professional setting it looks a bit daft. When I had a proper job all my colleagues had lots of qualifications but only listed relevant ones, e.g. MIPPM for a payroll mananger who also had the letters BA, BD, AKC, FRSA to use if he wanted to. It's more classy to be understated!

If you have a BA (Hons) and MA from the same university just say MA, if from different universities put BA Name of University, MA Name of University.

I'm against (Hons). For one thing virtually everybody who has a degree has an honours degree, at least in England. A Pass School is very rare indeed (that is the Oxford terminology - I don't know about elsewhere; I know UCL has non-honours degrees that are awarded very rarely indeed). Whenever I see (Hons), which is thankfully rarely, I regard it with a degree of distaste. I have never put BA (Hons) after my name. Indeed, I have only put BA or MA after my name when writing to The Times on academic matters where it indicates membership of the university and explains my particular interest in the topic. There was a spate of letters in The Times a few years ago which had people signing letters John Smith MA (1st-class hons) (Edinburgh) etc. It was a series of letters about degree classification or something. My advice is just say MA. It's enough.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 16:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Just "MA" for a BA and MA from the same institution is confusing (other than Oxbridlin), especially as whether or not one gets a ..A or ..Sc can be pot luck in this day and age. Most universities regard degrees as qualifications in their own right and have never had the old "ranks in a faculty" set-up. The main use of letters is to indicate the qualifications one has achieved, so arbitarly limiting some and not others would be confusing. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't disagree, but it's a matter of context. If you're a schoolteacher or academic then by all means in the staff list you would perhaps want to appear as John Smith, BA, MA, PGCE, or Professor John Smith, BSc MSc (London), PhD ScD (Manchester), FRS, to show the full range of your qualifications. That said, at my school the Head Master and the head of English, to name but two, were both BA and MA of the University of Wales and just appeared as MA. The Head Master on his writing paper uses just the letters MA, although he does of course have a BA. Presumably he assumes that anyone will know that he also has a BA - indeed a BA (Hons). And also, having reached the dizzying hights of a headmastership, he probably doesn't need to advertise his credentials.

There is also a question about when it is appropriate to use initials for degrees anyway. As I said, I use mine only when writing about an academic concern. If you are writing to the local council about bin collection you do not need to advertise that you have a degree. If you are writing to The Times about the Higgs boson you may find your letter is more likely to be published if your writing paper advertises you as John Smith, ScD (Cantab). I have long puzzled over the reviser of my Cassell's German dictionary, Harold T. Betteridge, M.A. (Birm.), Ph.D. (Lond.) My guess is that he is a BA and MA of the University of Birmingham; but what does it profit him to tell us so? The style guides tell us that socially only DD is used. For other doctors just put Dr John Smith.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 12:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Not only it is appropriate to put abbreviations after your name, not only you are entitled to do it, but it is actually expected of you to do it. Your university should have issued you with a policy paper where it is explained to you the exact abbreviation you are entitled (and expected) to use, together with the official university abbreviation. All qualifications usually have abbreviations: for example Open University entitles its Certificate (60 CATS) holders to put Cert after their name, with further abbreviations denoting field of expertise and university, eg the Certificate in Health Science is Cert Health Sci (Open), and Diploma (120 CATS) is Dip, while Certificate of Higher Education (120 CATS) is CertHE, Diploma of Higher Education is DipHE, ordinary Bachelor's is BA (or BSc, BEng, etc), Honours degree is BA(Hons) (Hon if writing in US English), Postgraduate Certificate (60 CATS) is PgCert, Postgraduate Diploma is PgDip, Master's degree is MA (or MSc, MSc(Eng), MEng, etc), Master of Research is MRes, Master of Philosophy is MPhil, Doctor of Philosophy is PhD, Doctor of Science is ScD or DSc, Doctor of Letters is DLitt, etc, and for all of these one should perfectly add the Latin abbreviation of the university (but some universities have English abbreviations) like BSc (Open) or BA(Hons) (Oxon) or BA (Cantab). Adding the honours class and year of graduation is possible, too: BA(Hons I) (Oxon 06). Academic degrees abbreviations always must be befoe abbreviations conferred by professional or royal societies (eg BA (Open), FBCS) but always after abbreviations offered by orders (eg MBE, BA (Cantab), MIET) with no commas between abbreviations of the same type but with commas between abbreviations of different types, eg: OBE OC OBC, BA(Hons III) Phil (Cantab 95) BEng(Hons I) Aero (Open 98) MSc(Eng) Civ (Exon 03) PhD (Oxon 07) DSc (Open 08), FIET FBCS CPhys IEng CSci. Note that some abbreviations are not postnominals but rather conferred to be used before the name, eg Eur Ing. As I said, people are expected to use them, they are not given to individuals for advertising purposes but as a means to give one's dues to the societies and universities that gave one their postnominal letters. So when a gentleperson puts abbreviations after their name they do not do so to advertise themselves but rather to pay their dues to their alma mater. It is only non-gentlepersons that do not understand this and use postnominals in a vulgar way to advertise themselves. With this in mind, one would expect that not using postnominals would be a minor form of hubris (not paying due respect to their alma matter), but in practice it is often difficult to list all abbreviations. In the past I was using all my postnominals after my name and as a result whereever I was writing my name it became two lines long, and furthermore people started assuming that I was advertising myself while what I was doing what simply paying respect to my university and professional societies, so when I became bored of writing two lines of text just to put my name and got misunderstood by various people who are not aware of this kind of culture (having been raised in a degenerated egotistical society with no sense of respect to one's family, country, army, university, institutions, etc) I was faced with the dillema of either choosing which abbreviations were the most important to list or not listing any at all, and not wanting to make a judgement on the importance of different organisations and still running the risk of people from different backgrounds passing assumptions on me, I decided not to list anything at all. After all the people who recognise abbreviations are so few in our days that this kind of culture can, perhaps, be considered a thing of the past. NerdyNSK (talk) 21:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Percentages of students recieving the degrees

