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?

@toastfiend marking is anonymous and teaching (especially marking) is seen as the unglamorous side of academia, So no lecturers dont have favourites. I don't know (or care) whom I am grading when am staring at 50 essays that I have to squeeze in amidst everything else. Neither does anyone else. Yes, if it's a dissertation and you know the student had a tough year or a breakdown or something then you will try not to fail them. Maybe bump them up a point or two if it makes a difference to their degree classification. But that's it. Lecturers know that at the end of the day - it's the degree classification that matters - they dont agonise about whether they give a 64 or a 66 on a paper.

@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

I am afraid I would say that is actually quite negative.

"reasonably good" is not good.

"this more valuable could have been a little more in depth" is a polite way of saying lacks depth.

uses an "adequate" number of academic expert sources generally means "just enough".

Sorry if that upsets you but it is a polite way if saying it's OK but not great.

The other thing to remember is that within certain subjects there are different styles of essays required eg. if addressing a source piece v writing a comparison essay so it may just be that you are not as good at one style as you are the other.

But on the plus side it sounds as though the ones you are good at you may be able to pick up marks to lift your overall average.

@465ggii I was on a relatively small course and the feedback made it clear that it was not anonymous. This was a decade ago, so perhaps things have changed, or things are done differently where you work. Having been there to witness it first hand, though, I can assure you that this particular lecturer most definitely did have favourites.

Either way, even if your points were applicable to my situation, it still shows wildly inconsistent marking at play.

The nice people are often the harshest markers IME.

Do you have a copy of the mark scheme? That will probably show you where you could have improved. I.e. The feedback you were given probably relates to the lower end, with things being adequate rather than good or excellent, mainly correct rather than always correct. Etc.

I also think there's a disconnect between your effort and expectations. If you know you didn't try, how can you be upset with a low mark? It takes time to produce a good piece of work, you may be very bright but unless you spend the time on the reading your work will never be better than adequate. So it's not a surprise really. Did you think you'd get away with writing from a small number of sources and getting some of it wrong? I mean you passed so it's ok but you were never going to get a really good mark for inaccurate rushed work.... I am wondering if you are a really bright student who's never really had to try that hard but always got good marks regardless. Unfortunately that stops working as you get more advanced!

I understand about motivation, I struggle with that too. Joint study sessions with friends might help?

Flowery language isn't appropriate for academic writing, OP. Academic phrasebank is a useful resource for improving your academic writing style:

www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/

I think the language used to provide feedback is a bit vague and constrained by the rubrics used. Markers don't want to veer off from the specific language of the rubrics, because it's effort and hassle, but that can make it opaque to students, who I often found needed to have the feedback explained to them (like the OP).

@SnackSizeRaisin

The nice people are often the harshest markers IME.

Do you have a copy of the mark scheme? That will probably show you where you could have improved. I.e. The feedback you were given probably relates to the lower end, with things being adequate rather than good or excellent, mainly correct rather than always correct. Etc.

I also think there's a disconnect between your effort and expectations. If you know you didn't try, how can you be upset with a low mark? It takes time to produce a good piece of work, you may be very bright but unless you spend the time on the reading your work will never be better than adequate. So it's not a surprise really. Did you think you'd get away with writing from a small number of sources and getting some of it wrong? I mean you passed so it's ok but you were never going to get a really good mark for inaccurate rushed work.... I am wondering if you are a really bright student who's never really had to try that hard but always got good marks regardless. Unfortunately that stops working as you get more advanced!

I understand about motivation, I struggle with that too. Joint study sessions with friends might help?

To be honest I think you hit the nail in the head, first and second year I was getting between 70 - 79 percent consistently without much of an effort at all. I studied for exams but would bang out an essay in a few hours including the reading. I naively thought why do people say getting a degree is hard? It's easy.

I noticed a jump into 3rd year when I was consistently in the 60s bar that one 51 percent. I never did many of the lectures and never signed in for tutorials but still found it pretty easy to wing my way through.

This year I thought it would be the same, and I really am putting a lot of effort into my dissertation but haven't really been attending lectures or seminars.

I know I'm doing myself a disservice but I really don't enjoy my course and am doing it as a means to an end. I feel like I've done it the past 4 years and I'm just ready to be done and my motivation is waning. But yeah you hit the nail on the head, it's up until this point all been very easy and came naturally to me.

[quote chesirecat99]Flowery language isn't appropriate for academic writing, OP. Academic phrasebank is a useful resource for improving your academic writing style:

www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/[/quote]
Thank you very much for this

Also as regards consistency...it might be less inconsistent than you think if you get a copy of the mark scheme and match yours up to it. But inevitably there will be inconsistency. If you look at published work it ranges from excellent to so terrible it has to be retracted at a later date. And nothing gets published in a decent journal without quite a lot of people thinking it's good. So clearly there's plenty of subjective judgement going on

In some universities there is a lack of consistency, the courses are written by the lecturers and there is no scheme of work with little real quality control. Compared to GCSE, Btecs and A levels there is no national standard - I think the increase in grades is a consequence of this.

