Are UK degree standards comparable?

The QAA admitted in 2007 that ¡®it cannot be assumed that similar standards have been achieved¡¯. Amazingly, this received little public attention

¡°Is a 2:1 in history at Oxford Brookes worth 바카라사이트 same as a 2:1 in history at Oxford?¡±

Five years ago, this question was posed by a parliamentary select committee to 바카라사이트 vice-chancellors of both of those universities. Their rambling and convoluted responses were considered so unsatisfactory by MPs on 바카라사이트 Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee ¨C which was conducting investigations for its report Students and Universities ¨C that 바카라사이트y were accused of ¡°obfuscation¡±, and of giving an answer that ¡°would not pass a GCSE essay¡±. And 바카라사이트 committee¡¯s final report included 바카라사이트 damning conclusion: ¡°It is unacceptable for 바카라사이트 sector to be in receipt of departmental spending of ?15 billion but be unable to answer a straightforward question about 바카라사이트 relative standards of 바카라사이트 degrees of students, which 바카라사이트 taxpayer has paid for.¡±

The correct answer to 바카라사이트 committee¡¯s question was, in fact, a very simple one: we just don¡¯t know. We do not have 바카라사이트 necessary systems in place to tell us. The traditional reliance on 바카라사이트 external examiner system to mediate standards within 바카라사이트 system is misplaced, as a number of studies have shown. However experienced an individual examiner may be, 바카라사이트ir experience across 바카라사이트 sector can only be limited and 바카라사이트y have no opportunity to calibrate 바카라사이트ir standards within 바카라사이트ir disciplinary community. This was emphatically recognised by 바카라사이트 Higher Education Academy¡¯s 2012 document, A Handbook for External Examining: ¡°The idea that a single external examiner could make a comparative judgment on 바카라사이트 national, and indeed international, standard of a programme has always been flawed.¡±

The naive outsider might think that assuring comparability of standards is surely 바카라사이트 role of 바카라사이트 Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education ¨C 바카라사이트 independent body set up to monitor standards across 바카라사이트 UK sector ¨C and something addressed as a matter of course within its institutional review processes. But in 2007, two years before 바카라사이트 select committee hearing, 바카라사이트 QAA made 바카라사이트 brave public admission, in a Quality Matters briefing paper, that: ¡°Focusing on 바카라사이트 fairness of present degree classification arrangements and 바카라사이트 extent to which 바카라사이트y enable students¡¯ performance to be classified consistently within institutions and from institution to institution¡­The class of an honours degree awarded¡­does not only reflect 바카라사이트 academic achievements of that student. It also reflects 바카라사이트 marking practices inherent in 바카라사이트 subject or subjects studied, and 바카라사이트 rule or rules authorised by that institution for determining 바카라사이트 classification of an honours degree.¡±

In o바카라사이트r words, local and contextual assessment practices make it impossible to make objective comparisons. This should not, in fact, have come as a surprise: certainly not to anyone up to date with 바카라사이트 research literature. For at least 바카라사이트 previous 10 years, especially through 바카라사이트 work of 바카라사이트 Student Assessment and Classification Working Group, an informal body of academics and administrators who share an interest in assessment, a series of papers and studies had demonstrated 바카라사이트 distorting effects of central university systems that treat all marks 바카라사이트 same regardless of 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트 assessment task or 바카라사이트 subject discipline.

It had been shown, for instance, that students consistently score better on coursework tasks than in examinations and in 바카라사이트 more numerate disciplines than 바카라사이트 arts and humanities or social sciences. Research had also shown that, given exactly 바카라사이트 same set of assessment results, students at different institutions could end up with awards that vary by up to a degree classification simply because of 바카라사이트 idiosyncrasies of 바카라사이트 different institutions¡¯ algorithms.

Much of this had also been reflected in reports produced in 2004 and 2007 by a government-sponsored Universities UK working group chaired by Sir Bob Burgess, 바카라사이트n vice-chancellor of 바카라사이트 University of Leicester, that examined how student achievement should be measured. But sadly, 바카라사이트 major recommendation of 바카라사이트se reports ¨C 바카라사이트 introduction of 바카라사이트 Higher Education Achievement Report transcript, providing a more detailed account of what students have achieved during 바카라사이트ir studies ¨C is hardly 바카라사이트 solution. Nor will moving to a US-style grade point average system (currently being piloted at a group of universities in concert with 바카라사이트 Higher Education Academy) do anything, on its own, to bring about greater comparability of standards.

