📚 How Much More Does a First-Class Degree Earn? UK Research on Degree Class and Income | 一等学位能多赚多少 英国研究看学位等级与收入
Every summer, hundreds of thousands of UK graduates receive a classification that will quietly shape their job applications, postgraduate choices and, according to a growing body of British research, their pay packets. The question 'how much more does a first-class degree earn?' sounds simple, but the honest answer is a range rather than a single number. This article unpacks the UK evidence on degree class and earnings, explains where the biggest financial gaps actually sit, and shows how A-Level students should use this research when choosing a course.
每年夏天，成千上万的英国毕业生会拿到一个将悄悄影响他们求职、升学和收入的学位等级。问题"一等学位能多赚多少"听起来很简单，但诚实的答案是"一个区间"，而不是一个具体数字。本文梳理英国关于学位等级与收入的研究证据，说明真正的收入差距出现在哪里，并告诉 A-Level 学生应该如何利用这些研究来做选校选专业决策。
1. The UK Degree Classification System | 英国学位等级体系
Most UK bachelor's degrees are awarded with honours and sorted into four main classes: First-Class Honours (a 'first' or 1st), Upper Second-Class Honours (2:1, 'two-one'), Lower Second-Class Honours (2:2, 'two-two') and Third-Class Honours. A small number of students receive an Ordinary degree or a Pass without honours. The classification is calculated from weighted module marks, and most universities require an overall average of around 70% for a first and 60% for a 2:1.
英国大多数本科学位都带荣誉（Honours），并分为四个主要等级：一等荣誉学位（First，简称 1st）、二等一级荣誉学位（2:1，读作"two-one"）、二等二级荣誉学位（2:2）、三等荣誉学位（Third）。少数学生拿到的是普通学位（Ordinary）或无荣誉的及格学位（Pass）。等级由各门课程的加权成绩计算得出，多数大学规定总平均分约 70% 为一等，约 60% 为 2:1。
This system is unusual internationally. Most countries use a continuous GPA or a percentage, so UK employers read 'a first' or 'a 2:1' as a coarse but powerful signal. That compression of a three-year performance into one label is exactly why economists find degree class so interesting to study: it creates a clean cut-off that can be compared across graduates.
这套体系在国际上并不常见。大多数国家使用连续的 GPA 或百分制，因此英国雇主会把"一等"或"2:1"当作一个粗糙但有力的信号。把三年的表现压缩成一个标签，正是经济学家觉得学位等级值得研究的原因：它制造了一个可以跨毕业生比较的清晰分界线。
| Classification | 等级 | Typical mark band | 常见分数区间 | Approx. share of UK graduates | 英国毕业生占比约 |
| First (1st) | 一等 | 70% and above | 70% 及以上 | ~30% |
| Upper second (2:1) | 二等一 | 60% – 69% | ~50% |
| Lower second (2:2) | 二等二 | 50% – 59% | ~15% |
| Third | 三等 | 40% – 49% | ~5% |
2. What the UK Research Actually Measures | 英国研究到底在测什么
Four sources dominate the UK evidence base. First, the Department for Education's Longitudinal Education Outcomes (LEO) dataset, which links university records to tax and benefit records, giving real earnings data rather than survey responses. Second, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) analyses of graduate earnings, which are famous for comparing returns by subject and institution. Third, the HESA Graduate Outcomes survey, which captures self-reported activity and pay roughly 15 months after graduation. Fourth, smaller academic papers that use cohort studies to isolate the effect of degree class itself.
英国的相关证据主要来自四类数据。第一，英国教育部（DfE）的"纵向教育成果"（LEO）数据集，它把大学学籍记录与税务、福利记录相连，得到的是真实收入而非问卷自报数据。第二，财政研究所（IFS）对毕业生收入的分析，以按专业和院校比较回报率著称。第三，HESA 的"毕业生去向"（Graduate Outcomes）调查，记录毕业约 15 个月后的自报去向与薪资。第四，一些规模较小的学术论文，用队列研究来单独剥离学位等级本身的影响。
Each source has a different window. LEO typically looks at earnings one, three, five and ten years after graduation, so it captures the early-to-mid career. Graduate Outcomes is a single snapshot. IFS work often focuses on age 29, roughly a decade after finishing a degree. Because the 'premium' changes over a career, a study that measures five years out can give a very different answer from one measuring ten years out.
这几类数据的观察窗口各不相同。LEO 通常看毕业后 1 年、3 年、5 年和 10 年的收入，覆盖职业早中期；Graduate Outcomes 只是一个单点快照；IFS 的研究常聚焦 29 岁，也就是毕业约十年后。由于"溢价"会随职业生涯变化，测量毕业后五年的研究和测量十年后的研究，结论可能差别很大。
3. Headline Numbers: The First-Class Premium | 核心数字：一等学位的收入溢价
The most common headline from UK work is that first-class graduates earn somewhere in the region of 5% to 15% more than graduates with a 2:1, once you compare similar people in similar jobs. That is a real but moderate gap, not the life-changing multiple that tabloid headlines sometimes imply. In cash terms, on a typical graduate salary of around £28,000, a 10% premium is roughly £2,800 a year before tax — meaningful, but far smaller than the difference between subjects.
