UK grade and US GPA

[zulkfal]

Hi forum members,
Thanks a lot for your replies for my previous posts. I just want to find out the grading system to convert UK to US GPA.
UK grades are
1st Class= 70%
2:1 upper second class = 60%-69.99%
2:2 lower second class= 50% - 59.99%
Pass= 45%-49.99%.

But normally student range differently e.g. I have A's in some courses, B’s as well and C’s as well overall I have 68% in my results if I leave out my first year result (which are not counted towards final results). Who I will convert these grades?

[bne600]

I have been following your posts clearly and I think I can help. I am the guy who raised the issue about your GPA first in your previous post. I am a second class upper student but my CWA was very high and very close to first class. (69.11). I think 2.1 is either less than 3.0 or very close. You can still make it but the best thing is to apply to more medium schools and few if any top 10 schools. You know the big schools hardly compormise and they usually find it difficult to give you the benefit of the doubt. Again, in reply to your previous post, dont be concerned about your maths background. Econometrics and Economics for mathematics are o.k and your gre quants score is execllllent. People make a lot of noice about the importance of the GRE but I think it is second to your GPA. However note that the admission process is a rondom act. So you can still take the risk but take a necessary risk. Goodluck o.k and hope you make it up next year.

[fp3690]

The 2.1 range is so broad that it does not make sense to convert it to GPA. However, if u do, I had found couple of years ago a conversion guide from Berkeley saying that a First is A (and A+ if above 75), 65-69 A-, 60-64 B+ etc

[Palimpsest]

It really varies, I dug up an old conversion from University of Iowa...for those abroad, it's a large public uni, a step below Wisconsin and Michigan. The conversion there was 70+ = A+, 65-69 = A, 60-65 = A-... so it certainly varies, though this probably has something to do with a school's quality, but also its attitude on what caliber of coursework is to be expected during a study abroad program. At any rate, 68 overall seems okay (probably not a dealbreaker except perhaps at the top 5, though we all know the randomness that goes on anyway...) and your marks in the more mathematically rigourous courses are what you should be looking at anyhow.

[EconPL]

At LSE they make following translation of grades to US system for a general course students:

78+ is A+
73-78 is A
68-73 is A-
63-68 is B+
58-53 is B

But i will check it and post later the exact way they translate it as this one is just straight from my head. It should be similar though.

But I agree that without 1st class (and I mean a strong first) you shouldn't have much hope for Top 15. Try very wide range of school when applying.

[kkitkat]

Granted, I have no idea how it works exactly, but it doesn't make any sense to me. If 68% is A- which translates into 3.7 then doesn't it mean that second upper class is the same as 3.7 on the 4.0 scale? And if this the case how come the OP (that I think has 68%) doesn't have a shot at top-15. There's been a discussion on another thread (http://www.urch.com/forums/phd-econo...-programs.html (The untold truth about Top 10 programs)) and from there it seems that people with GPA around 3.6-3.8 managed to get into top-10 schools. What am I missing here?

[fp3690]

70 being A- is absurd. In my university, essay based exams rarely received above 71.

[treasuries]

The 2.1 range is so broad that it does not make sense to convert it to GPA. However, if u do, I had found couple of years ago a conversion guide from Berkeley saying that a First is A (and A+ if above 75), 65-69 A-, 60-64 B+ etc

At LSE they make following translation of grades to US system for a general course students:

78+ is A+
73-78 is A
68-73 is A-
63-68 is B+
58-53 is B

As a follow-up, when do you get a Distinction at LSE?

[Karina 07]

*Ahem*, re: all these "without a distinction you're doomed".... I've said before elsewhere, my department has really hard markers. I'll probably graduate with around a 69 or so (still waiting for the marks), but around the time of application my average was more like a 67-68. I did fine . But then, I had a lot of professors comment about how some of my papers were publishable (even though they received a 68) and how they expected me to get a distinction on X (which later turned out to receive a 67... where is the justice??).

In fact, I've yet to receive a distinction on a single assignment, I'm sorry to say (although I'm expecting one or two when I finally get my marks).

I don't think I'm stupid, either (I had a 3.8+ GPA at a good university in the U.S. and won a good scholarship and etc.), and it's not for lack of effort... my department is just mean and stingy.

In fact, I know of another department at the same university, which had 30 students in their master's program and *didn't give out a single distinction*.

So if any of them needed a distinction to get into another program, well, they're in trouble.

[corpfin2006]

Karina 07, why don't you just publish your CV here? That would save you the time you spend on bluntly incorporating (oftentimes irrelevant) details about your academic track record (going back until high school...) into a significant proportion of your posts.

Thanks for listening.

Back to the topic: You need two marks >=70 and another two marks >=60 to get a distinction at LSE (MSc). For further info: http://www.lse.ac.uk/resources/schoo...tersDegree.htm

As for BSc: http://www.lse.ac.uk/resources/schoo...ear2004_05.htm