It would make sense to report what percentages of students recieve the different grades. The article does state, that approximately 20% recieve a 3rd degree and 10% recieve a 1st degree, but what about a 2:1 and a 2:2. Are these two groups equally big, meaning that those who recieve a 2:1 is the best 45%? - Marc K 19:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Generally the proportions are roughly:

• 1st - top 10%
• 2:1 - next 50%
• 2:2 - next 30%
• 3rd - bottom 10%

But this varies from university to university. 129.12.200.49 16:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll weigh in here: It varies all right, and the percentages have changed markedly over the last 40 years - I did a Physics degree at Dundee University in the early seventies and of an intake of 57 students, roughly half didn't get a degree at all, 15 got an Ordinary degree (a Scottish pass degree), while another 15 were invited (yes, you had to be invited, usually at the end of second year or early in third, you couldn't just apply) to do the honours course. Of those, one got a first, 2 a 2.1, and 3 or 4 a 2.2 (my memory fails me), the rest receiving a third class honours, which was quite distinct from an ordinary degree in scotland, since the scope and difficulty of the course material was entirely different. Then, to get a 2.2, you had to score an average exceeding 65, >75 for a 2.1 and >85 for a first. Scores were calculated over both course work (tutorials, labs) and exams, the course work contributing one-third. There has been enormous degree devaluation in British Universities over the last 30 years, with some 'Universities' awarding 1st class degrees to more than 20% of their intake. The whole system is so meaningless now and comparisons so useless that I really think we should chuck it and start again. My brother got a double first from St.Andrews university in the very early sixties. To do that, he had to score more than 90 average in each of 2 different disciplines over the last two years of his honours course! But I've worked in places where newly employed 1st class electrical/electronic engineering graduates were easily outstripped and shown up by our engineering apprentices, lads without a degree, working towards their professional qualifications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.167.113.130 (talk) 06:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

There are some stats by department from University of Manchester, <http://www.student-direct.co.uk/news/degree-classifications-fluctuate-wildly> --87.127.117.246 (talk) 23:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to be lazy, but I'm really busy. If anyone else has time, you can find precise and very clear (percentage) statistics for UK degree classifications awarded in spreadsheets openly available at the HESA website (this is the government body charged with officially recording HE stats, which all universities are obliged to provide them with). I've seen the data myself, but don't have time right now to find it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.84.248.99 (talk) 14:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I've done just that - created a graph from the HESA data 1995-2011 and put it in the relevant section over at the Grade inflation entry (seemed more relevant there), which I linked from here.IMGrant (talk) 11:57, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Good reference source for article

<http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0749444835/ref=A9/?%5Fencoding=UTF8&keywords=%22third%20class%22%20degree%20pass%20honours&p=S030&checkSum=LZvZ%2bVwSHFZrYJ1gJc80vy9xPm6kx%2b2r%2fFm9ehI0H8U=> Bwithh 02:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Neil Ascherson's triple first

Neil Ascherson only did History, which means it would have only been possible to get a double first. Is there any evidence he got a triple first? A UK Student forum member apparently emailed Kings and they said he only got a double first: <http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/archive/index.php/t-237719.html> Unadopted 16:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Drinker's degree

A minor point, but the article refers to a Third as being called a Drinker's Degree, and provides an appropriate reference. However, in this case the reference is wrong. A quick google search suggests that a 2:2 is commonly referred to as a Drinker's Degree. The author of the Guardian article got it wrong.--Victim Of Fate 13:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Difference between "with honours" and without

I'm not sure this is a clear cut matter. In Scotland the non honours degree takes three years, the honours degree four, whilst Open University has an "ordinary degree" that requires 300 CATS points and an honours degree requiring 360; but otherwise in my experience of England & Wales a Bachelors degree without honours is one that has been specifically denied honours for whatever reason - failing a year and having to retake is one but I'm not sure this is a universal application - rather than a distinctive different set of study.

