2.1 to a first??

CocoMouse

Hey guys, need some help!

After viewing my provisional results and checking my GPA I found that I am a matter of a few points off graduating with a 1.1. Although I realise a 2.1 is a very good result I have worked very hard throughout my degree (psychology), achieving no less than a B- in any subject, including my first year when grades are not taken into account.

I also feel that I would have been able to achieve higher grades in my assignments had individual feedback been given on more modules. In the few modules that I received even a small amount of individual feedback I was able to work on the areas in which I fell down at mid term to achieve higher grades at final assessment, and I regret the fact that more of our lecturers do not give individual feedback, as I feel my final grades would have greatly improved in other modules as well.

I was wondering if there was any kind of extra credit I could apply for, or if any of my grades might be reconsidered in order that I would receive the few extra grade points I need to boost my GPA to 3.68 (I think its around 3.57 at the moment, however I am awaiting final results and credit from another module to be applied), at which point I would achieve a 1.1. I am interested in pursuing a PhD and I feel that I would be much more competitive if I graduated this higher grade.

I have emailed the head of school, but I dont know how she'll react... has anyone been in this situation before and successfully gotten the higher mark?

Any thoughts or practical advice would be very much appreciated.

Thanks in advance!!!

WeeBushy

Moving from 3.57 to 3.68 it a lot bigger than you think. You have to move up, on average, over half a grade in every module that counts towards your degree to increase you GPA by .11

Extra credit can be completed, but it will not count towards your GPA:

Any additional credit accumulated by a student who has deferred graduation, i.e. extra credit, will not contribute to the award of honours in the programme or any of its constituent majors. The transcript will show these extra modules and associated grades, and credit will be awarded for all modules completed. However, the grades awarded in the extra modules will not contribute to the stage GPA or degree GPA.

http://www.ucd.ie/registry/academicsecretariat/asug/programmecompletiongraduation/

The only way you will be able to increase it is by appealing a lot of results, but seeing as appealing to increase a grade isn't a reason UCD accepts, you will have to find discrepancies/poor marking for them to be changed.

Assessment appeals: http://www.ucd.ie/appeals/exam_appeal.htm

Powerhouse

CocoMouse wrote: »

Hey guys, need some help!

After viewing my provisional results and checking my GPA I found that I am a matter of a few points off graduating with a 1.1. Although I realise a 2.1 is a very good result I have worked very hard throughout my degree (psychology), achieving no less than a B- in any subject, including my first year when grades are not taken into account.

I also feel that I would have been able to achieve higher grades in my assignments had individual feedback been given on more modules. In the few modules that I received even a small amount of individual feedback I was able to work on the areas in which I fell down at mid term to achieve higher grades at final assessment, and I regret the fact that more of our lecturers do not give individual feedback, as I feel my final grades would have greatly improved in other modules as well.

I was wondering if there was any kind of extra credit I could apply for, or if any of my grades might be reconsidered in order that I would receive the few extra grade points I need to boost my GPA to 3.68 (I think its around 3.57 at the moment, however I am awaiting final results and credit from another module to be applied), at which point I would achieve a 1.1. I am interested in pursuing a PhD and I feel that I would be much more competitive if I graduated this higher grade.

I have emailed the head of school, but I dont know how she'll react... has anyone been in this situation before and successfully gotten the higher mark?

Any thoughts or practical advice would be very much appreciated.

Thanks in advance!!!

To be honest, while a 3.57 is a good grade it is a long way off 3.68 in terms of what's required to make the jump. You should put your grades into an excel spreadsheet and trick around with them to see what would be required to reach 3.68. You'll be surprised at the amount of grades that would need to increase. I did six modules in one of the my final year subjects and got a 3.6. I would have needed three of them to increase to get to 3.68 - half the course essentially would have had to be regraded.

Maybe it's worth a try but I certainly didn't think so in my case. Just beware that there is a substantial gap there. In old money you're just under 68 per cent on the 2.1 scale but sometimes people don't appreciate the significance of awarding that extra two per cent.

dr gonzo

I can commiserate OP, I worked very hard and, like you, Im at a point where I'm very close to a first. To put things in perspective however, I'm on a 3.65 and really have no way to move up as this would require a jump of 3 grades. While this sounds small there has to be specific reasons why you should be moved up, i.e my lecturers are not just going to pick a random course I did and bump me from a B to an A if I havent earned it. More to the point though is that at this stage the university knows whats going on and apparently really dont like the idea of grades being moved for no other reason then to get people over the threshold.

