Ok, I'm probably going to come across as a pompous wind bag here but I don't mind. I'm mired in marking essays and decided to have a look back through some of my undergraduate essays to get a feel for marks (bearing in mind I only graduated 2 years ago). Reading back through an essay that I remember spending ages and ages on, I remembered getting a relatively low mark for it (less than 60%) and being quite upset. Now, going on the criteria by which that essay was marked the vast majority of the ones I've received would fail, straight off the bat. Half of them can barely string a sentence together. Yet we moderate essays in groups and when some other lecturers looked at a couple I wanted to fail last time they insisted I change the mark by around 10 % (one of them made a massive massive error about the writer she was discussing, the kind of information which a 5 year old would know- and this has been tested!)
This isn't a 'STANDARDS ARE SLIPPING!' rant because as I say I'm not long out of university myself. I'm just trying to work out what's changed? I can say with complete confidence that my work was miles better than anything I've marked so far yet I had to fight tooth and nail for my first 70%....I don't know. Anyone come across anything similar?

I'm always told I am a bit strict with marking. What I would say is that apparently if you have only just finished a course yourself you do have the 'well I managed to do it better than that' attitude. I also think that other markers - especially if they are involved with the budget of the course are under a lot of pressure to pass everyone. Failing people means more work = more ££ off of the budget.

======= Date Modified 17 Feb 2010 17:34:03 =======
Hi Keep Calm, I feel similarly, but I teach at new unis and did my undergrad at a top 5, on the top course for my subject (over 10 years ago, if that makes any difference) and I reckon there's about 10% discrepancy in grades, could it be that? Also, I think too much of marking is arbitrary, especially in none exact subjects, and I have been quite shocked by some of the grades I've seen handed out to undergrads. It's usually permanent staff that shock me in this way: One got a first without proper citation and referencing; anther a high 2:2 without any citation at all - although she gained extra marks for sobbing and playing the victim in the module leader's office. Beats me, I just get on with it now - just get what you can out of the job and hang the rest.

======= Date Modified 17 Feb 2010 17:37:46 =======
I understand that it might come across as me having that attitude and I do realise some of it is probably subjective Sneaks, but I'm honestly not exaggerating here: some of the essays I'm expected to give decent marks to are barely comprehensible. In the essay I looked at I'd read lots of secondary criticism, I'd quoted extensively from the text, analyzed the use of language, attempted an argument with some originality and structured and expressed the whole thing well. Now I'm not saying it was the best essay in the world but it fulfilled all the criteria we are supposedly meant to mark by.
I'm leaning towards what you suggested at the end there...
ETA: sorry Eska cross-posted! I'm at the same uni so it can't be that but I can totally imagine the discrepancy being that much between universities. And I agree about the permanent staff...

The student is the customer, and the customer is always right. It is virtually impossible to fail as customer- opps - sorry, student.

I am not a generous marker and have no worries about giving low marks. I was always thorough in my comments and gave specific things that could be done to improve the essays.

I was a very average student at undergraduate, and had to fight for the 70s + that I got sometimes. But, the 60s I got......I have yet to mark anything as a 2.1 that matches the kind of stipulations my markers applied. I mean, some of the "2.1" essays I mark don't even have introductions, cogent conclusions, and are rough. Not a complaint about falling standards, more about uneven application of standards and the general impossibility of getting students to actually work for their degree since most expect to get a 2.1 and if they don't, they can easily complain...

======= Date Modified 17 Feb 2010 19:34:30 =======
I think the standards in some universities and in some courses are just lower. Only one person was awarded a 1st out of approx 100 students on my degree course. When essays were returned it was rare to hear of students getting an A. In the university I do my PhD and teach at, we seem to hand out 2:1 degrees like they are going out of fashion, and 1st class to those who are a little above average. When I first started here I was giving people Cs for essays and they would get marked up to a high B even though it was full of errors and poorly formed arguments. My current university is a 'newer' university and I did my undergrad at one of the oldest in the UK. I don't know if this has any impact or if there has just been a general shift across the board through in the push to get more people educated to degree level. I share your frustration!

I have to absolutely agree with you Keep_Calm. I got a first in my undergrad less than 5 years ago, and am still at the same university now doing my PhD. Some of the stuff I have to mark is barely comprehensible- I get 2nd and 3rd year students who don't even know what a sentence is, let alone the difference between 'their', 'they're' and 'there'. I think I find this more disturbing than the actual content, which sometimes isn't that bad if you can comprehend it. It's frustrating, and the scary thing is that a lot of these guys are getting 2.1s. My supervisor has very high standards, and has recently given her third year group a modal grade of a D in their final module exam, only to be told that this is too low for a modal grade. Her argument- they handed in a load of rubbish that was not worthy of anything better. Their argument- you just cannot have a modal grade of a 3rd class degree in a module, it looks so bad. I am biased because I was the TA on the module, but it was very well organised and well lectured, and the exam paper was absolutely fair. All we can conclude is that people are simply not prepared to put the effort in to do well...you can provide people with the materials they need and try to teach them the skills they need, but if they are not prepared to put in the effort and the work, what can you do? Of course, there are exceptions to this, and there are a lot of talented undergrads here too, but it always seems to be the bad ones that stick in your mind unfortunately :( I know, it just sounds like a rant, but I am in agreement with you! KB