英国研究最常见的结论是：在与条件相近、岗位相近的人群比较后，一等学位毕业生的收入大约比 2:1 毕业生高 5% 到 15%。这是真实但温和的差距，并非小报标题暗示的那种"改变人生"的倍数。换算成现金，如果典型毕业生年薪约 28,000 英镑，10% 的溢价大约是每年税前 2,800 英镑——有意义，但远小于专业之间的差距。
The simple way researchers express this is a percentage premium:
简单来说，研究者用百分比溢价来表示：
Premium = (E₁st − E₂:1) ÷ E₂:1 × 100%
The trouble is that this one number hides enormous variation. The premium is larger in law, finance and some STEM fields, where employers screen hard on classification; it can be close to zero in sectors that recruit on portfolios, placements or professional exams, such as parts of the creative industries, nursing and social work. Always ask 'a premium in what subject, at what career stage, for whom?'
问题在于，这一个数字掩盖了巨大的差异。在法律、金融和部分 STEM 领域，雇主会严格按等级筛选，溢价更大；而在部分创意产业、护理和社会工作等更看重作品集、实习经历或职业资格证的行业，溢价可能接近于零。所以要始终追问："是在哪个专业、哪个职业阶段、对哪一类人产生的溢价？"
4. The 2:1 / 2:2 Cliff Edge Is Bigger Than the First | 2:1 与 2:2 之间的断崖比一等更大
Here is the finding that surprises most students: the biggest financial discontinuity in the UK system is not between a first and a 2:1, but between a 2:1 and a 2:2. Hundreds of graduate schemes, many law firms, the Civil Service Fast Stream and most postgraduate courses set a 2:1 as a hard minimum. Below that line, the number of doors that simply close is substantial, and the earnings gap reflects exclusion rather than a subtle pay difference.
这里有一个最让学生意外的发现：英国学位体系中最大的收入断层，不在"一等与 2:1"之间，而在"2:1 与 2:2"之间。数百个毕业生管培项目、许多律所、公务员快速通道（Fast Stream）以及大多数研究生课程，都把 2:1 设为硬性门槛。掉到这条线以下，被直接关上的门数量相当可观，收入差距反映的是"被排除"而非"工资水平的细微差别"。
This is a classic case of what economists call a threshold or 'sheepskin' effect: the value of the qualification jumps at the point where it unlocks something, rather than rising smoothly with every extra mark. For a student sitting on 58%, pushing to 60% is likely to be worth more in lifetime earnings than a student sitting on 68% pushing to 70%. That is a striking and counter-intuitive result.
这正是经济学家所说的"门槛效应"（threshold effect）或"羊皮效应"（sheepskin effect）：证书的价值在"解锁某个机会"的那一点上跳升，而不是随着每一分成绩平滑上升。对一个均分 58% 的学生来说，冲到 60% 带来的终身收入价值，很可能大于一个 68% 的学生冲到 70%。这个结论相当反直觉。
- 2:1 minimum | 2:1 门槛：most large graduate schemes, many professional training contracts, most master's programmes. 大多数大型管培项目、许多职业培训合同、多数硕士项目。
- First preferred | 一等优先：magic circle law, investment banking, strategy consulting, competitive PhD funding. 魔圈律所、投行、战略咨询、竞争激烈的博士资助。
- Class less decisive | 等级影响较小：sectors using portfolios, placements or licensing exams. 依靠作品集、实习或执业考试的行业。
5. Subject Choice Beats Degree Class | 专业选择比学位等级更值钱
If you want the single strongest predictor of UK graduate earnings, it is not degree class — it is subject. IFS and LEO analyses consistently show median earnings gaps of tens of thousands of pounds between subjects a decade after graduation, dwarfing the few percentage points linked to classification. Medicine, dentistry, economics, maths, computer science and engineering sit at the top; creative arts, some humanities and some social science combinations sit at the bottom.
如果要找英国毕业生收入最强的单一预测因子，那绝不是学位等级，而是专业。IFS 和 LEO 的分析一致显示，毕业十年后不同专业之间的收入中位数差距可达数万英镑，远超学位等级带来的那几个百分点。医学、牙医、经济学、数学、计算机和工程位居前列；创意艺术、部分人文学科以及某些社科组合则排名靠后。
A rough hierarchy of the returns looks like this:
回报率的大致排序如下：
Medicine / Dentistry > Economics / Maths / CS > Engineering / Law > Natural Sciences > Social Sciences / Business > Humanities > Creative Arts
Some UK analyses even find near-zero or negative average returns for certain subject-and-institution combinations for men, after accounting for the fact that graduates forgo earnings during three years of study. This does not mean those degrees are worthless — many have strong non-financial returns — but it does mean the earnings argument must be made at subject level first, and only then at degree-class level.