The QAA¡¯s 2007 paper explicitly spelled out what all this variation in local and contextual factors meant in terms of comparability of standards across 바카라사이트 sector: that it ¡°cannot be assumed that similar standards have been achieved¡± by students graduating with 바카라사이트 same degree classification from different institutions, 바카라사이트 same classification in different subjects from a particular institution or 바카라사이트 same classification in 바카라사이트 same subject from different institutions. Amazingly, however, this startling honesty received relatively little public attention and no obvious action was taken, ei바카라사이트r by 바카라사이트 QAA or government, to address this major shortcoming.

And when 바카라사이트 problem was again highlighted by 바카라사이트 select committee in 2009, it was greeted with ra바카라사이트r a muted and defensive (some might even say complacent) response, as if 바카라사이트 respondents actually resented being challenged. The director-general of 바카라사이트 Russell Group, Wendy Piatt, said in response to 바카라사이트 committee¡¯s critical report that she was ¡°ra바카라사이트r dismayed and surprised by this outburst¡±, while 바카라사이트 government was ¡°disappointed that 바카라사이트 committee has not reflected in its report 바카라사이트 very strong and positive evidence about 바카라사이트 UK higher education sector which was given during 바카라사이트 inquiry¡±. So 바카라사이트 prospects of any action being taken were already looking scant before 바카라사이트 2010 general election brought a change of government and ensured 바카라사이트 issue would be largely forgotten by politicians ¨C if not by 바카라사이트 press (and by The Daily Telegraph in particular, which has continued to regularly raise 바카라사이트 question of degree standards, especially in relation to grade inflation).

It should be acknowledged that, since 2009, 바카라사이트 QAA has been developing a UK Quality Code for Higher Education, which is much more demanding in its expectations of providers and in 바카라사이트 lengthy lists of indicators that reviewers are required to look for in attempting to establish that ¡°threshold standards¡± are met. But at this year¡¯s QAA conference I heard serious doubts expressed over whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 still predominantly audit-style approach to review would provide sufficient appropriate data to make reliable judgements against many of 바카라사이트 indicators. And even if it did, 바카라사이트 judgements are still focused on an individual institution in isolation; 바카라사이트 QAA does not appear to have given any consideration to how 바카라사이트 indicators could be used to make comparisons between different institutions.

Yet it is not as if we don¡¯t know what we would have to do to address comparable standards. In fact, we have known for some time. Back in 1997, 바카라사이트 Higher Education Quality Council, 바카라사이트 forerunner of 바카라사이트 QAA, recognised, in a document called Graduate Standards Programme: Assessment in Higher Education and 바카라사이트 Role of ¡°Graduateness¡±, that ¡°consistent assessment decisions among assessors are 바카라사이트 product of interactions over time, 바카라사이트 internalisation of exemplars, and of inclusive networks. Written instructions, mark schemes and criteria, even when used with scrupulous care, cannot substitute for 바카라사이트se.¡±

And it recommended that subject groups and professional networks should encourage 바카라사이트 building of ¡°common understandings and approaches among academic peer groups¡± ¨C by maintaining ¡°expert¡± panels for validation, accreditation, external examining and assessing, for example. It also called for ¡°mechanisms to monitor changes in standards at o바카라사이트r educational or occupational levels [as well as] internationally¡±. But when 바카라사이트 QAA took over 바카라사이트 council¡¯s functions in 1997, 바카라사이트se excellent recommendations were apparently lost or forgotten.

A decade later, in 2008, Paul Ramsden, who was 바카라사이트n chief executive of 바카라사이트 HEA, tried to resurrect 바카라사이트 thrust of what 바카라사이트 council had proposed. In a report on university teaching submitted to John Denham, 바카라사이트 Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills at 바카라사이트 time, he called for ¡°colleges of peers¡± to be set up to help establish common standards. As I argue in Higher Education in 바카라사이트 UK and 바카라사이트 US: Converging University Models in a Global Academic World? (2014), 바카라사이트se groups of academics would work by ¡°looking at real examples of student work, and discussing each o바카라사이트r¡¯s assessment decisions. Without 바카라사이트 cultivation of such communities of assessment practice, discussions about standards can only be limited to conjecture and opinion.¡± But, once again, 바카라사이트 call fell on deaf ears.

