Interesting article. Especially in light of the comments made by the main speaker at the CPL jobs roadshow which happened recently. The comments made at those events suggested that unless college was the only thing you had done or completed recently your qualifications unless a specific requirement are of much less relevance than your measurable and demonstrable skills. Furthermore, there are plenty of very highly educated people who cannot execute clear and unambiguous communication. There is much more to recuitment and selection than an exam grade. Companies tempted to make generalisations based on such results limit their ability to attract and secure innovative and valuable talent. A good degree score does little other than show an ability to pass academic exams.

I guess it depends what area you are in. Speaking from personal experience (psychology), you need to get a 2.1 to get into a masters, any job you go for in my field will look at both your results and experience to assess your abilities.. I worked in a hospital that paid psychology graduates more if they received a 2.1. Getting a 2.1 has opened many doors for me. That said, if you get a 2.2, you can make up for it in other ways. Getting a few years of experience in the field should help.

A 2.1 degree doesn’t mean you’re good at communicating or writing which are two skills mentioned above. I know people who have first class honours and masters etc and they can’t string two sentences together.

I have 32 yrs work experience, just doing my first degree now.. wonder if it makes any difference if I get a 2:1 or 2:2. Probably just put me out to pasture!!

It’s odd though because once you have the experience your qualifications mean less.

Yeah yeah. One time aLeaving Cert was the be all, then a commoner Gardner degree, and now it’s a 2.1. Outcome? The dumbing down of a 2.1 until a first class hon. becomes the employer’s preferred qual. And so it goes.

Makes sense

Well I missed a 2.1 by a small margin myself. I did a degree in French and Spanish, which by no means is an easy thing to do. I don’t understand why people emphasise a 2.1 and say that a 2.2 is ‘below average’. At the end of the day, in language, experience is so so important! If an employer had to choose between a candidate who got a 1.1 but had little experience and another with a 2.2 but who had spent time abroad working and improving their language skills, they might just employ the latter! Anyway many MA programmes are open to those with a 2.2 now.

I believe this headline is a sign of the times we are in ………. it’san EMPLOYERS market out there; therefore they can more or less employ who (within reason) they want and set the pay and conditions they want (within reason). Also we are talking about graduates here and if a company is looking for a graduate to fill a position can you blame them for wanting recruit those with the best academic results as there probably is no other way to grade them other than their interview performance.

From working in the IT sphere experience is key, If you were presented with a candidate with a first class honours degree and another with a pass degree but also had Industrial qualifications and a bit of experience in the relevant area you require; It would (usually……… but maybe not always) be the first class degree candidate who would be left disappointed

Such the cuts in education will help now won’t they!

It’s been said, but high marks might have nothing to do with communication or a host of other things. Nothing can replace an Interview and experience, other skills, etc.

Also, the difference in marking between different courses is huge, no matter how many outside markers are brought in. In some courses, a 1st class honours might be much more achievable than a 2.2 in another course. Some courses might have more subjective content, so the examiner has much more influence, others might have very varied courses so someone who excels at one part of it might have their overall grad being lower because of another area. The list can go on, but you get the idea.

Arguably people qualifying with a 1.1 have worse communications because they have focused so much on academia, the people with a 2.1 or 2.2 spent more time in clubs and socs in my experience which recruiters seemed to prefer the soft skills they developed.