We've all noticed the inconsistency across our staff - no issues with a crap mark (well I do have but they're against me) but a crap mark with no constructive feedback other than "do the entire assignment again" - isn't on. As it was - think there were issues across the whole cohort with those two assignments as they were moderated right up between initial and finalised results for us.

As for the 80%+ range... I've done it once, and got close to it (high 70s) on a couple of other assignments - but all in a module where I do have a real flair for it compared to a lot on the course.

And yes, our nicest lecturer is the toughest marker. She's lovely though!

@BurbageBrook

To be honest in essay subjects I think even at A Level and GCSE marking can easily be a little inconsistent. At university level even more so. A sample get moderated but not every paper does, and mark schemes can be interpreted pretty subjectively.

Done both and a level/gcse are external exams- externally moderated, trained examiners who have a blind set of ‘seeds’ in every marking set that will already have been marked and moderated. If your marking doesn’t match up with a seed (usually a tolerance) the whole set gets taken back from you and remarked elsewhere and you get re-trained and have to pass again before being okayed to mark others. Uni- absolutely nothing. No training, very opaque mark-schemes. Senior lecturers in theory moderate but mostly don’t, never disagree with one another and in my experience have absolutely no idea why they have given a mark if challenged. It’s a joke.

Don’t take the marks seriously enough to dent your confidence.
They tell you what the lecturer is looking to reward, that’s really it!

I'm in my final year of a Social Policy degree. I get good marks (consistently over 70). I work my arse off.

Some thoughts:
Flowery language = definite no no. It can be passionate, or critical, without the language. The content should speak for itself.

Journal articles are your friend. Undergrad lecturers love a good selection of recent, relevant articles, it will give you more applied context, and the more you read the better your writing will be (this is generally true, but with journals specifically. Some social policy, and especially sociology, texts can be more literary in their use of language, but journal.articles are reporting research and interpreting it, which is basically the point of an essay, without the empirical bit).

All our work is second marked and marking is fairly consistent. Still there is some variation. Some markers favour certain kinds of analysis. Probably shouldn't be the case but it is. Samenis true of journals for publishing academics. Partner the skill I'm learning is recognising what a marker wants and then doing it. That doesn't mean agreeing with them necessarily.

I think YANBU to query some inconsistency, but YABVU to expect to bash out an essay in 12 hours WITH READING and get a 2:1.

Good job I don't get marked on my late night mumsnet posts! Cursed fat fingers.

One motivation which might help is to consider how much money you will have wasted on your degree if you need a 2.i but fail to get it. Think firstly of the cost of loans. OK, there might not be a tuition loan if Scottish, but think of the maintenance loan, or if your parents paid that think of them just giving you all the cash up front. Then think about the wages you might have earned during the past few years that you have been studying. Then think about the loss of wages that will occur in your future career from having a lower classification of degree. Possibly the additional cost of a masters to prove that you could have done it.

I can totally understand that circumstances are such that some students underperform but is whatever else you have been prioritising over your studies worth that amount of money? Sometimes it is - mental, physical wellbeing, family commitments etc. Sometimes it isn't. Even when it is something that is worth prioritising it doesn't mean that you won't look back sometimes and wonder whether life might have been different under different circumstances.

If my last post was a little harsh do also imagine the opposite, how life will be when you get a 2.i, how proud you will be of the effort you put in and the career opportunities it will give you.

@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

From your feedback I’d guess that you haven’t fully stepped up from level 5 to level 6 ( I’m assuming if you’re in the last year that it’s now level 6 but not sure about Scotland).

So try and concentrate on the critical analysis side of things. If you also had some inaccuracies which cast doubt over your understanding then a mid 50s mark could well be fair. Do your uni library offer any writing workshops for critical analysis?

I do agree with a couple of earlier points, that yes marking can be inconsistent and also some staff may give higher marks for an easier life.

When I was a new lecturer I marked fairly but firmly. I had someone come and see me in tears saying it was her worst mark ever and her mum disagreed with the mark, she was one of a few complaining. Also I second marked an assignment which a senior lecturer had given 82% for and I failed it because although it was a well written assignment the student hadn’t covered the learning outcomes. The first marker was furious and wouldn’t accept the new grade, it had to go to a professor who agreed with me and my mark stood.

These days I admit I tend to give higher marks as it’s just not worth the hassle of giving lower marks and I don’t have time to deal with unhappy students.