Degrees

[oddoneout]

Lanchester Poly in the early seventies - 50 on course no firsts and few Desmonds but we were probably thick .....

I doubt that. Polytechnics had a different purpose from Universities and a different student make-up. In the same way that any school can put out good league table results if its cohorts are of the right demographic and academic profile, any half way competent university should turn in good degree results from students with known academic history(A levels). The real skill is in enabling students from less conventional or advantageous backgrounds to get good results, and that was something that the best polytechnics were very good at.
In my year one of the two Firsts went to a mature student who had no A levels, who had been unable to get a university to even consider her application.

[MrGongGong]

Firsts from Oxbridge were what was sought when recruiting and there was no great difficulty in finding them - young qualified accountants wanting to get into corporate finance in the nineties. I don't know if people with lower degree classesor from elsewhere would have succeeded as they didn't get past first base. Generally speaking the selection system produced the required result.

You might have a first from Oxbridge (and probably one of those "fake" MA's n'all) but unless you know who Wyndham Lewis was you can sling your hook IMV

[Beef Oven!]

Nearly half of all young people go on to higher education these days. That means they are cleverer than we were because back in the day it was very hard to get into university. If they are cleverer than us, then there will be higher grades coming out. I call it progress.

[Dave2002]

Generally speaking the selection system produced the required result.

Which raises a question "required by whom?".
It doesn't follow that the results were optimum, and few people would admit that they made the wrong choice surely.

I'm not actually disagreeing, but it is possible that the results only suited some people's purposes. This is always a problem with selection procedures. Your statement is based on opinions and personal assumptions I suspect.

[Dave2002]

You might have a first from Oxbridge (and probably one of those "fake" MA's n'all) but unless you know who Wyndam Lewis was you can sling your hook IMV

In contrast to Wyndham Lewis maybe - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyndham_Lewis

[MrGongGong]

In contrast to Wyndham Lewis maybe - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyndham_Lewis

indeed

Thanks Dave

[vinteuil]

In contrast to Wyndham Lewis maybe - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyndham_Lewis

... Percy W-L was a particularly unpleasant piece of work; I don't know much about the other Wyndham Lewises.

Not quite sure why MrGong2 is so keen on him...


.

[MrGongGong]

... Percy W-L was a particularly unpleasant piece of work; I don't know much about the other Wyndham Lewises.

Not quite sure why MrGong2 is so keen on him...


.

I'm not particularly
but was amazed that no-one on UC the other week had heard of him
or the Vorticists

[Historian]

... Percy W-L was a particularly unpleasant piece of work; I don't know much about the other Wyndham Lewises.

Not quite sure why MrGong2 is so keen on him... .

See the 'University Challenge' thread for a reference to the said Wyndham-Lewis.

[Serial_Apologist]

... Percy W-L was a particularly unpleasant piece of work; I don't know much about the other Wyndham Lewises.

Not quite sure why MrGong2 is so keen on him...


.

This raises an interesting moral dilemma I've often thought about - to what extent having a dodgy character or record in other respects should impact on a person's influence being seen as exemplary. It's an unfortunate truth that some notables who have had positive influences on what came after them often happen to have questionable characters in other respects - one example being the psychotherapist R.D. Laing, who happens to be something of a hero of mine, despite his drink problem and stories alleging mistreatment of close family members. Karl Marx and Engels have often been found guilty of being members of the very bourgeoisie they claimed to despise and of whom they appealed for the overthrow. Others would include famous composers, the quality of whose music and subsequent influence have been subject to quite a lot of discussion here and elsewhere. I remember discussing this aspect of Miles Davis with Ian Carr, the late jazz trumpeter and author of an excellent biog on Miles, and Ian saying, "His actual motive is irrelevant. People might play for what we would consider the worst of motives, meaning merely for money or fame. But it doesn't matter. If he's got the ability or vision he can use it in a wonderful way. And similarly you take a guy with no ability but the purest of motives in the world, and what will come out is crap! So in a sense, sincerity and purity of motive are irrelevant. The only thing that matters is the man's vison and talent. There's a lot of muddled thinking. Everybody thinks if you're sincere, that's it. Sincerity's nothing. It's rubbish. You can be totally sincere and a total idiot! These points should be realised, because what we must do is recognise creativity and talent where we see it". Although I tend to warm to sincerity against intelligence per se, I'm glad I've kept that interview with Ian from 1986. In the end it all comes down to a question of accountability.

