Not meeting minimum grade requirements of Job

Gael23

I have an interview coming up next week which asks for a min 2:2 degree but I got a Pass/3rd class degree.
Obviously this isn't on my CV but I'm wondering how to deal with it if asked about it?

Saipanne

Gael23 wrote: »

I have an interview coming up next week which asks for a min 2:2 degree but I got a Pass/3rd class degree.
Obviously this isn't on my CV but I'm wondering how to deal with it if asked about it?

How did you do with continuous assessment/project/dissertation?

Gael23

Saipanne wrote: »

How did you do with continuous assessment/project/dissertation?

Better than that anyway. Could I emphasise this?

Manach

Also, for any job after college, emphasis any team based activities both academic or reasoniabley socially benefical.

Saipanne

Gael23 wrote: »

Better than that anyway. Could I emphasise this?

Definitely. You were delivering high quality reports/projects to a tight deadline. That's exactly what employers want.

As for your exams, just be honest and say it didn't work out as well as you expected, given your fine performance with projects, etc.

Gael23

Saipanne wrote: »

Definitely. You were delivering high quality reports/projects to a tight deadline. That's exactly what employers want.

As for your exams, just be honest and say it didn't work out as well as you expected, given your fine performance with projects, etc.

My degree was actually quite heavily focussed on project work. However it would be difficult to prove that my continious assessment results were better because you get an overall grade for each module. Im not sure if employers even ask for verification

Saipanne

Gael23 wrote: »

My degree was actually quite heavily focussed on project work. However it would be difficult to prove that my continious assessment results were better because you get an overall grade for each module. Im not sure if employers even ask for verification

It may be difficult to prove, but you can work on how you will deliver that message, so it is convincing.

Whatever you do, don't make excuses. Just be honest. Point out where you did well, where you think you went wrong. And most important of all, what you learned from your mistakes. Above all else, don't bull**** them.

Gael23

Saipanne wrote: »

It may be difficult to prove, but you can work on how you will deliver that message, so it is convincing.

Whatever you do, don't make excuses. Just be honest. Point out where you did well, where you think you went wrong. And most important of all, what you learned from your mistakes. Above all else, don't bull**** them.

Im doing an interview coaching session before it so its something I will mention at that. I dont want to tell a blatant lie but on the other hand I feel if I tell the full truth I will be instantly ruled out.

jaymcg91

Don't lie. You'd get fired if you got found out because you lied, not because of the grade you got. I'd imagine they'd argue you were untrustworthy.

Saipanne

Gael23 wrote: »

Im doing an interview coaching session before it so its something I will mention at that. I dont want to tell a blatant lie but on the other hand I feel if I tell the full truth I will be instantly ruled out.

You won't be ruled out. Honest people capable of learning from mistakes are highly sought after.

Gael23

Saipanne wrote: »

You won't be ruled out. Honest people capable of learning from mistakes are highly sought after.

I did make a few mistakes and also at a point during my degree had some personal stuff going on which took my attention off my studies for a while, looking back that could have been minimised but didn't seem like that at the time.
Been doing some research on this and I'm finding out that voluntary work, which I've been doing for the last 2 months helps a bit.

Gael23

Would an employer typically request certificates of a degree?

Mrs OBumble

Gael23 wrote: »

Would an employer typically request certificates of a degree?

Yes. But only if you've told them that you have one and it's relevant.

If theyre interviewing the op despite the cv not mentioning the grade, then it may not matter

The most important thing is not to specifically lie. Applying for something you're not a 100%fit for isn't lying, it's just taking a chance that the conditions are negotiable.

maxwell smart

Gael23 wrote: »

I did make a few mistakes and also at a point during my degree had some personal stuff going on which took my attention off my studies for a while, looking back that could have been minimised but didn't seem like that at the time.
Been doing some research on this and I'm finding out that voluntary work, which I've been doing for the last 2 months helps a bit.

Don't use personal issues as an excuse for doing a bad job. Regardless of how major they were at the time.

Saipanne

maxwell smart wrote: »

Don't use personal issues as an excuse for doing a bad job. Regardless of how major they were at the time.

Yeah. I think it's better to have the approach where you blame yourself and then show that you understand where you went wrong and what you learned, and what you would do differently next time.

Mr. Loverman

Let's say the interview is for an IT position and I'm interviewing you. I would most likely not hire you. I will explain:

IT is full of people who hate their job. Who did it by accident. Who have no aptitude for it. I try very hard to avoid hiring these people. Generally they are poor performers and take up too much of my time (they're surfing the web, doing a half assed job, do the bare minimum, don't push themselves, etc.)

