To think the marking at university is inconsistent?

[yogaqueenhood]

I'm in my 4th and final year at uni (Scotland). I am a fairly average student, I don't put in much effort if I'm honest and could definitely improve there. However, that's not really relevant here.

Last year I passed with an overall of 63 percent so a 2.1. All of my assessments bar one was between 60 and 72 percent. However, I had one essay that was 51 percent. I was really upset and disappointed in myself but took the feedback on board.

This year I've been really concentrating on my dissertation - mainly my literature review so have probably been slacking in other modules. However, the same woman that gave me the 51 percent last year has just given me an essay back marked at 56 percent. I was genuinely shocked at this mark as I felt I really grasped this assessment. I obviously didn't.

I'm feeling really deflated but the only thing that is keeping me going is the fact that she gave me a really low mark last year and I went on to get higher marks in the rest of my assessment. Is it possible she just doesn't like my writing style? I'm just not giving her what she's looking for but other lecturers are happy with what I am giving?

Or am I doomed? I need 58 percent overall to get a 2.1 this year and I really really need a 2.1 even if it's just a scrape.

AIBU to think the marking at uni is really inconsistent? How can I go from 51 percent to 72 percent in a matter of weeks? And that same marker giving me a really shit mark the following year? Is there such a thing as strict markers?

From the feedback it would seem that you needed to provide more accurate sources and discuss them in more depth and you needed to develop your criticality. These are really key in a literature review which is why you've probably got a mark in the 50s.

Asking for more detailed feedback would be beneficial. Could you also meet with an academic skills tutor?

One of our DC got an E for a particular essay, which I then asked 2 friends who teach the same subject (at much higher rated unis) to take a look at to see where ha had gone wrong.
Both rated it A They felt that maybe his lecturer didn't fully understand the concepts he had detailed.

@RAFHercules

One of our DC got an E for a particular essay, which I then asked 2 friends who teach the same subject (at much higher rated unis) to take a look at to see where ha had gone wrong. Both rated it A They felt that maybe his lecturer didn't fully understand the concepts he had detailed.

I'm sorry but there's not a chance this is true. You're saying your friends told you they would score your child over 70% when their actual lecturer scored them about 30%?

By the way, what a PP said is correct. Fails are double marked. So that'll be two lecturers who gave your DC 30 odd %

@yogaqueenhood

My feedback was

• clearly and unequivocally addresses the question set.

• demonstrates a reasonably good understanding of the key themes and issues, but some inaccuracies that suggest more depth of understanding required.

• develops a logical and effective pattern of argument.

• offers analysis and critical reflection, though this could valuably have been a little more in depth.

• presents material that is mainly accurate and precise.

• provides a comprehensive treatment of the topic

• supports arguments effectively and with evidence.

• draws on the appropriate literature and uses an adequate number of academic expert sources.

• is referenced correctly and effectively.

• demonstrates independent learning.

I actually don't think the feedback is that negative which is why I am struggling with the 56 percent

The language of the feedback is consistent with a grade in the 50s but it looks like it has been copied and pasted from a marking rubric. It is not developmental and does not tell you how it could be improved. For example, this could be rewritten as follows:

You clearly address the question set though there are some inaccuracies in your paper, such as (provide example) which suggests it would benefit from additional reading and citation to strengthen your arguments (that way your reading would not be ‘adequate’ but good/excellent), good referencing etc. etc.

I’m guessing that this tutor, perhaps due to the nature of the topic, requires wider reading leading to more in depth analysis. Using language such as ‘this means…’, ‘this suggests…’, ‘the evidence points to…’, ‘contrary to…’ ‘alternatively…’ demonstrates critical analysis and deeper engagement with a wider range of literature. As a guide, you should be reading for 70% of the time you allot to your essay, and writing for 30%.

I think that marking is generally consistent, but that students must take time and make the effort to develop a deep understanding of what the tutor is looking for, and to take the opportunity to seek formative feedback on plans or drafts.

I don't put in much effort if I'm honest and could definitely improve there. However, that's not really relevant here

In your final year you really need to put in all the effort that you can. Think about how much value your degree will be if you just miss out on the grade you want by a few percent. You want to end the year feeling confident that you have worked as hard as you could and you are getting the grade that you are capable of. Go and see her and see if she can explain where you could gain more marks.

It does sound as if you have some inaccuracies and a lack of evaluation. At your stage in the degree you should be ticking most of the boxes so just because the feedback doesn't seem too negative I would hope that a student in their final year can reference correctly, demonstrates independent learning etc. I wouldn't see that in itself as a reason to celebrate. When it says 'adequate number of academic sources' it depends how many she is expecting for a good or excellent number of sources.