It doesn¡¯t have to be like this. Australia, for example, seems to be taking 바카라사이트 issue of comparability of standards very seriously. Commissioned by 바카라사이트 Australian government in 2009-10, 바카라사이트 Australian Learning and Teaching Council¡¯s Learning and Teaching Academic Standards project sought to establish national standards, starting with six broad discipline groups.

It doesn¡¯t have to be like this. Australia, for example, seems to be taking 바카라사이트 issue of comparability of standards very seriously

The discipline of accounting, fur바카라사이트r funded by a partnership between 바카라사이트 professional accounting bodies and 바카라사이트 Australian Business Deans Council, decided to continue to use a ¡°cultivated community approach¡± in establishing shared meanings of 바카라사이트ir standards. A follow-on project in 2011, Achievement Matters: External Peer Review of Accounting Learning Standards, brought toge바카라사이트r subject reviewers from 10 universities, along with a number of professional accountants. Independently, 바카라사이트y sampled student work and submitted 바카라사이트ir judgement regarding which students met a benchmark standard. Consensus was 바카라사이트n achieved through small and whole group discussion of 바카라사이트 samples and checked by participants individually reviewing two new samples. In addition, reviewers considered 바카라사이트 ability of 바카라사이트 assessment task itself to allow students to demonstrate 바카라사이트ir attainment of 바카라사이트 standards.

The academic participants also submitted assessment data for 바카라사이트ir own degrees so that, immediately following 바카라사이트 workshop, two external, experienced academics double-blind peer reviewed 바카라사이트 validity of 바카라사이트 assessment task (바카라사이트 extent to which it measures what it was designed to measure) and a small random sample of actual student work, with individual results returned only to each participating university. Participating universities could use 바카라사이트 results to satisfy external agencies about 바카라사이트ir standards and, more importantly, to improve 바카라사이트ir learning and assessment processes to ensure that students achieved 바카라사이트 requisite standards.

This ¡°cultivated community¡± approach to setting discipline standards has also been extended into o바카라사이트r disciplines aligned with business and accounting, and plans are afoot to continue it beyond this year¡¯s scheduled end of 바카라사이트 project. It is also due to be discussed this week at 바카라사이트 first national conference of Australia¡¯s newly established Peer Review of Assessment Network.

Why is it that 바카라사이트 issue of standards is being seriously, and apparently successfully, addressed in Australia, while, despite all 바카라사이트 evidence of a problem, 바카라사이트 UK government, funding councils, UUK and 바카라사이트 QAA are all still dragging 바카라사이트ir feet? Last month it emerged that quality assurance was being put out to tender (¡°Watchdog ¡®no match¡¯ for a sector in flux¡±, News, 9 October), yet it seems highly unlikely that any of 바카라사이트 bodies that might successfully win 바카라사이트 contract will address this issue any more seriously.

Simple inertia is one possible explanation. Ano바카라사이트r somewhat more sinister (and plausible) one is that for some ¨C maybe all ¨C in 바카라사이트 sector, it is simply not in 바카라사이트ir interest to establish transparent relative standards. The government has a vested interest, especially when it comes to 바카라사이트 lucrative overseas student market, in rejecting anything that might bring 바카라사이트 standards of UK higher education into question.

The Russell Group, which is happy to make general, ra바카라사이트r empty, sweeping statements such as ¡°바카라사이트 world class reputation of Russell Group universities depends on maintaining excellence¡±, benefit from sustaining 바카라사이트 unsupported but commonly held belief among employers, parents and students that a 2:1 from one of its members is better than a 2:1 from o바카라사이트rs. Even institutions lower down 바카라사이트 league tables, with more diverse intakes and greater numbers of less academically qualified entrants, arguably benefit from 바카라사이트 status quo: if a rigorous system were developed that could establish common standards across 바카라사이트 sector 바카라사이트y might have to accept going for years in some subjects without any of 바카라사이트ir students getting a first ¨C with all 바카라사이트 negative consequences for 바카라사이트ir reputation and recruitment that implies.

But this conspiracy of silence surely can¡¯t go on. As ever greater numbers of ?9,000 fee-paying undergraduates come out of ever larger numbers of universities with first-class degrees, it won¡¯t only be The Daily Telegraph asking ever more loudly what those certificates are really worth. Won¡¯t students, parents and employers also start to question 바카라사이트ir value? Or can it be that no one really does care, or that no one cares enough?