That's why I put 2.1 as a minimum score on my job ads.

Just bear this in mind. You'd need to really sell yourself to me. If I smelt any sort of bull**** I would dismiss your application, but if you were honest and the feeling I got was you messed up in the past but have matured since then (or whatever) and are motivated and taking IT seriously, I'd consider you.

Obviously I don't know what you studied or what the job is, I'm just giving you my perspective.

TimeToShine

I don't know why you think a 2.1 is synonymous with someone who likes their course? I realize this is purely anecdotal evidence but I think anyone who is a product of the LC is able to get the head down and scrape home the 2.1 whether they like the course or not. I think you may be discounting potentially very good employees if you're biased like that.

Lux23

I hated the last course I did and I got a first. Then again, it was in marketing which is easier to get good grades in.

Gael23

TimeToShine wrote: »

I don't know why you think a 2.1 is synonymous with someone who likes their course? I realize this is purely anecdotal evidence but I think anyone who is a product of the LC is able to get the head down and scrape home the 2.1 whether they like the course or not. I think you may be discounting potentially very good employees if you're biased like that.

I see your point but I get Mr.Loverman's too. Some of the interviews I've had its come up and others not but I assume an employer asks for certs at offer stage?

Mr. Loverman

TimeToShine wrote: »

I don't know why you think a 2.1 is synonymous with someone who likes their course?

That's not what I said though.

IT is full of people who hate their job. Who did it by accident. Who have no aptitude for it. I try very hard to avoid hiring these people. Generally they are poor performers and take up too much of my time (they're surfing the web, doing a half assed job, do the bare minimum, don't push themselves, etc.)

• Don't like IT
• No aptitude for IT
• Low performers

Ideally I'd only hire people with firsts as it shows a strong work ethic, but HR never agree with me...

If you've ever hired people you will know you need to avoid the duds as they make your life hell, so any red flags should be taken seriously.

Tarzana2

TimeToShine wrote: »

I don't know why you think a 2.1 is synonymous with someone who likes their course? I realize this is purely anecdotal evidence but I think anyone who is a product of the LC is able to get the head down and scrape home the 2.1 whether they like the course or not. I think you may be discounting potentially very good employees if you're biased like that.

Yeah, my sis's husband is a very successful software developer. He's 35, been interested in computers since he was 10 or so. Wasn't massively into study so got a mediocre LC and a 2:2 degree, just about.

But he's absolutely flying it in his career. No problems with his work ethic either.

I got a 2:1 (biology degree) through sheer force of will and the exams going my way, but there are huge gaps in my knowledge. It's not always a good indicator.

Saipanne

Too much emphasis is placed on final exams.

It favours the rote learner too heavily.

doc11

Saipanne wrote: »

Too much emphasis is placed on final exams.

It favours the rote learner too heavily.

Far too many excuses from people who get terrible results. If you have an interest in a subject you should be doing well in it rote learning or not. The old I'm better at Continuous assessment:rolleyes: doesn't stick for me, far too convenient an excuse. In most cases if one person finds the right/good answer everyone has with C.A

Saipanne

doc11 wrote: »

Far too many excuses from people who get terrible results. If you have an interest in a subject you should be doing well in it rote learning or not. The old I'm better at Continuous assessment:rolleyes: doesn't stick for me, far too convenient an excuse. In most cases if one person finds the right/good answer everyone has with C.A

Nothing in this post shows me to be wrong. Exams are simply a lazy solution to testing people's ability. It simply suits those who memorize information without requiring any true understanding. That's why the cramming works for people, despite it being a retarded way of absorbing information.

I achieved great results in exams and CA. But my finest achievement was finishing top of the class for my masters dissertation. That can only be achieved by avoiding the crammers route to success and actually learning something.

If I was hiring someone, I'd take the guy with the top project work, because work isn't like an exam, it's project based.

Tarzana2

doc11 wrote: »

Far too many excuses from people who get terrible results. If you have an interest in a subject you should be doing well in it rote learning or not. The old I'm better at Continuous assessment:rolleyes: doesn't stick for me, far too convenient an excuse. In most cases if one person finds the right/good answer everyone has with C.A

I had a friend on my course who is desperate at exams. I got a 2:1, she got a 2:2. I wasn't more knowledgeable, she got better CA scores than me, she studied hard and knew her shít. She just gets very nervous in exams and often blanks, whereas I tend to be quite relaxed in exams and tend to become quite confident at that stage and will take chances. I wasn't a better student than her, in fact, I was worse.