@Curioushorse

Ha ha. You should study 'assessment' at university. It was a popular module on my masters in education. Brilliant. Top banter when it got to examining our own assessment criteria for that module!

It's bollocks. It's all absolute bollocks. Up until that point I think I'd had some mild thoughts, but had put them to one side in the secure confidence that university lecturers must know what they're doing. Nope. In most of the 'inexact' subjects (so, anything where there isn't a yes or no answer) there is wild variation between individual modules, as well as individual lecturers. They're often making up their own assessment criteria- but that's actually incredibly difficult to do, so while they may fit in loosely with a department, and have been overseen, there's a limit to how exact they bother being.

The most interesting question I remember somebody asking- bearing in mind we were all teachers, trying to improve how we helped students improve- was about the scoring. Generally marks are out of 100 (which I suspect yours are, OP), yet people rarely gain above 75. We got our essays back and the tutor was obviously pleased with our marks. They were towards the top end. One person said, thanks. What can we do to get higher?
The tutor did nothing. They're great.
So what are the other 25 marks for?

It’s to allow for the possibility of writing something truly groundbreaking in the field, at a level of rigour/sophistication/originality far above that expected at whatever level it is (eg undergrad/masters).

I think it’s ok - it kind of places you as part of the academic world and allows for the (real) possibility your work might be of for eg. publishable standard, while not making this the level expected of students for them to achieve top marks.

@RAFHercules

One of our DC got an E for a particular essay, which I then asked 2 friends who teach the same subject (at much higher rated unis) to take a look at to see where ha had gone wrong. Both rated it A They felt that maybe his lecturer didn't fully understand the concepts he had detailed.

That didn't happen....... Nice little dig a 'lower rated' universities though.

A fail would be looked at by a second academic so you're saying two people got it spectacularly wrong? And this wasn't picked up during moderation or by the external examiner?

The higher you go in education the more subjective analysis becomes. Therefore the assessment becomes much more prone to inconsistency and variation but it's most noticeable in the average student. Often everyone agrees on the work that is brilliant and the work that is crap, it's the so-so that is hard to benchmark. Especially across very variable modules.

@RAFHercules

One of our DC got an E for a particular essay, which I then asked 2 friends who teach the same subject (at much higher rated unis) to take a look at to see where ha had gone wrong. Both rated it A They felt that maybe his lecturer didn't fully understand the concepts he had detailed.

They don’t use an A–E system at unis

Yeah, there's a real lack of consistency. One of my lecturers, during my undergraduate degree, told us after the fact that he marked one of our essays as if it was post grad work just in case any of us wanted to go on and do a post grad masters. Bonkers.

@RAFHercules

One of our DC got an E for a particular essay, which I then asked 2 friends who teach the same subject (at much higher rated unis) to take a look at to see where ha had gone wrong. Both rated it A They felt that maybe his lecturer didn't fully understand the concepts he had detailed.

This has happened to a relative of mine. He works on the cutting edge of data analytics for a well known company that creates certain algorithms we all hate & got a C for his essay on how to apply it to finance. His essay was later developed into a published paper and is considered a kind of application standard of this type of work. He didn’t get the C because of his concepts or that his work was shit. He got a C because he didn’t reference anything (not even his own publications) and his arguments didn’t follow any kind of logical structure- his team added all of that later.

@Ozanj well yeah. If he didn't quote a single source in his essay then he's not going to be able to fulfill the criteria relating to interpreting and citing relevant academic sources, is he?

I would say that these points are probably the key to why you didn't get a higher mark, OP.

- demonstrates a reasonably good understanding of the key themes and issues, but some inaccuracies that suggest more depth of understanding required.

I would interpret "a reasonably good understanding" as bit better than enough to pass. FWIW, I have a marking scheme in front of me and the descriptors used are "good" for marks in the 50s, "very good" for marks in the 60s, "excellent" for marks in the 70s, "outstanding" for marks in the 80s, "exceptional" for marks above 90, 40-50 is "adequate". It's not your marking scheme but I would expect it to be similar.

- presents material that is mainly accurate and precise.

"Mainly accurate" is concerning, I wouldn't be expecting you to get things factually incorrect in your 4th year.

- offers analysis and critical reflection, though this could valuably have been a little more in depth.

I think this is where you probably lost a lot of marks. Were you given a marking scheme that shows what percentage of marks are allocated to different criteria? Often the most marks are for critical analysis, there aren't many so marks for things like referencing or organisation/structure. You should be getting a perfect score for referencing as a final year student, they are "easy marks".

I think you are right that there are inconsistencies though. One person's good is another's very good.

