Institutional bias and the degree class system

Journal of Geography in Higher Education

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 285-297

  Heritage, George L ^a   Thomas, Andrew D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SALFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b MANCHESTER METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Degree class; Geography degree; Marking algorithm

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; COHORT ANALYSIS; HIGHER EDUCATION; LEARNING; STUDENT; TEACHING;

EID: 34248158747     PISSN: 03098265     EISSN: 14661845     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03098260601063743     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Armstrong, M., Clarkson, P. and Noble, M. (1998) Modularity and credit frameworks: The NUCCAT survey and 1998 conference report. Northern Universities Consortium for Credit Accumulation and Transfer, Newcastle upon Tyne
2. Bridges, P., Bourdillon, B., Collymore, D., Cooper, A., Fox, W., Haines, C., Turner, D., Woolf, H. and Yorke, M. (1999) Discipline related marking behaviour using percentages: A potential case of inequality in assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 24:3, pp. 285-300.
3. Elton, L. (1998) Are degree standards going up, down or sideways?. Studies in Higher Education, 23:1, pp. 35-42.
4. Elton, L. (2004) Should classification of UK honours degree have a future?. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 29:4, pp. 415-422.
5. Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC) (1997) Graduate Standards Programme: Final Report, 1, HEQC, London
6. Hornby, W. (2003) Assessing using grade related criteria: A common currency for universities. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 28:4, pp. 437-456.
7. Hunt, J. G. (1991) Leadership: A New Synthesis, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA
8. Knight, P. T. (2001) A Briefing on Key Concepts: Formative and Summative, Criterion and Norm-referenced Assessment, LTSN Generic Centre Assessment Series, LTSN, York
9. Murphy, R. (1995) Firsts among equals, the case of British university degrees. British Journal of Curriculum and Assessment, 5, pp. 38-45.
10. National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (NCIHE) (1997) Higher Education in the Learning Society. Report of the National Committee (The Dearing Report).HMSO, London
11. Oh, D. M., Kim, J. M., Garcia, R. E. and Krilowicz, B. L. (2005) Valid and reliable authentic assessment of culminating student performance in the biomedical sciences. Advances in Physiological Education, 29, pp. 83-93.
12. Quality Assurance Agency (2000) Promoting Higher Quality Code of Practice for the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education, Section 6: Assessment of Students, QAA, Gloucester
13. Quality Assurance Agency (2001) The Framework for Higher Education Qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, QAA, Gloucester
14. Rose-Innes, A. C. (1985) Letter: Splitting degrees. The Times
15. Simonite, V. (2000) The effects of aggregation method and variations in the performance of individual students on degree classifications in modular degree courses. Studies in Higher Education, 25, pp. 197-210.
16. Stowell, M. (2004) Equity, justice and standards: Assessment decision making in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 29:4, pp. 495-510.
17. Winter, R. (1993) Education or grading? Arguments for a non-subdivided honours degree. Studies in Higher Education, 18, pp. 363-377.
18. Woolf, H. and Turner, D. (1997) Honours classifications: The need for transparency. The New Academic, 6:3, pp. 10-12.
19. Yorke, M., Barnett, G., Bridges, P., Evanson, P., Haines, C., Jenkins, D., Knight, P., Scurry, D., Stowell, M. and Woolf, H. (2002) Does grading method influence honours degree classification?. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27, pp. 269-278.
20. Yorke, M., Barnett, G., Evanson, P., Haines, C., Jenkins, D., Knight, P., Scurry, D., Stowell, M. and Woolf, H. (2004) Some effects of the award algorithm on honours degree classifications in UK higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 29, pp. 401-413.