一些英国分析甚至发现，在扣除三年求学期间放弃的收入后，某些"专业 + 院校"组合对男性的平均回报接近于零甚至为负。这并不意味着这些学位没有价值——很多学位的非经济回报很高——但它说明：讨论收入时，应该先看专业层面，再谈学位等级层面。
6. Institution, Region, Gender and Background | 院校、地区、性别与背景
Degree class is only one variable in a crowded field. UK research shows substantial earnings gaps by institution, with graduates of a small group of highly selective universities earning noticeably more on average. Region matters too: London salaries carry a large cost-of-living premium, so a graduate in the North East on £26,000 and one in London on £32,000 may have similar real purchasing power.
学位等级只是众多变量中的一个。英国研究显示，院校之间也存在明显的收入差距，少数选拔性极高的大学，其毕业生平均收入显著更高。地区同样重要：伦敦薪资包含一大块生活成本溢价，所以东北部年薪 26,000 英镑的毕业生和伦敦 32,000 英镑的毕业生，实际购买力可能差不多。
Gender and socio-economic background add further layers. The UK gender pay gap appears early in graduate careers, and research repeatedly shows that students from lower-income backgrounds earn less on average even when they attend the same university and achieve the same classification. In other words, a first-class degree does not deliver the same return to everyone.
性别与社会经济背景又叠加了更多层次。英国的性别薪酬差距在职业早期就已出现，而研究反复表明：即使就读同一所大学、拿到同样的学位等级，来自低收入背景的学生平均收入仍更低。换句话说，一等学位并不是对每个人都能兑现同样的回报。
7. Why the Premium Exists: Signalling, Human Capital and Sorting | 溢价从何而来：信号、人力资本与筛选
Economists offer three complementary explanations. The human capital story says that students who earn firsts have genuinely learned more, and that extra skill is productive and therefore paid. The signalling story says the first is mostly a credential that tells employers 'this person is intelligent, disciplined and hard-working', regardless of what was learned. The sorting story says that the kind of person who gets a first was already on a higher-earnings trajectory before university began.
经济学家给出三种互补的解释。人力资本理论认为，拿到一等学位的学生确实学到了更多，这些多出来的技能有生产力，因此有报酬。信号理论认为，一等学位主要是一张凭证，告诉雇主"这个人聪明、自律、勤奋"，与具体学到了什么关系不大。筛选理论则认为，能拿到一等学位的人，在大学开始之前就已经处在更高的收入轨道上。
The standard way to test this is a wage regression that controls for observable characteristics:
检验这些机制的标准方法是加入可观测控制变量的工资回归：
ln(Wᵢ) = α + β₁·Firstᵢ + β₂·LowerSecondᵢ + γ·Xᵢ + εᵢ
Here Wᵢ is annual earnings, Xᵢ is a vector of controls such as subject, institution, prior attainment and family background, and β₁ captures the first-class premium. The key problem is unobserved ability: if motivated, able people both get firsts and earn more, β₁ is biased upward. Studies that control for prior attainment typically find the premium shrinking, which suggests a meaningful part of the raw gap is selection rather than the classification itself.
其中 Wᵢ 是年收入，Xᵢ 是控制变量向量（专业、院校、先前学业成绩、家庭背景等），β₁ 即为一等学位溢价。核心难题是"不可观测的能力"：如果既聪明又努力的人既容易拿一等又容易赚得多，β₁ 就会被高估。控制了先前学业成绩的研究通常发现溢价缩小，这说明原始差距中有相当一部分来自筛选效应，而非等级本身。
A second economic concept helps here: the lifetime value of a degree is a present value, not a single salary figure.
第二个有用的经济学概念是：学位的终身价值是现值，而不是某一年的工资数字。
PV = Σ (Eₜ − Cₜ) ÷ (1 + r)ᵗ
Eₜ is earnings in year t, Cₜ is cost (tuition, living costs and forgone wages), and r is the discount rate. Because the premium compounds over a 40-year career, even a modest annual gap can accumulate — but so can the cost of an extra year of study.
其中 Eₜ 是第 t 年的收入，Cₜ 是成本（学费、生活费与放弃的工资），r 是贴现率。由于溢价会在 40 年的职业生涯中复利累积，即使每年的差距不大，最终也可能相当可观；但多读一年书的成本同样会累积。
8. Grade Inflation: Are Firsts Losing Their Value? | 分数膨胀：一等学位正在贬值吗
The share of UK graduates receiving a first has risen dramatically. In the early 1990s, roughly one in fourteen graduates earned a first; by the early 2020s, roughly one in three did. Universities, the Office for Students and successive reviews have all wrestled with whether this reflects better teaching, harder-working students, or grade inflation that erodes the signal value of the classification.
英国毕业生获得一等学位的比例大幅上升。上世纪 90 年代初，大约每 14 个毕业生中才有 1 个拿一等；到 2020 年代初
Published by TutorHao | Exam Prep Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
或截图后用「扫一扫 → 相册」选择本图