Consequently I don't know if it's always the case that "first", "second" and "third" only apply to Honours degrees - I suspect some universities may apply them to all Bachelors degrees. Does anyone know of any clear sources on this? Timrollpickering 10:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

A Bachelor's degree can be issued with honours, if the student completes 360 CATS with adequate marks, or as an ordinary degree, if the student completes 300 CATS with adequate marks or 360 CATS with inadequate marks, but the exact details differ from university to university. Honours degrees are classified (first, 2:1, 2:2, third, and sometimes auregat). I have never heard of ordinary degrees with classification. It is not necessary that a student is denied honours to get an ordinary degree: a student may not wish to receive an honours at all. For example, 300 CATS can be completed faster than 360 CATS, so some students could prefer an ordinary degree to an honours one if they cannot wait to complete the 60 remaining credits (and half of these credits usually come from a short thesis), and even students who completed 360 credits may have preferred to not spend much effort at their studies and graduate with an ordinary degree instead if they believe that's enough for their purposes. An ordinary degree is not less a degree compared to an honours degree, they are both Bachelor's degrees, but the honours usually includes a thesis, so it denotes a higher mental achievement. Ordinary degree holders are entitled and expected to put BA (or BSc, BEng etc) after their name, while Honours graduates are entitled and expected to put BA(Hons), preferably including the classification as well, so a third-class is BA(Hons III), and as with all degrees the Latin name of the university and year of graduation can be put afterwards eg BA(Hons III) (Cantab 07). Students who complete 360 credits but fail to receive the necessary marks get an ordinary degree. NerdyNSK (talk) 20:18, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

As I recall it you needed 360 units, 180 of which must be at the "higher level", and must include a "substantial piece self-motivated study" ... or some such goobledygook (meaning a dissertation) for an honours degree. falling short of the 360, or not managing to finish the dissertation (or equivalent) would mean you could only matriculate without honours. As I understood it, classifications were available to anyone leaving with ordinary degree, DipHE, or whatever, but that might depend on the institution. And whether anyone takes any notice is another matter.

Possible confusion in this article, I believe these definitions have evolved over time, and what is written is the latest system being applied in all or some British institutions. I'm really not sure it is universally true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.131.216 (talk) 22:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Not all ordinary degrees are a result of a "failed honours degree" in England, either. With the Open University you can accept an ordinary degree and then do another course to gain full honours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.118.73 (talk) 16:33, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Special degree

The article should say something about a 'special', occasionally awarded at Cambridge (and maybe e.g. Oxford), which I suspect is the same as or similar to a pass degree. 79.78.126.201 (talk) 20:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I have never heard of the special degree being award at Oxford. However, I do know somebody whose brother was given one at Cambridge. The Pass degree at Oxford is awarded to those who satisfy the examiners in a Pass School. I don't know how the special is awarded at Cambridge. There is a mention on this website of somebody obtaining a special degree from the University of London, but I think it must mean something different as the person has obviously had a distinguished academic career. Indeed it appears that in India 'Special' means something good, so he may be transferring the Indian terminology. Academic_degree#Scotland gives a Scottish meaning. It seems also to be a term meaning the same as a War Degree.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 01:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree something should be said about this. AFAIK a Special at Cambridge is like a pass degree, i.e. the lowest level of degree, and is rarely awarded. I'm not sure whether it's possible to fail a Cambridge degree, as it was traditionally the case (and may still be) that if you are in Cambridge for nine terms you qualify for a degree, so I think a Special may be really a fail masquerading as a minimal pass. 93.96.236.8 (talk) 20:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Second class degrees

Thought I'd weigh in here. As far as socially and certainly within Professions in the City, the distinction between 2:1s and 2:2s is massive. I agree that this makes little sense considering the that both grade classifications are ridiculously wide (10%) and right next to each other, but that is the way people see things. A 2:1 is more likely to be thrown in with a first in conversation than with a 2:2. As such the article should seperate the two degree classifications. Whether this division is fair or not is irrelevant. Whether you wish to argue that people who get 2:2s are just as smart as those who get 2:1s is irrelevant. Social treatment of the two classifications is widely varied and this should be reflected within the article.--Zoso Jade (talk) 21:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll weigh in too. Over the last few decades a great many of the candidates that would have had a 2:2 now get a 2:1. It has become the "real passing grade" just like how in A-Levels the first grade really worth having is probably a B now, because of grade-inflation. In your GCSEs you can "pass" with any mark but actually, below a C is worthless.

