Loading Degree Completion Tracker…
Awarded, not attempted. A module you are resitting has not been earned yet.
38.9%
140 credits of 360 credits awarded, so 220 credits are still to come.
You are 67% through the planned calendar and 39% through the credits. That gap is the whole reason this is measured in credits: counting terms elapsed would have reported the larger number and called it progress.
Carrying on at the pace already set finishes in October 2029, which is 26 months past the date above. That projection assumes the rest of the degree goes exactly as the part behind you did, which is optimistic if any of it was a lighter year.
Progress here is credits awarded divided by credits required, and nothing else. Terms elapsed is shown beside it as a contrast rather than as a measure: the two agree only for a full-time student who has repeated nothing, and they diverge exactly when somebody most needs an honest number.
Whether the credits you hold are the right ones is a separate question this cannot see. Degrees carry compulsory modules, level rules and progression requirements, so it is entirely possible to be at 90% by credit and still be a year from graduating because one core module only runs in the autumn.
Ask anyone how far through their degree they are and the answer comes back in years. Second of three, so two thirds. That reply is accurate for one kind of student: full time, nothing repeated, nothing deferred, nothing dropped in November. For everybody else it drifts, and it drifts in the flattering direction, because time passes whether or not any credit was banked in it.
A part-time student four years into a six-year route and a full-time student repeating a year have spent the same calendar and hold completely different degrees. The measure that separates them is credit awarded against credit required, and it is the only fraction on this page that has any claim on the truth. Elapsed time still appears, deliberately, as the thing to compare against — where the calendar has run further than the credits have, that gap is the tracker earning its place.
Credit registered for this term is not credit held. A module in progress can be failed, deferred, withdrawn from in week six, or passed with a mark that carries no credit under your regulations. So the headline percentage counts only what has been formally awarded, and the credit you are sitting right now is shown on its own line beneath it as the optimistic reading.
Resits are the same argument in a sharper form. A module you are repeating has already consumed a term and awarded nothing, which is exactly the situation where counting terms elapsed does the most damage. Enter the credit you have actually been given, and the fraction stays honest even when the year did not go well.
The second output is the one that changes behaviour: credits remaining divided by the years remaining, giving the rate per year, and per term, needed to still finish on the date you planned for. Nobody is ever told this number. It sits still while things go well and steps up every time something slips, and by the time it has become unreachable it has usually been unreachable for two terms.
Take 360 credits with 140 awarded, twelve months of the plan left. That is 220 credits in a year, or 110 a term on a two-semester year, against a typical full-time load nowhere near it. The finishing date has already moved; the only question left is whether anyone says so this month or next June. Beside it the tool projects the date implied by the pace you have set so far, which assumes the rest of the degree goes exactly like the part behind you.
Being 90% through by credit does not mean you are a term from graduating. Degrees carry compulsory modules, level rules, prerequisite chains and progression requirements, and a core module that only runs in the autumn can hold an otherwise complete student for a full year. Credit is a quantity; a degree is a quantity with a shape.
Nor does the tracker know your regulations. Maximum registration periods, credit that expires after a number of years, minimum credit at the final level and rules about how much may be carried are all real constraints that turn a clean fraction into a conversation with a course leader. Bring the number to that conversation rather than treating it as the outcome of one.
The total for the whole award as printed in your programme specification, not the credits for one year. Use the same counting system throughout, since ECTS, semester hours and CATS points are different sizes and mixing two of them produces a confident fraction of nothing.
No, and that is its main weakness. It extends the average pace you have already set across everything remaining, so a slow first year drags the projection pessimistic and a placement year with no credit in it drags it further. Treat it as a trend line rather than a forecast.
Because the two have different denominators. Credit earned raises the fraction complete, while the months remaining shrink underneath the rate at the same time. Passing a term with less than the required load moves both figures, and they move in opposite directions.
Include them once the receiving institution has formally awarded them against this degree, at the value it granted rather than the value they had originally. Credit under evaluation has not been awarded to anyone yet and will make the fraction wrong in whichever direction the decision goes.