[ardcarp]

I think the whole question of thinking ahead as to what grade one might get is more in people's minds now. I don't remember anyone deliberately aiming or expecting to get a first.

The same applies in schools. I don't remember (admittedly in the Stone Age) anyone bothering unduly about what grade they might get at GCE or A-level. Nowadays, kids are continually bombarded with their 'target grades' from age 11 onwards.

Back to degrees. No-one in my year got a 1st. There were three II(i)s and the majority got a II(ii) which was a perfectly respectable degree. (The 'Desmond' had not been coined back then.) There was even a 3rd class degree awarded and one aegrotat.

Grade inflation has steered clear of one area; namely Associated Board Music Exams. They are as hard as they ever were (with the possible exception of Grades 1 and 2 on wind instruments, which used not to exist.) Strange that a subject which the general public might regard as airy-fairy has kept the standard flying high.

[jean]

Back to degrees. No-one in my year got a 1st. There were three II(i)s and the majority got a II(ii) which was a perfectly respectable degree.

Very much how it was in my time at Exeter.

(The 'Desmond' had not been coined back then.)

(What is it?)

Back to A levels.

I can only really speak of my own subject, but back then, Prose Composition was the hardest thing we had to do.

It is now optional at A level for both Latin and Greek. But if you do choose to take it, you will find that North & Hillard, which used to be an O level textbook, will be sufficient for your needs.

[french frank]

The same applies in schools. I don't remember (admittedly in the Stone Age) anyone bothering unduly about what grade they might get at GCE or A-level.

I was discussing this with an old schoolfriend a few weeks back. We agreed that among our year, something like 80-100 pupils, we could only think of two who might have got what would now be called 'straight As' (never mind A*s). They were bright, but even they might have nodded on the all-important exam days. Now, students actually aim for - and really hope to get - what we would never have dreamed of. And they take more subjects than we took

[oddoneout]

The same applies in schools. I don't remember (admittedly in the Stone Age) anyone bothering unduly about what grade they might get at GCE or A-level. Nowadays, kids are continually bombarded with their 'target grades' from age 11 onwards.

Back to degrees. No-one in my year got a 1st. There were three II(i)s and the majority got a II(ii) which was a perfectly respectable degree. (The 'Desmond' had not been coined back then.) There was even a 3rd class degree awarded and one aegrotat.

Grade inflation has steered clear of one area; namely Associated Board Music Exams. They are as hard as they ever were (with the possible exception of Grades 1 and 2 on wind instruments, which used not to exist.) Strange that a subject which the general public might regard as airy-fairy has kept the standard flying high.

The grades at O and A level were of concern in those cases where they represented the gateway to further education. Entry to 6th Form at my school was dependent on passing your O levels at sufficient standard, and of course uni entry would be conditional on grades. The difference now is that the pressure is on the teacher to get the pupils to reach the required(for whatever purpose) grades, with constant monitoring,and where necessary 'intervention'. Whereas in my day it was very much a case of the lesson was taught and it was up to the pupils to do the necessary to take that forward to the exams. Certain teachers were known to be more successful than others, and things like the half-termly and termly tests might show that up, but where there were deficiencies in skills the chances of action being taken(to help either teacher or pupil) were zilch.
It is good to hear the ABM exam standards are being maintained. Do you think that might have something to do with them being practical exams, and does the same also apply to things like dance? Playing a scale or performing a particular step are not really open to levels of interpretation in the same way that an essay topic might be.

[oddoneout]

I was discussing this with an old schoolfriend a few weeks back. We agreed that among our year, something like 80-100 pupils, we could only think of two who might have got what would now be called 'straight As' (never mind A*s). They were bright, but even they might have nodded on the all-important exam days. Now, students actually aim for - and really hope to get - what we would never have dreamed of. And they take more subjects than we took

It will be interesting to see what effect the(latest) changes to A level will have.The splitting into AS and A2 has been dropped and it's back to 2 year courses and exams at the end in one chunk, which presumably will reduce the number of subjects that can be taken. While the repeating modules until a decent grade was obtained had perhaps gone too far, as far as I can see the changes are going to make it more difficult for many pupils to access and get anything from post GCSE education. If they give up after the first year there will be nothing to show for it, unlike completing an AS.