Similarly, under systems where it's not seen as necessary to call everything but the most appalling performance a "pass", anything below the 2:1 would fail. In reality 2:1 and 1st may just as well be called "pass" and "merit" because the one is the large body of students who did at least well enough to for example do the next degree up afterwards, and there are a great many of them, and the ones with 1st did "particularly well"... all the UK rhetoric using words like outstanding and all that is just political hype. It isn't THAT special, at least not in general. Princeofdelft (talk) 09:18, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

First Class Degrees

The section on First Class degrees currently goes on and on about the system in place at Cambridge. This is an article about what a first class degree means in general in the UK rather than what it means at one particular university. All talk of the tripos system should be left to a Cambridge-specific articles.--Zoso Jade (talk) 11:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Just thought I'd add so that hopefully someone sees this and fixes it, that when it says that very few get a first degree in physics or engineering, this is untrue. Go check for yourself! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.107.40 (talk) 21:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

What an uninformative article...save us the crap about cockney slang...

Where are the equivalencies of the various degrees, first, second etc. with the % of the grades, isn't that the single most important thing to write here.... Who gives a damn if 11% of the students graduate with a first if you give no indication of what %100 of the total grade is a first anyway...

I added it myself based on a query here in discussions by another user.

91.132.224.196 (talk) 23:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I second the motion to remove this paragraph; it is irrelevant to those outside of the regions in the south of England.--Vindicta (talk) 23:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Where on earth did that slang come from? I am from the south of england and attended a London university and have never heard any of those. I don't really think it adds anything to the article. Philman132 (talk) 13:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Vindicta and Philman: remove the section on slang. I haven't heard any of these in the UK (where I graduated in the 1960s and the 1980s) or in Australia (where I now teach undergraduates), and the allusions to media celebrities would have to be both local and ephemeral. Nor have I heard any Australian equivalents. For those who remember it - one might just as well include a "Porterhouse Blue". --Wikiain (talk) 23:36, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I've never seen cockney slang in any other Wikipedia article (though presumably there is an article for it where it belongs). I went to a London university and never heard any of these terms, and never heard them during my long career. Cockney slang was used in the East End area of London (within the sound of Bow Bells), traditionally an area of manual workers who would not have gone to university, and this area does not even have a university. There is therefore no sensible connection between cockney slang and degree grades. The fact the suggested slang uses modern names gives the game away; they are nothing to do with traditional cockney. The section on cockney slang should definitely be removed from this article. FreeFlow99 (talk) 10:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Abbreviations

I would love to see, the list of abbreviations concerning the above-mentioned degrees. Right now the article is incomplete. For instance, I know that second class is abbreviated to 2:1, but how about firs, we write like (Hons I), (Hons) I, that kind of stuff is quite handy for prospect applicants for postgrad --huski (talk) 12:40, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Applicants for postgraduate places and grants will state their qualifications fully, with emphasis on an honours class, in their application. They will probably also supply academic references, which would discuss their honours class and sometimes where they came within that class (e.g. high, medium and low "first"). Abbreviations will be irrelevant. --Wikiain (talk) 23:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

BA vs BSc

Removed from article: "However, this includes BSc degrees. As assessment for arts degrees (B.a) is more normative and less mathematical, therefore, it can be said that much fewer than 11% of candidates graduate with a First-class honours in the UK. " by 188.221.109.225.

Presumably "much fewer than 11%" is meant to refer to either BA or BSc students specifically, since 11% overall (for that year at least) is assured by the reference. Either way it needs a source, and doesn't change the fact stated in the previous sentence. Plus I don't believe the variation is even greater than BA vs BSc: I think within these degree types, or even within individual subjects, different institutions do things differently. Finally, saying that 11% of candidates got a first in a particular year is different from saying that universities always give the top 11% of candidates a first (that's not even suggested in the article). Quietbritishjim (talk) 08:49, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Since the removed text appeared to think that BA and BSc degrees necessaroly cover less and more mathematical subjects respectively, which is of course incorrect, it's a good job it was removed. BAs in Physics, Computing, Chemistry, Geology, Biochemistry, Mathematics and so on are awarded by some British universities. For example at Oxford, every first degree course leading to a bachelors degree leads to either a BA or a BFA, not to a BSc. Michealt (talk) 15:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)