Interesting debate and discussion and we see different disciplines have different approaches. At a recent workshop where we discussed this an argument was put forward from Law that over 70 has to be perfect so that students understand there is a cost and time implication in employment for work that has any errors.
I too use the full range of marks at both ends. The highest marks I have ever given were well into the 90s and I can still remember both the students and the work (in two cases I borrowed - with permission - from their work the following years to enhance teaching material and at least one of them went onto an academic career) so now I ask myself will I still remember this in 2 years time (for the right reasons) - if so then it's probably a 90s. I also tend to reward work that makes me think with the very high marks.
At the bottom end I have had numerous discusions as an internal moderator because colleagues have given marks of 30 to dire work "so the student isn't demotivated" but a mark of 30 didn't reflect the amount of extra work needed to get it to a pass standard and isn't doing the student any favours. If it's dire then the student needs to know that (and similarly if I will remember it in 2 years time its probably single figures).
I work in TNE and have cultural challenges with some overseas colleagues who give 100 for work that meets the learning outcomes whereas I see meeting the learning outcomes as a bare pass (as refelcted in our assessment criteria).
Its nice to see these interesting debates develop as we move towards holidays and we have more chance to think beyond the next class or the pile of marking.
Merry Christmas everyone.
Chris
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------
From: Geoffrey Darnton <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 21/12/2016 12:26 p.m. (GMT+00:00)
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Christmas Cracker
Interesting questions Linda - I have my own answers.
I have just finished marking a set of Level 5 assignments. I gave a mark of 100 to two of those assignments (until now, that had only happened to one student in a group). The lowest mark I gave was 15 (apart from 0 for non-submission). The high performing students were so motivated and interested in their assignments that what they wrote would even have met the Level 7 descriptors.
I do not consider a mark of 100% to indicate 'perfection' - indeed, even when I give 100% I suggest ways the work could be improved. For me, what matters is the context in which the work is being done: what is the level (and hence the level descriptors)? what is the credit value of the module (hence an indication of total effort that can be expected)? I then ask "could I reasonably have expected this student to have done more than they have done with the relevant contextual constraints (time, level, ILOs, etc.)? - if the answer to that question is 'no', I must give serious consideration to 100% or a very high mark.
I reject the concept that very high marks should be reserved for work that is 'publishable'. Writing an assignment, or an exam paper, are nothing like writing a conference or journal paper. If I wanted a restriction like that, the assignment brief would have to tell the students that what they need to write is a conference or journal paper as the assignment! (that can also work well).
Another observation I make is that in my many years of experience, enforced word counts, particularly low word counts, are very damaging to the best students. Wherever possible I try to disapply enforced word counts. 'Guideline' is a wonderful weasel word to do that!
What motivates my students is telling them up front that 100% is achievable (and has been achieved), giving them the chance to write about something that really motivates them, and explaining I don't care how many words they use (I know lots of academics are wedded to enforced word counts!). That works for some students, but there is always a residual group who don't care about coming to class, and approach everything very last minute. Hence, the 15s and 20s, not 100s.
best wishes
Geoffrey
On 21/12/2016 11:41, Linda.Robson wrote:
It doesn’t matter what grading system you use; GPA, 0-100% or the bizarre 13 point system I have used in the past, the point is whether or not the markers use the whole scale and what the top of the scale is considered to be.
Is the top of the scale where the student has achieved all the learning outcomes? Or is it production of a piece of work that has no faults and could not be improved upon?
Linda
Linda Robson SFHEA SFSEDA FRSA
Staff Tutor and Senior Lecturer
Direct Dial: +44 (0)20 7556 6131 | Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
School of Engineering and Innovation
Science, Technlogy, Engineering and Maths Faculty
The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA www.open.ac.uk<http://www.open.ac.uk/>
From: External examiners discussion forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marcus Wood
Sent: 21 December 2016 11:20
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Christmas Cracker
Just responding to the bit about GPAs, the point about using the whole percentage marking range does indeed become moot when you use a GPA system, since the highest you can then get is 4.0 or 4.5 (depending on the precise system being used – which can and do vary).
These marks will be used and will be used in a final calculation so the full ‘GPA marking range’ is now being used and is contributing to the overall result and a student can attain the highest GPA grade for their final degree classification in practice as well as in theory – as opposed to the current degree classification systems where in practice a student doesn’t get an overall percentage grade of 100%.
Best wishes,
Dr Marcus Wood
Senior Registrar: Governance
Academic Quality Directorate
Buckinghamshire New University
High Wycombe Campus
Queen Alexandra Road
High Wycombe
Buckinghamshire HP11 2JZ
Telephone: 01494 605066
For all formal regulatory documents please go to http://bucks.ac.uk/about_us/how_we_are_structured/Governance/public_information/formal_documents/ and use the search field. For inquiries related to our External Examiner process please email [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> and a member of the team will get back to you.
From: nwellman [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 21 December 2016 10:53
To: Marcus Wood <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>; [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re[2]: Christmas Cracker
Hi all,
I'm sure we've all grappled with this one over the years.
Picking up Marcus' point, as an EE I am often more concerned when 'marking across the range' results in grade inflation with 2nd class work gaining 1st class marks.
I suspect this is partly psychological in that once markers get into the mindset of awarding 80/90s it shifts the goalposts away from 70%=excellence/1st and it can seem miserly to award marks in the 60s.
I've also noted that breaking down assessments into overly small elements can also distort the final mark, especially if half (or 0.25) marks aren't allowed). Thus, 5/8 for an element can seem mean so there's a tendency to award 6/8 which raises a 62% 2nd to a 75% 1st. Having five or so such elements each of which is upgraded in this way can easily cumulatively result in over marking (see below for how I personally resolved this).