She's done amazingly well since leaving college six years ago. She got her break in a pharmaceutical company and was on her way. All her knowledge and hard work in college was displayed once she got her chance to show it off. I fared way worse in science and have changed industries since.

Saipanne

Tarzana2 wrote: »

I had a friend on my course who is desperate at exams. I got a 2:1, she got a 2:2. I wasn't more knowledgeable, she got better CA scores than me, she studied hard and knew her shít. She just gets very nervous in exams and often blanks, whereas I tend to be quite relaxed in exams and tend to become quite confident at that stage and will take chances. I wasn't a better student than her, in fact, I was worse.

She's done amazingly well since leaving college six years ago. She got her break in a pharmaceutical company and was on her way. All her knowledge and hard work in college was displayed once she got her chance to show it off. I fared way worse in science and have changed industries since.

It's simple common sense, when you think about it.

doc11

C.A are higher for everyone then exams, to say your better in C.A then exams is generally meaningless as it's the same for everyone. They are basically there to stop people failing a module and having to repeat.

If someone can assimilate a large quantity of information and produce a quality answer by "cramming" is he not more valuable then a person that spends the whole year studying to get a similar result? (leaving out the fact that lecturers will tell you whats coming in exams which make the whole process redundant anyway).Just because you spend more time studying something doesn't make you better then anyone else.

Project work in college is a pointless way of judging an individual unless your on the team involved. Getting a good grade doesn't mean you actually contributed effectively,someone can essentially carry a team by themselves. And everyone can B.S and say they led the team at an interview regardless:cool:. If your getting top grades as an individual I don't see how it would be any different in project work.

People who blank at exams aren't the type of people who you'd want in a pressurized team based environment either.

Saipanne

doc11 wrote: »

C.A are higher for everyone then exams, to say your better in C.A then exams is generally meaningless as it's the same for everyone. They are basically there to stop people failing a module and having to repeat.

If someone can assimilate a large quantity of information and produce a quality answer by "cramming" is he not more valuable then a person that spends the whole year studying to get a similar result? (leaving out the fact that lecturers will tell you whats coming in exams which make the whole process redundant anyway).Just because you spend more time studying something doesn't make you better then anyone else.

Project work in college is a pointless way of judging an individual unless your on the team involved. Getting a good grade doesn't mean you actually contributed effectively,someone can essentially carry a team by themselves. And everyone can B.S and say they led the team at an interview regardless:cool:. If your getting top grades as an individual I don't see how it would be any different in project work.

People who blank at exams aren't the type of people who you'd want in a pressurized team based environment either.

I'm very grateful I don't have your attitude to education, learning and life in general.

Thank you, Jebus.

Tarzana2

doc11 wrote: »

C.A are higher for everyone then exams, to say your better in C.A then exams is generally meaningless as it's the same for everyone. They are basically there to stop people failing a module and having to repeat.

Actually on my course, the CA assignments were modules by themselves. So if you failed on exam, they wouldn't help you compensate.

In addition, I can't speak for other courses, but on my biology course, CA was tough, involving lots of research and writing convincing discussion sections, not just reading stuff and regurgitating it. There were also small CA exams which required you to understand complex calculations and lab techniques. And there were no group projects.

As for your asinine comment on the character of people who blank in exams, I already said my friend was excelling in industry. Anyone who works in pharmaceuticals knows how pressurized it is.

Saipanne

Tarzana2 wrote: »

Actually on my course, the CA assignments were modules by themselves. So if you failed on exam, they wouldn't help you compensate.

In addition, I can't speak for other courses, but on my biology course, CA was tough, involving lots of research and writing convincing discussion sections, not just reading stuff and regurgitating it. There were also small CA exams which required you to understand complex calculations and lab techniques. And there were no group projects.

As for your asinine comment on the character of people who blank in exams, I already said my friend was excelling in industry. Anyone who works in pharmaceuticals knows how pressurized it is.

It was the same for me. Failing CA meant automatic failure of the module, no matter how well you crammed. If you regurgitated onto a page for your project, you were likely to get a 2.2. You had to show original thought to hit the top grades. As for my dissertation, it was 1/3 of my master degree, and no amount of cramming can save you there. You either know your ****, or you look like a bluffer.

Eoin

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Ideally I'd only hire people with firsts as it shows a strong work ethic, but HR never agree with me...

And on the flip side, it's often HR who put in the minimum qualifications when the hiring manager couldn't really care less, if the candidate has enough relevant experience.

Gael23

Eoin wrote: »

And on the flip side, it's often HR who put in the minimum qualifications when the hiring manager couldn't really care less, if the candidate has enough relevant experience.

This is a Trainee job so candidates won't have very much experience.