Hi guys, just wanted to ask a silly question. What kind of grades are expected for a masters degree to be considered good. I'm on course for a merit and should be able to achieve this relativley easily if I continue to work hard. However I can't help but feel that is is an under achievement since at undergraduate level 60-69 was a 2:1.Is it seen in the same way coz I have been told that its the same as a third at undergraduate level. I also read somewhere that you should expect to get about 10 % lower in your masters than you got in your final year at undergrad level

Q What kind of grades are expected for a masters degree to be considered good?

A. A distinction.

I did an MRes and there were only two grades Pass (50%+) and distinction (70%+), so I'm not sure where a merit grade comes in at.

As for percentage grades I got 69.4% in my MRes (so was totally gutted) and a 2.1 in my undergrad average of ~65%. I did better at MRes because I tend to do better in practical work than in exams and as my MRes was heavily practical based. I'm guessing nowadays it's easy to tell from transcripts how well people do as it's no just a grading system

A merit is 60 - 69.5 %

I guess then that a merit is considered the equivalent of a 2.1 at masters level which is a higher level than BSc 2.1

To be honest I don't think that many places take the grade of a masters too seriously because there are a few different grading systems. I think what matters is that you have a masters in that area and that you had a sufficiently good first degree to do a masters.

I've never heard of anyone asking for a specific grade at masters level

Thank you for clearing that up for me, as at undergraduate level it is made very clear, i.e. what grades are considered to be good i.e. 1st or 2:1, however it is not so clear at masters level. Most places just ask for a masters in an appropriate subject. I have been given an uncondidtional offer for my PhD on the basis of my first degree but they havent said anything about my MRes as in what they expect only that starting the degree wouldnt require me to wait for my MRes result since I already have my first degree. But I expect that they would expect me to pass as well as I can.

I went for an Interview at the University of Paisley with Thomas Connolly [world famous in his field]. He informed me quite candidly that if you couldn't get a Distinction at Masters level then you weren't worth bothering with. He also said that its the students that don't get the distinctions that try and make an argument that its not that important. Was to him. Sorry all you passers/meriters if that spoils your day.

golfpro I am utterly devastated by what you have said. I don't know what to do with myself!

I think I'm going to give up my PhD, even though I'm in my 4th year and just a few months from submitting.
It just all seems so pointless now that someone who I've never heard of in an unspecified field has said I'm not worth bothering with since I didn't get a distinction in my MA.

WOE!


LMAO.

It greatly depends how competitve you field is. My field is very. Some aren't.

Oh well now I just have feelings of desperate inadequacy and inferiority.

What field are you in golfpro?

Computing.

So there must be a lot of computer science graduates then if your field is so competitive.

No idea. All I'm aware of is that as a postgraduate research subject the competiton for funding is intense.

Am I the only one not to have heard of University of Paisley?

Golfpro, did that guy offer you the PhD place then?

I know shanghaichica was refering to a MRes but just wanted to mention that a taught masters is nothing like a PhD.