 |
 |
Nic Groombridge Your previous message said: >I'm doing a lot of marking like most colleagues at the moment but have >come across - not at my Institution - some very steep gradients in a >marking scheme. That is in a journalism exercise with one hundred points >at stake the marker has taken 10 marks off for each failure to mention a >first name (of Marx, Gramsci and Weber!) so reducing the student's mark by >30 points to 26. > >I have made it clear to the marker that I don't believe any such scheme >can be justified but am having difficulty laying my hands on something >other than my own feelings about such marking. > Making criteria clear beforehand apart, you could ask for a full set of criteria retrospectively and open the weighting of marks against each one to public (Exam Board) scrutiny. Personally I would see this as a a case of incipient 'battiness', a desire to catch people out, and punish them in the process, always lurking in the undergrowth of assessment. I assume you can bring this to the attention of higher authority and have them deal with it, hopefully with an opportunity to institute the requirement for prior, upfont and public criteria for all assessment tasks. Good luck David "The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscape but in having new eyes." Marcel Proust David Jaques, 7 Stanley Road Oxford OX4 1QY 0(044)1865 203255