Degree

ArchitectDublin

Can anyone recommend a source for the some basic principles or theory behind examination grades, particularly at 3rd level (though any level is fine)?

Also does anyone have an opinion on whether a % mark eg A1-95% in one Level 7 Degree should (in theory) represent the same level of 'academic achievement' as another Level 7 95% mark (even if in a completely different subject). Probably impossible to really measure I know, but does this theory stand up to scrutiny?

Or is it accepted that each course can establish its own measure without comparison to other subjects?

In other words, in Ireland, is there anyone responsible for 'balancing the books' between courses when it comes to grades when examiners award too many (or too few) A1's?

Any references for this area would be much appreciated.

peckerhead

There is (no pun intended) some degree of comparability in terms of award classifications — 1st class hons., 2.i & 2.ii, etc. — but grading systems vary from institution to institution, and the link between, say, letter grades and numerical scores/percentage bands would vary even more widely across subject areas. In a maths module an A1 might be 90% and the pass mark 50% or 60%, while in a modern language the pass mark could be 40% and an A grade (or a "first") start at 70% or 75%. Yet a maths or science course might award a higher proportion of firsts and fewer fails than, say, an equivalent-level course in history/philosophy/English literature. It's very hard to measure accurately or compare meaningfully.

In terms of 'responsibility', Irish institutions are more or less free to police their own practices, subject to the oversight of a system of external examiners whose reports are (I think) made publicly available. Also, certain degree courses are vetted by professional bodies. In marketing terms, it's not in any College's interests to be perceived as having lower standards than their competitors, but it is also the case that handing out plenty of firsts puts bums on seats too.

If you're looking for detailed statistics, contacting the relevant institutions is probably your best first port of call. I can't think offhand of any useful references, but will post back if anything occurs to me.

Tom Dunne

ArchitectDublin wrote: »

Also does anyone have an opinion on whether a % mark eg A1-95% in one Level 7 Degree should (in theory) represent the same level of 'academic achievement' as another Level 7 95% mark (even if in a completely different subject). Probably impossible to really measure I know, but does this theory stand up to scrutiny?

The level of a course on the national qualifications framework, Level 7 in your case, is determined by a number of defined criteria.

Every course at a comparable level should be relatively similar in terms of what is required at that level, regardless of the subject. These criteria are general enough, they are not domain/subject specific.

Therefore you could argue that a 95% mark in an engineering course assessment should in theory be comparable to a similar mark in a science course, assuming they are both at the same level on the qualifications framework.

Full details on the QQI website: http://www.qqi.ie/Pages/HET-Awards-Standards.aspx

ArchitectDublin

Thanks peckerhead & Tom Dunne.

With the increase in competition for jobs and masters between graduates from separate courses this is an increasingly important issue.

For instance a lot less graduates from a BSc in Architecture (the 1st 3 years of many, MANY! years of training) go on to be architects then when the course was first set up.

So those that 'leave' the profession are, at times, competing against other BSc graduates. And those other BSc graduates may have come from less academically demanding Bsc courses but emerged with much higher marks.

In Ireland 15-20% get 1st Class degrees overall but it's around 5% for architecture (the intake to which is higher than average academically).

Seems unfair/unbalanced no?

Tom Dunne

ArchitectDublin wrote: »

In Ireland 15-20% get 1st Class degrees overall but it's around 5% for architecture (the intake to which is higher than average academically).

Seems unfair/unbalanced no?

Are you comparing like with like?

That 15-20% is very broad - is it across similar disciplines or all disciplines? What about the entry requirements for degree courses - are they higher or lower for architecture? I could go on...

Remember, the devil is in the detail.

ArchitectDublin

You're right Tom, it is very broad. Its just the average of all 3rd level results over all Unis. Some give out a lot less than others.

But in one university that does Architecture the average is 18% for a 1st class across all disciplines. But for Architecture in that same Uni 1st Classes honours amount to about 5% and rarely above 10%. Entry requirements for Architecture are generally 500+ CAO points so the students are roughly the top 10% of academic achievement at Leaving Cert or thereabouts?

I'd be keen on seeing specific survey results for Bsc 's across the board for instance.

peckerhead

Apart from looking at synchronic variation (i.e. comparing across disciplines/faculties/institutions at a given point of time) you would also want to consider fluctuations across time (the undeniable grade inflation of recent years) and other structural factors, e.g. how entry requirements can be used to manipulate demand, resulting in more or less academically able cohorts being admitted to the "same" programme. If a B.Sc course that used to require 425 points and honours maths takes in students with 320 points and only pass maths, all else being equal, you would expect median performance to be lower. If the grades didn't drop, indeed, it would seem logical to conclude that the standard required for a pass, honours, etc. must have fallen... (but of course nobody but academics will admit to this).

The multiplicity of variables makes it difficult to arrive at anything but very impressionistic judgements to the effect that, for instance, science is "harder" at TCD than at UCD, or standards higher at DIT than UL, or that a 1st class Hons from one institution is somehow worth more than the same award from another. The universities and ITs know this, of course, and so branding/marketing is more important to management strategy than issues of transparency or academic integrity.

Probably the best way to get something like a "league table" of the B.Sc programmes in the country would be to assemble all the extern examiners and ask them to come up with a ranking. But there's absolutely no way something like that would be permitted.

smallgarden

Just my two cents. I went to a TCD affiliated college and the highest percentage anyone got was between 70 and 75. They just didn't award higher. In comparison my friend in D.I.T was coming out with 90s which were unheard of in my college.

Outkast_IRE

I can tell you in terms of engineers courses anyway, Engineers Ireland on an annual basis sends teams to audit courses and ensure that they are of the same difficulty and level as elsewhere.

The audit looks at,

Previous years examination papers, and continuous assessments to ensure the difficulty level and the marking level are up to scratch. They usually request a meeting with some current students and graduates to ask them questions about the course etc.

So in terms of engineering, i would be pretty confident that the level of difficulty is similar across the institutions.