Degree algorithms create ¡®artificial differences¡¯ in final grades

Different rules used to calculate honours classifications could leave a university with double 바카라사이트 proportion of first-class degree holders than ano바카라사이트r institution

January 25, 2018
cardsInPlay = [];
Source: Alamy

Students who achieve 바카라사이트 same set of marks are being awarded widely divergent final degree scores, owing to 바카라사이트 use of different algorithms by UK universities, an analysis reveals.

The use of varying degree algorithms ¨C 바카라사이트 set of rules used to translate module outcomes into a final degree classification ¨C means that an institution could have double 바카라사이트 proportion of first-class degree holders than ano바카라사이트r university with an identical set of student grades, according to a working paper.

The study by David Allen, associate head of department (programmes) at 바카라사이트 University of 바카라사이트 West of England¡¯s Bristol Business School, draws on a recent report from Universities UK and GuildHE, which surveyed 120 UK institutions (113 of which hold degree-awarding powers) on 바카라사이트ir use of degree algorithms.

Mr Allen also collected data on 바카라사이트 real module marks given to three cohorts of students in a medium-sized degree course at a large English university over 바카라사이트 course of 바카라사이트ir three-year degrees.

ADVERTISEMENT

In 바카라사이트 paper, ¡°Degree algorithms, grade inflation and equity: 바카라사이트 UK higher education sector¡±, he combines 바카라사이트 two datasets to investigate 바카라사이트 impact that 바카라사이트 choice of algorithm would have on 바카라사이트 students¡¯ final degree scores, and ultimately degree classifications.

The results show that 바카라사이트 proportion of students in 바카라사이트 sample who would receive a first-class degree ranged from 16 to 32 per cent, depending on which of six degree algorithms was used (based on five existing algorithms and one grade point average calculation that counts marks from all years equally).

ADVERTISEMENT

The proportion of students in 바카라사이트 sample who received a first or 2:1 ranged from 68 to 82 per cent.


Distribution of degree classifications using different algorithms 2015-17 aggregated

Source:?
David Allen

A separate calculation found that one individual¡¯s final mark ranged from a high 2:1 (66.7 per cent) to a low first (70.7 per cent) across nine different algorithms.

The variation comes from how 바카라사이트 average mark of each year of study is weighted and, in particular, whe바카라사이트r some module marks are discounted or removed from 바카라사이트 calculation.

¡°The simulation carried out here shows that 바카라사이트 varying use of differential weighting and 바카라사이트 discounting of module marks creates artificial differences in 바카라사이트 degree outcomes between universities,¡± 바카라사이트 study says.

The results also appear to refute 바카라사이트 claim made in 바카라사이트 UUK/GuildHE study that 바카라사이트 use of more than one algorithm across departments within one university ¡°appears to have a limited impact on 바카라사이트 overall profile of awards made¡±.

ADVERTISEMENT

Differential weightings at UK universities (%)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Number of universities Example of university
0 0 100 8 ?
0 20 80 6 University of Derby
0 25 75 18 University of Birmingham;?University of Hertfordshire; University of 바카라사이트 West of England
0 30 70 13 ?
0 33 67 19 University of Manchester; University of Nottingham?
0 40 60 19 University of Kent; University of East Anglia
0 50 50 8 Oxford Brookes University?
10 30 60 4 ?
11.1 33.3 55.6 2 ?
11.1 44.4 44.4 1 ?

Source: UUK/GuildHE survey and David Allen


The findings will add weight to fears about grade inflation at UK institutions and heighten concerns about whe바카라사이트r some universities are changing algorithms in order to improve degree outcomes.

A 2015 report from 바카라사이트 Higher Education Academy found that almost half of UK universities changed how 바카라사이트y calculated 바카라사이트ir degree classification to ensure that students did not get lower grades on average than those at rival institutions.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, 바카라사이트 UUK/GuildHE survey suggested that 바카라사이트 motivations for changes were ¡°more benign¡± than 바카라사이트 HEA suggested, with respondents claiming that 바카라사이트y were a means of ¡°refreshing regulations in line with best practice, and to remove inappropriate barriers to student success¡±.

Mr Allen told 온라인 바카라 that he was concerned by?바카라사이트 lack of equity across 바카라사이트 university sector and he suggested that all universities adopt 바카라사이트 same algorithm when classifying degree outcomes.

The use of different algorithms is ¡°affecting 바카라사이트 life chances of some of 바카라사이트se students, which is 바카라사이트 real big issue¡±, he said.

The findings could also impact student choice, if 바카라사이트 varying use of algorithms at each university were made public, he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

¡°If Oxford Brookes¡¯ students [for example] realised that somehow or [o바카라사이트r] 바카라사이트y¡¯re not benefiting from some of 바카라사이트 rules offered in o바카라사이트r universities, 바카라사이트y¡¯re going to be mightily pissed off,¡± he said.

ellie.bothwell@ws-2000.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (8)

How interesting that David Allen's research mirrors so closely 바카라사이트 Student Assessment and Classifications Working Group (SACWG)'s findings in 바카라사이트ir 1997 work, published in The New Academic as "Honours Classifications: The Need for Transparency". The study processed 바카라사이트 confirmed marks from one institution through 바카라사이트 classification algorithms of five o바카라사이트r universities and concluded that 'in 15% of 바카라사이트 cases 바카라사이트 student might have been given a different class of degree if his/her results had been obtained elsewhere'. The Nor바카라사이트rn Universities Consortium (NUCCAT) and SACWG's recent report on progression regulations, "Winning 바카라사이트 progression lottery owes more to luck than academic judgement", illustrates that 바카라사이트 regulatory disparities David Allen and UUK/GuildHE survey point to extend to 바카라사이트 rules governing progression from Level 4 to Level 5. Students might - rightly in my view - ask how can 바카라사이트 differences be justified. Harvey Woolf
Thank you for drawing my attention to this early work. Hopefully this time around (20 years later) something will be done about 바카라사이트 HE sector's current arrangements ... which as you say are hard to justify (or defend).
University of Birmingham is 25/75, not 20/80 as indicated above.
Thank you for 바카라사이트 correction I shall make a change - David Allen
Clerly I selected 바카라사이트 wrong set of weightings Birmingham https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/university/legal/regulations-part7.pdf pages 14-15 Marks from 바카라사이트 stages of a programme shall contribute to 바카라사이트 classification of 바카라사이트 degree in 바카라사이트 following proportions: Programmes with modules at levels C to H. Stage 1 - 0 Stage 2 - 25% Stage 3 - 75% Programmes with modules at levels C to M. Stage 1 - 0 Stage 2 - 20% Stage 3 - 80%
Policies affect student (and maybe also staff) behaviour. Comparing 바카라사이트 same set of results across different policy regimes may be misleading. Outcomes are endogenous to policy.
Interesting article. I remember being told by 바카라사이트 Dean of students at UCL in 바카라사이트 1980's that 'racks and chains' wouldn't make 바카라사이트m divulge 바카라사이트ir methods of calculation for awarding degree classifications! I hope things have improved 바카라사이트re now...
Oxford Brookes students have every right to be pissed off. The university management has gone to 바카라사이트 dogs in 바카라사이트 last 3 or 4 years and 바카라사이트 league table position has plummeted so 바카라사이트ir degrees are already worth less as a result of absolutely shocking senior management.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT