Honours degree classification - information for students

content

Summary

From 2018-19 onwards, the university will apply the following regulations for Honours degree classifications:

Students will be awarded a first class honours degree if they achieve an average (mean) mark of 70% or more across all SCQF Level 10 credits.
Students will be awarded an upper second class honours degree if they achieve an average (mean) mark between 60-69% across all SCQF Level 10 credits.
Students will be awarded a lower second class honours degree if they achieve an average (mean) mark between 50-59% across all SCQF Level 10 credits.
Students will be awarded a third class honours degree if they achieve an average (mean) mark between 40-49% across all SCQF Level 10 credits.

Each student’s average (mean) mark is rounded to the nearest whole number, and this will determine their final classification.

See Academic regulations webpage for more information.

How is this different from the previous regulations?

Final classifications will now be calculated solely on the average (mean) mark of all SCQF level 10 credits.

Previously there were three criteria relating to: the student’s average mark; achievement in the dissertation specifically; and achievement in reaching a minimum threshold in all SCQF level 10 credits.

Why has the university changed its regulations?

The new regulations are a simpler and more transparent way of calculating Honours degree classifications. They continue to recognise student performance fairly and consistently, and remain aligned with national expectations. For the majority of students, the new regulations will result in the same final degree classification as the previous regulations would have done.

Who will be affected by the change?

These regulations will apply to all undergraduate degree students who start their final level in 2018-19 or after.

What transitional arrangements are in place for students who are already part-way through their studies?

The new regulations will apply to all undergraduate degree students who start their final level (SCQF Level 10) in 2018-19 or after. Because final classification is based only on Level 10 modules, the change does not result in any disadvantage to existing students.

For part-time students who have already started their final level, the university will apply the principle of ‘no detriment’, which is always the approach when there is a regulatory change. Should the old and new regulations generating a different classification for any such student during the transition, the higher classification will be awarded.

How does the rounding work? If I get an average mark of 59, but two of my module marks are above 70, could I be awarded a 2:I?

A student would need to get an average (mean) mark of 59.5 or above to be rounded up to 60, which is the threshold for a 2:I.

Otherwise their mark would be rounded down to 59, and therefore eligible for a 2:2, even if they achieved high marks in some modules.

One of my final year modules is a Level 9 module. How will that be counted within my degree classification?

If a student has completed only 100 credits at Level 10, the average (mean) mark of all Level 9 modules will be calculated and included as the sixth mark.

My final year project / dissertation is worth 40 credits. How will that be counted within my degree classification?

Modules will be weighted according to their credit value eg 40-credit modules will be counted as two instances of the same mark.

Does this change make it easier or harder to get a good degree classification?

Neither. The data modelling showed that, for the majority of students, the new regulations will result in the same final degree classification as the previous regulations would have done.

What impact will this change have on the distribution of degree classifications? Will there be more or fewer firsts and 2:Is?

Neither. The data modelling showed that the distribution of classifications will remain broadly similar when applying the new regulations. The proportion of firsts and 2:Is awarded will remain in line with other universities in Scotland.

What is the rationale for changing from the ‘best 100 credits’ approach?

This will support and incentivise student engagement across all modules, and recognise consistency of performance. Inclusion of all modules avoids ‘discounting’ the lowest module mark, which is in line with national recommendations.

Why has the university chosen this approach instead of other possible models?

The university agreed a number of principles and criteria against which to evaluate potential alternative models:

Simplicity / accessibility (easy to understand)
Transparency
Fairness (supporting consistency of decision-making)
Recognises consistency of student performance
Encourages student engagement across all modules
Criterion-referenced rather than norm-referenced
In line with sector norms and expectations
Single institution-wide algorithm which accommodates diverse programme structures
Supports the university’s mission and values, accommodating our diverse student body and study patterns (eg part-time study, entry at SCQF Level 9 or 10)
Aligns with other academic regulations eg RPL, minimum credit requirements

The approach chosen demonstrated the best fit with these criteria.

How does this approach compare with other universities?

Each university has autonomy to determine its own assessment regulations, within the context of a national Quality Code http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code

There are different models, for example, some universities include credits from more than one year / level, and some apply differential weighting to modules.

The model UHI has chosen is in line with our mission and is appropriate to our student population, particularly the proportion of students who enter degree study at Level 9, or whose learner journeys do not fit the four year full-time study model.

The national report from Universities UK ‘Understanding Degree Algorithms’ (October 2017) confirms that UHI’s approach is in line with other universities. http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Documents/2017/understanding-degree-algorithms.pdf

How did the university consult on the change? How were students involved in the process?

The university convened a working group chaired by the Academic Registrar, with representatives from senior management, academic staff and HISA. The group discussed and agree appropriate criteria for the model, taking into account external reference points. Data analysis and modelling was undertaken to show the impact of different models on both the distribution of degree classifications, and on individual student scenarios. The group agreed the approach which provided the best fit with the design criteria, and made recommendations to Academic Council accordingly.

The HISA Executive Committee endorsed the draft proposals in December 2017. There was an open online consultation for all students and staff in Jan-Feb 2018. This was widely promoted, in conjunction with HISA, through newsletters, emails, social media, staff and student portals, and via committee discussions.

What is HISA’s position on the change?

HISA has given formal endorsement of the change.

HISA are delighted to have been involved in the consultation around changes to Honours Degree classification regulations. HISA was represented on the university working group, and HISA’s Executive Committee (consisting of all our officers), voted to endorse the proposed changes. We believe that the changes being implemented (in 2018-19) are in the best interests of the students of UHI.

If anyone would like to get in contact to discuss the changes, please email hisa.vphe@uhi.ac.uk

Has an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) been done?

Yes, the EIA is available here https://www.uhi.ac.uk/en/about-uhi/governance/policies-and-regulations/policies/equality-diversity/equality-impact-assessments/. It was considered that there was no negative impact on any groups with protected characteristics. More broadly, the proposed change supports the university’s diverse student population, particularly those who enter degree study at Level 9, or whose learner journeys do not fit the four year full-time study model.

Who should I speak to if I still have questions?

You should speak to your programme leader or PAT in the first instance.