Much of the problem here is the word 'percentage'. I'm not sure there was ever a time when there was an 100 point scale.  The 70%+ wasn't used much, but neither were scores below about 30. There has not been the same move to use the bottom of the 'scale' as there has been to use the top.  So basically there was/is a 40-50 point scale, not a 100 point scale.

John

Dr John Canning
Senior Academic Coordinator

LLAS Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies
University of Southampton | Avenue Campus | Southampton | SO17 1BJ 
+44 (0) 23 80597526 | @johngcanning |  www.llas.ac.uk


Follow LLAS on Twitter! http://twitter.com/LLASCentre 

To receive our monthly e-bulletin, please register at: http://www.llas.ac.uk/mailinglist 



-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Andrew Revitt
Sent: 08 December 2011 09:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: FW: Assessment criteria for English Lit

Here at University Campus Suffolk we use a twelve point grading scale for all our undergraduate provision.  All assessments achieving all the assessment criteria are graded within one of four bands (3, 2:2, 2:1, 1 for Honours programmes, P, G, M and D for Foundation degrees) along with suffixes of -, =, or +.  Course teams are expected to provide clear grading criteria for students, indicating how grades are arrived at explicitly by reference to these criteria within feedback.  There is variety in how teams approach this, some employing a generic set of criteria for each level used on all assessments, others creating criteria which are specific for individual assignments.  Overall classification is based on an averaging of grades weighted in favour of final year studies, with a small fudge factor employed when considering the award of Firsts (as there is no opportunity to get a grade above 1+, there is no equivalent to a student getting a 90% grade to up their average as would be possible in percentage systems).

This system is not without its critics in the institution, particularly those wedded to percentages, and there are instances where the mechanical calculation of classifications using the system can leave colleagues a little uncomfortable.  There are some areas that present more of an issue (exam grading is a particular bug-bear) and I would not describe our practice as fully developed.  However, on the whole the system is well integrated into our courses and operates effectively.

Andrew

__________________________________________________ 
Dr Andrew Revitt 
Educational Developer 
Academic Development 
University Campus Suffolk 
Waterfront Building 
Neptune Quay 
Ipswich 
Suffolk 
IP4 1QJ 
Tel. (01473) 338597 



-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Macdonald, Ranald F
Sent: 07 December 2011 18:08
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit

I agree completely about the nonsense of trying to use percentage marking.

In my early days of HE teaching I was course leader for a BTEC Business and Finance course and subsequently became an external moderator in many FE and HE institutions. The grading scale was Distinction, Merit, Pass and Fail, though many people   couldn't resist using pluses and minuses. We developed clear criteria against a set of descriptors and there was little argument about the validity and robustness of the process. As I moved more to degree teaching and course leadership I tried to use broad marking scales but, other than on the modular programme at the University of Derby, everyone was stuck on percentages, leading to endless debates at exam boards around the margins. It was seen as more convenient for calculating averages and degree classifications and was supposed to remove any subjectivity - mmmm.

Ranald


Ranald Macdonald SFSEDA, FHEA, NTF
Emeritus Professor of Academic Development, Sheffield Hallam University Higher Education Consultant Senior Associate: Professional Development, C-SAP Subject Network
+44 (0)1629 734307 or 07900 213800 (mobile)
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> and: www.ranald.pbworks.com<http://www.ranald.pbworks.com/>



________________________________
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Darren Gash [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 07 December 2011 10:05
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit

Agreed. I've previously used Middlesex University's 20 point scale, which proved to be a good middle ground between the standard classifications (too broad) and a percentage scale (too narrow). So, for example, a 2.1 would be divided up into marks of 8, 7, 6 and 5, where 5 is the highest grade. This was also good for students as it provided an incentive to improve their performance within a particular classification range

On 7 December 2011 09:47, Elizabeth Cleaver <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Hello all,

I too use a 15 point scale (although only in my capacity as an external examiner at Staffordshire Uni). I think the scale works well and it equates easily to the A-F range. However, as Shan points out you need to be clear (in your marking criteria) what differentiates a 14 from a 15 (or an A from and A+) etc. All in all, I think for subjects where there is no right or wrong answer, small percentage differences are not particularly helpful and the 15 point scale seems to work well.

Elizabeth

Dr. Elizabeth Cleaver
Head of Learning Development Unit
Newman University College
Birmingham,
B32 3NT

Tel +44 (0)121 476 1181 ext 2396<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201181%20ext%202396>
Mob  +44 (0)7808 768888<tel:%2B44%20%280%297808%20768888>



-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Shan Wareing
Sent: 06 December 2011 23:36
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit

Hi Janet and everyone

Here at UAL, we've just moved to a 15 point scale using letter grades (A+ to F-), for reasons including the ones already mentioned (to encourage use of the full range of grades, especially at the top end, and to discourage long discussions about the difference between 57% and 56%), and because most people say the letters are more intuitive to understand and travel better (eg when overseas students return home).