[quote Autumndays123]@Ozanj well yeah. If he didn't quote a single source in his essay then he's not going to be able to fulfill the criteria relating to interpreting and citing relevant academic sources, is he?[/quote]
He didn’t even use paragraphs. I remember him sending me the essay to look at it and I wondered how he even got a C

YANBU! I took my contract law exam in March after revising for weeks and was given 35%! Resat in September and got 83. In property law I wasn't confident at all and still don't really get the main concepts but achieved 100 (!) %. It's outright arbitrary. This is at the leading remote university in Germany (FernUni Hagen).

I don't think you should be surprised that your marks vary from module to module - it might be that your grasp on the material in one is significantly weaker than in another.

I've taught and marked undergrad modules and the marking criteria was pretty stringent, and we had to swap a sample of essays with our colleagues to cross-mark for consistency.

I'd say where you are falling short based on your feedback is:

• demonstrates a reasonably good understanding of the key themes and issues, but some inaccuracies that suggest more depth of understanding required.

^^ your understanding of key themes and issues is not secure or always accurate

• offers analysis and critical reflection, though this could valuably have been a little more in depth.

^^ because your understanding isn't secure, your analysis/reflection is not as strong as it could be.

• presents material that is mainly accurate and precise.

^^ sometimes it is inaccurate/imprecise - this won't pass muster in academic writing.

• draws on the appropriate literature and uses an adequate number of academic expert sources.

^^ work would be better if you drew on more sources.

Possibly in another module where you've scored 71 your understanding is much more secure, you've drawn on a wider range of sources and conducted deeper analysis - this would result in much more academically convincing work.

I do struggle with this particular model. It's about social policy and for some reason it's just not my strong point. I'm also a bit of a 'flowery' writer which I'm trying to work on. I think some lecturers enjoy that more than others.

But having heard everyone's opinions on here in regard to my feedback I can see now where I went wrong and what I can do in future to strengthen my grade. So thank you all for that.

And yes, pulling my finger out of my arse and putting in an effort will obviously help! I did the essay in 12 hours including reading so yeah

I've just lost all motivation this year. Can't seem to get it back.

flowery language is not appropriate in an undergraduate essay about social policy. it will be read as lacking in depth and intelligence. think of your essays as a formal report - there is no place for hyperbole or flowery descriptions. all you need are facts and arguments backed up by evidence and knowledge of the literature.

@yogaqueenhood

And yes, pulling my finger out of my arse and putting in an effort will obviously help! I did the essay in 12 hours including reading so yeah

Then I would be happy with a 2:2 to be fair- given the fact that your feedback clearly states that you have misunderstood parts of the material.

Why would you think you deserved any higher?

Next essay- choose the title in advance, send a draft outline to your prof or seminar leader and ask if you are on the right track, and spend a bit of time on it. 12 hours of focused work across a few study sessions when you understand the material is fine- a 10am-10pm job has the potential to go a bit wrong

I somehow got 95 in a report...Ninety five.... How????it wasn't that good...

@yogaqueenhood

I do struggle with this particular model. It's about social policy and for some reason it's just not my strong point. I'm also a bit of a 'flowery' writer which I'm trying to work on. I think some lecturers enjoy that more than others.

If you know a module is not a strong point then you need to put in the time rather than avoiding it, book tutorials and ask questions.

I had a module I was dreading, especially as the lecturer made it clear that it was the main module people on the course failed on (no pressure then!) I put in a lot of work to understand it and to be able to write about it concisely and it paid off, I made up for the time spent by spending less time on a module I found easy to understand.

If you are a flowery writer then you need to work with someone who is very concise and get them to read through your essays and show you how they would reword them, it really helps to see how others cut down paragraphs when you are struggling to. One of the biggest tips I heard in the early days of my study was that if you cannot stay within the word count then you do not understand the subject!
I know what it is like to flag at the end and I really had to push myself to finish strong but not putting in the effort and hoping for the best is not going to get you the grade you want.
One disappointing grade is not the end of it if you can turn it around with the rest of your work.

In my experience it's extremely inconsistent.

I did a term studying abroad whilst at uni. We had two lecturers who came with us, one liked me and I liked her and I always got high First marks when she graded my essays. One hated me. He only liked the gaggle of sycophants who fawned over him and told him he was wonderful, and I'm quieter and disinclined to fawning over people. He always gave me 50-55% on everything I submitted.

Bearing in mind both these lecturers were teaching the same specific module whilst we were abroad, it seemed bizarre that I'd get glowing praise from one lecturer and a grudging pass mark from another.

I always did well - nothing below a 2:1 - under every other lecturer I had, but the highest mark I ever got from him was 56%. 🤷‍♀️