As things stand I think that we are mostly (?) work to a system, reflected by Mark's point, whereby we 'know' what a F/3/2.2/2.2/1 looks like and that 40% is the pass/fail threshold with 70% a 1st and anything over c85% outstanding (measured holistically via consideration of the ILOs and the QAA/graduate skill benchmarks). So as long as we have degree classifications anything above this is largely immaterial (unless mark means inform marginal grading decisions).
Like others, I have rarely awarded over 85%, but for truly exceptional work have awarded in the 90s, and, yes, 100% (I found USA MBA students found this difficult and felt they'd failed if the got 'only' 75%, until it was explained that this was still a distinction).
Again speaking as an EE (for business/mgt/mktg), I have also found that assessments can be simplistic/process driven, testing recall of the taught syllabus or mechanistic application of models rather than the ILOs and academic rigour (yes, we do have this in bus/mgt !).
Re GPAs: the HEA did a pilot in 2013/14: its report is here:
https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/resources/GPA-report-2013-14.pdf
Their recommended metric is shown below. Note that this still leaves wide excellence/fail bands of 75-100% and 0-30%, so Marcus's point about encouraging marking across the range is perhaps moot.
I checked, eg Oxford Brookes, who similarly has wide extremes (see: https://www.brookes.ac.uk/regulations/current/core/a3/a3-14/ and the student guide here: https://www.brookes.ac.uk/students/your-studies/grade-point-average/)
The HEA recommendation is:
[cid:part11.FEB3B86A.3633CB38@darnton.info]
And Oxford Brookes':
[cid:part12.05AE17DF.F22B35A6@darnton.info]
Note that HEA offers GPs for fails over 30% whilst OB doesn't and that OB has a maximum of GP 4.5, so the two aren't compatible and would still need 'translation'.
I didn't much on other UK HEIs GPAs so am unsure how standardised they are, but it seems they are different from the USAs, so still aren't universal.
There's an interesting paper on all of this from Doug Hunt from Imperial here: https://www.imperialcollegeunion.org/your-union/how-were-run/committees/12-13/Union_Council/file/2016
For what it's worth, my system was to award marks out of ten (to x.5/10) for each element, then use the element weightings to calculate a mean score. This was then holistically reviewed by asking the question "is this really an XYZ class piece of work?" , with the answer usually (but not always) being 'yes'. In some instances a capping element was in place (eg no/poor refs) which could limit an otherwise good piece of work to a pass at best (tough love?).
This method also formed the basis for giving very specific feedback to students regarding what they did well and less well (or 'badly').
Neil Wellman (retired but still EEing)
------ Original Message ------
From: "Marcus Wood" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 21/12/2016 09:17:48
Subject: Re: Christmas Cracker
It’s also quite common to have external examiners talk about the need for markers to use the full range of marks, i.e. 0-100, since this rarely happens in practice.
The issue is the huge banding for a First-class mark from 70-100, where other bandings, e.g. 2.1, are only 10%. This is one of the reasons why people are increasingly tending to favour Grade Point Averages (GPAs) over percentage marks for modules. Still some way to go re moving to GPA as a sector.
Actually to specify, though, that a percentage mark over 80% cannot be awarded (which was the original query) has to be wrong, surely? It must be possible for a student to achieve a mark of 80+ even if it is very difficult. To this extent I disagree with Mark’s point below.
Dr Marcus Wood
Senior Registrar: Governance
Academic Quality Directorate
Buckinghamshire New University
High Wycombe Campus
Queen Alexandra Road
High Wycombe
Buckinghamshire HP11 2JZ
Telephone: 01494 605066
For all formal regulatory documents please go to http://bucks.ac.uk/about_us/how_we_are_structured/Governance/public_information/formal_documents/ and use the search field. For inquiries related to our External Examiner process please email [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> and a member of the team will get back to you.
From: External examiners discussion forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Mark Taylor-Batty
Sent: 20 December 2016 14:31
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Christmas Cracker
Merry Christmas James
It’s quite common to have a top mark within a system that is based on 0-100, even if the full 100 range is not applied. One could argue over whether this means percentages are being applied or not (they are, but certain percentages are being disallowed; they are not but applying a scale from say 30 to 80). The important things are the grade qualifiers and the criteria to guide one within the grades. The number applied in a sense are arbitrary, but a system needs to have a coherent logic. 30 to 80 scales do have a logic, even as topped and tailed percentages.
On 20 Dec 2016, at 14:13, DEROUNIAN, James <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Christmas Cracker
[as seen on a card from a colleague, but worthy of a cracker joke = “What do you get if you cross a bell…..with a skunk?” Answer: ‘Jingle Smells’]
And a brain teaser:
A colleague recently announced that – although a module guide clearly states award of percentage marks for student assignments - they marked out of 80; that is 0-80 (top mark).
Why? How can this be justified? Isn’t it just plain wrong?
Happy Christmas :)
James
James Derounian BSc (Hons) MPhil MRTPI FHEA FILCM
Principal Lecturer in Community Engagement and Local Governance,
Course Leader Applied Social Sciences,
National Teaching Fellow,
University of Gloucestershire,
Cheltenham
GL50 4AZ
Tel. 01242-714562
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Visiting Fellow Edge Hill University Institute for Public Policy and Professional Practice
Honorary Fellow Birmingham University (Third Sector Research Centre)
######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS&A=1
######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS&A=1
######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS&A=1
######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS&A=1
######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS&A=1
######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS&A=1
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=EXTERNAL-EXAMINERS&A=1
|