We have 8 standard marking criteria, which always have to appear on feedback forms but can be marked as 'not applicable' and can be nuanced for the assignment and subject area.  A matrix indicates achievements at each letter band for each criteria, which is built on Bloom, Perry etc, and is adapted for the creative visual arts in particular, including experimentation and manual skills development.

We've recently had the implementation of the criteria evaluated (the evaluation does points out that by moving to institutionalised standard practice we were flying in the face of most of the assessment literature), which showed a largely positive reception by staff, and we saw clear improvements in our assessment ratings in the NSS and Postgraduate Experience Student Survey.

An advantage of having a standard feedback form and standardised criteria is we can build an online grading and feedback tool which automatically populates fields from the student record systems (e.g. course unit code, student number), can upload the standard text from the matrix - which can be deleted or adapted, and allows the grade entered to be uploaded back into the Student Record System, which reduces human error in mark transcription, means all percentage & addition calculations, and capping for referrals, are done within the SRS, and saves time.  The Assessment Tool can publish feedback as a PDF in our VLE - we're just in the final stages of trialling it in live summative assessments at present.

Details, including the evaluation, are here: http://www.arts.ac.uk/assessment/, and the feedback forms & matrix are available as downloads here: http://www.arts.ac.uk/assessment/resources/downloads/download.html.  You can't see the online Assessment Tool yet but there is some information about it

all the best
Shan

Dr Shân Wareing
Dean of Learning and Teaching Development University of the Arts London
272 High Holborn, London WC1V 7EY
T:020 7514 8051<tel:020%207514%208051>   Mobex: 3826
M: 07725 705026<tel:07725%20705026>  E: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
________________________________________
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Strivens, Janet [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: 06 December 2011 17:34
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit

Anyone else trying in vain to change the terms of this discussion?

Why do we assume that, because a university requires its grades to be reported in percentages and uses 70% to indicate a first class piece of work, all disciplines can differentiate between three grades of first class to correspond to 70% plus, 80% plus and 90% plus? It seems to me that differentiation of quality of work in English literature can be done with reasonable inter-rater reliability into four grades plus fail. Anything more fine-grained becomes iffy but i could be convinced by the evidence for discrimination between upper and lower ends of each grade, represented by (say) a mark of 63% and 67% within an upper second class grade and ditto with other grades. But discriminating within a range of 70%-100%? Surely that must be nonsense?

Janet Strivens

PS I am however very interested in what you find out, Jo!

-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Cooper, Alison
Sent: 06 December 2011 12:53
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit

Dear Colleagues

This raises an interesting topic that I am tasked to have some thoughts about (my own fault for asking awkward questions)..., around the topic of using the 'full range of marks', especially at the top end...

Does anyone have access to any good examples of differentiated criteria within the wide 70%/First class /A grade band that seeks to recognise that this band is much wider than all the others, and so describes different kinds of performance/achievement within that grade band? (any discipline, but especially those subjects that often do not use the full range). I know it can be a case of semantic inflation - very = 70, very very = 80, very very very = 90, but if anyone has anything more substantive, I would love to see it.

Also, I would be very interested in examples of assessment tasks that invite/encourage the width of performance/achievement possible in the top grade.

Hope that makes sense! Thank you for reading this.


Ali

Ali Cooper
Teaching and Curriculum Development Adviser/ Director of Studies for Certificate in Academic Practice (CAP) Organisation and Educational Development (OED), HR Building, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YW
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>     tel: (01524 5)10632<tel:%2801524%20%205%2910632>
Educational Development website: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/celt/celtweb/

-----Original Message-----
From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Jo Peat
Sent: 06 December 2011 12:27
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Assessment criteria for English Lit

Dear colleagues

I'd be very grateful if anyone has access to assessment criteria for BA English Literature that they think are particularly sound and that they would be happy to share. My colleagues on the English Lit degree are looking to revise their criteria and are especially interested in more categorised criteria  for grades above 70% and criteria for groupwork. I have some information to share with them, but they're very interested in seeing criteria from colleagues at other institutions, if at all possible.

Your help would be very much appreciated.

Best wishes

Jo

Jo Peat
Senior Lecturer in Learning and Teaching in HE LTEU University of Roehampton [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
020 8392 3237<tel:020%208392%203237>

Newman University College, Genners Lane, Bartley Green, Birmingham B32 3NT ( Registered Office ) Tel +44 (0)121 476 1181<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201181> Fax +44 (0)121 476 1196<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201196>
Newman University College is a charitable company limited by guarantee, Registered in England and Wales with Company number : 5493384 Charity number : 1110346 VAT number : 559 1908 08