might sound a bit harsh but if you fail a whole year should you really expect a 2:1?
I should expect a 2:1, if I accept that I messed up in my second year, take my resits in August, and then come back in the third year, and work a
lot more than someone who is just aiming to get a 60% 2:1. I needed an average of around 65/66 this year to scrape a 2:1, which I achieved.
My punishment for messing up my second year is surely the fact that my 2:1 grade boundary was effectively pushed up to 65%, and that I had to come back in August to resit. To then add to that that my punishment is that I can no longer get a 2:1 (unless you deem an average of 80% do-able in an Economic degree) seems ridiculous.
The undergraduate handbook says:
"Marks obtained in year II resits are used for progression purposes but
are not used in the calculation of averages for degree classification"
I took that to mean that obviously your resit marks (say you get a 66%) won't be used for degree classification purposes, but just assumed that a 40% pass mark would be used, which I did not think unreasonable? You can't really deny that it sure as hell isn't explicit.