Does your university cap resits at the pass mark, or give you zero?

[Carzy]

Need a quick survey of different universities....

Basically, I've got my degree results today, and found out that my second year resits were automatically given zero, rather than being capped at a pass mark. This seems ridiculously harsh to me, seeing as how badly it will screw up any average. It takes me from a 2:1 to a 2:2....

From a quick browse of other university websites it seems they cap at 40% or whatever the pass mark is. I'm looking to appeal my degree classification, and so it would be good if I could also point out other universities don't use this zero rule (or maybe some do, I don't know yet...) then it might add weight to my appeal.

Cheers

 

[Carzy]

how can it be capped at 0%? surely that means that taking the resit is totally pointless?

and at mine its capped at 40%

It's "only used for progression purposes" apparently. It's completely ridiculous. I messed up my second year, so I worked my arse off this year, got a high 2:1 average, but I get a 2:2 because of my resits in the second year. It means doing anything in the third year is pointless basically. My tutor basically just said "that's how the system is" and told me how someone he knew had got all 2:1s, except one exam, which he resit (and thus got zero), and he ended up with a 2:2 overall! He just sorta said "we all thought it was injust but there was nothing we could do". Complete bull****, of course there's something you can do, you can flippin' change the rules. He said they had the rule because of "legality" or some rubbish. It basically means if you mess up your second year you have zero (literally) chance of getting a 2:1 in the third year.

 

[Carzy]

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.

 

[Carzy]

Capped at pass mark (40%) at Birmingham. I imagine certain course may be different though; what are you doing Carzy?

Economics at Nottingham University.

 

[Carzy]

That's a pretty bizarre system really. You would have got higher than 0% when you first failed the module so why on earth would they force you to resit in order to progress, but then give you no mark at all as opposed to the commonly accepted 40% cap, or at the very least your original marks?

I've just realised I didn't quite make it clear, that my mark is at zero, because I didn't go to the exam, so automatically got a 0. Giving me my original marks, is therefore giving me 0%. It doesn't really change the problem though, seeing as there's not any difference between me not going to the exam, and me going and getting 1%. Either way, they still aren't capping the resit at 40%.

 

[Carzy]

Kinda defeats the point of being able to resit a bit though, if your grade can't move at all. Having it capped at the very minimum pass mark makes a bit more sense to me, I'd find it odd to see someone coming out of uni with a pass, but with marks below pass grade. If they're letting you resit they should at least give that, it my opinion anyhow.

And on a slight tangent, I think he said it was 0% because he didn't attend the exam for whatever reason? You could argue that if he had been at the exam he would have got a higher mark even if it was just 1%. Although then the reasons he didn't go to the exam would have to be justified a bit more.

I don't think it would change the justification at all though, it's the overly punitive nature of only taking your first-sit mark, even after a favourable resit which would take you to 40%. I'd get a 2:2 whether I got 20% in my exams and then did re-sits, or if I got 0% and then did re-sits (under the Nottingham Uni system).

I didn't bull**** my way through an extenuating circumstances claim (which I could have done, claiming depression/drug addiction), but instead took it on my back and worked my arse off to correct my mistake. There's no rehabilitation aspect to the system as it were, and therefore there is no incentive for me to work at all in the third year. To punish in three ways: 1. Having to come back in August and resit exams (for which I had to cut short a holiday abroad), 2. Having my 2:1 target raised to 65%, AND 3. Taking all my resits at first-sit mark seems ridiculously draconian.

 

[Carzy]

sorry if this is off topic, but its not worthy of a thread in itself.

are the exams given at every uni the same exams? like a calculus module paper for example, is this the same paper nationwide? or does each uni set its own papers? or are the several exam boards like at a-level?

Each sets their own exams. (Seeing as each university runs a different course, it would be quite hard to set nationwide exams )