In your case OP I think these points are even more relevant because the jump from 3.57 to 3.68 is enormous and I would be shocked if your lecturers would even contemplate moving a fraction of the grades that you would need brought up to get your first.

Its a ****ty system but I suppose we can both take comfort that our complaints in part stems from doing very well, and we can always just use our gpa instead of saying we got a 2.1...

Bougeoir

Well I missed a 2.1 by 0.03 myself and tried to increase my GPA from 3.05 to 3.08 with little luck as the module coordinators have to abide my UCD policy. In fact, I checked what would be required to reach a 2.1 and it's 4 extra grade points. Anyway, the final grade you need depends really on what you were studying and want to do. In my own circumstances, I was doing French and Spanish and the MA programme I want to do only require a 2.2 and value experience (in my case, living and working abroad). Maybe you could try to gain valuable experience on your CV? It seems that hat's what many employers are looking for these days anyway. Anyway you got a high 2.1, you should be happy. Had I performed better in second year, I would have gotten a 2.1 too but hey 'C'est la vie'!

graduate

I was wondering if there was any kind of extra credit I could apply for, or if any of my grades might be reconsidered in order that I would receive the few extra grade points I need to boost my GPA to 3.68 (I think its around 3.57 at the moment, however I am awaiting final results and credit from another module to be applied), at which point I would achieve a 1.1. I am interested in pursuing a PhD and I feel that I would be much more competitive if I graduated this higher grade.

Any institution which regards 3.68 as being vastly different from 3.57 wouldn't be worth doing a PhD in.

dr gonzo

graduate wrote: »

Any institution which regards 3.68 as being vastly different from 3.57 wouldn't be worth doing a PhD in.

Not to hi-jack the thread but I was thinking this myself. I hope that Phd funders (what few there are) will look at transcripts and GPA's rather then a broad, and rather useless, term like 2.1 or 1.1

pljudge321

graduate wrote: »

Any institution which regards 3.68 as being vastly different from 3.57 wouldn't be worth doing a PhD in.

My PhD offer was conditional on graduating with a first and that's from a college an order of magnitude higher up in the rankings than UCD so it does happen. Definitely a bit unfair if you are absolutely borderline.

Same deal with IRCSET PhD's. If you claim you're going to get first and you don't then you don't get the funding, doesn't matter how close you were.

The 2.1 bracket of 3.08 to 3.68 is far too broad IMHO. There can be a hell of a difference work wise between the upper and lower ends of it so I think the people on higher 2.1's do get a bit shafted in that regard.

Powerhouse

pljudge321 wrote: »

The 2.1 bracket of 3.08 to 3.68 is far too broad IMHO. There can be a hell of a difference work wise between the upper and lower ends of it so I think the people on higher 2.1's do get a bit shafted in that regard.

Certainly the 2.1 spectrum was too easy to get onto given the massive difference between 60% and 69%. When I started in UCD a 2.1 was 62%, then if broadened inexplicably to 60%. Like you say that's too broad - and it's far too easy for many people to land somewhere on the 2.1 spectrum without tearing up any trees along the way.

All that said, does it make any difference now that nobody has a 2.1 on their transcript anymore? The 3.08-3.67 is surely just a guideline while people get used to the change? Down the line people presumably will think of their GPAs as grades A, A-, B+, B etc. and their will be less torment about abstractions such as 2.1s and 2.2s.

dr gonzo

Powerhouse wrote: »

Certainly the 2.1 spectrum was too easy to get onto given the massive difference between 60% and 69%. When I started in UCD a 2.1 was 62%, then if broadened inexplicably to 60%. Like you say that's too broad - and it's far too easy for many people to land somewhere on the 2.1 spectrum without tearing up any trees along the way.

All that said, does it make any difference now that nobody has a 2.1 on their transcript anymore? The 3.08-3.67 is surely just a guideline while people get used to the change? Down the line people presumably will think of their GPAs as grades A, A-, B+, B etc. and their will be less torment about abstractions such as 2.1s and 2.2s.

Completely agree. Correct me if im wrong but I believe the American system might be like that. They have latine honours for the top percentiles (but with very narrow margins) and then after that it just seems to be a degree with the GPA representing the more detailed breakdown.

If this is the case, its far better in my opinion