Is it fair to get a raw CR but SNG P? (1 Viewer)

[bimatty]

My mark for a unit last years was 65 raw, so a low credit. However, my scaled (or whatever you want to call it) was 63, so instead of a low credit, a high pass. I thought that scaling was obviously fine, but that you had to be awarded a mark that was the same as your overall grade. Can someone please confirm?

 

[xeuyrawp]

My mark for a unit last years was 65 raw, so a low credit. However, my scaled (or whatever you want to call it) was 63, so instead of a low credit, a high pass. I thought that scaling was obviously fine, but that you had to be awarded a mark that was the same as your overall grade. Can someone please confirm?

The university claims that it no-longer marks and scales to normal distribution, but this is essentially a lie.

I assume you've calculated your raw mark correctly? If so, no, it's not fair. You can complain if you want to, but you'll need to decide whether it's worth it.

 

[andyfg88]

My mark for a unit last years was 65 raw, so a low credit. However, my scaled (or whatever you want to call it) was 63, so instead of a low credit, a high pass. I thought that scaling was obviously fine, but that you had to be awarded a mark that was the same as your overall grade. Can someone please confirm?

How on earth did you calculate your raw mark?

It's funny you should mention this, for two of my subjects last semester I got a 73 and a 64 respectively. Now I'm beginning to wonder if I was perhaps scaled down.

 

[bimatty]

Thanks Pwar and andy for your responses. I received this email from the convenor:

In regard to the mark of 63, I reiterate what I wrote to you on December 20, 2010 when you first contacted me to enquire informally about your grade. A SNG is “a ranking within a letter grade. In your case, the SNG places you near the top level of a "Pass" grade. In regard to this mark, you must remember that it is common practice for raw marks to be scaled in arriving at SNGs, and that grading is qualitative as well as quantitative, and based on all of the available evidence.” In LING214, 75% of the final mark is based on performance in the major report (for which you scored 53%) and the exam (for which you scored 58%). These marks, taken in combination with your critique and experimental participation marks, and your overall performance relative to other students in the unit, placed you at the top of the Pass grade: Hence, the mark of 63.

Overall, I got

5/5.
16/30.
18/20
26/45.

So, that's 65.

 

[hungwell1337]

Do universities do this?

Yes

Is it fair?

yes, because you arnt the only one getting scaled down(or up)

 

[xeuyrawp]

Do universities do this?

Yes

Is it fair?

yes, because you arnt the only one getting scaled down(or up)

Wow, I'd like to have a discussion with you which argues that it's fair.

In a university context like this, scaling is not fair. When you're dealing with students numbering hundreds (and not tens of thousands which are all standardised, ie HSC), set and mark your assignments properly.

If you do your job as a unit convener, scaling is not necessary. Gah, some students are way outside of the bell-curve and there's no reason to suggest why? Wow, they should get the marks they deserve.

I remember seeing one of my lecturers quite distressed because he had to explain to some committee that out of the 4 students in a class, 4 students were getting HDs. All the best students were taking that class because the other option at the time was boring and unchallenging, and, go figure, we all did really well. Meanwhile, the other class of ~20 had a standard bell-curve you'd expect in any normal sample of third-year students.

 

[AsyLum]

Thanks Pwar and andy for your responses. I received this email from the convenor:

In regard to the mark of 63, I reiterate what I wrote to you on December 20, 2010 when you first contacted me to enquire informally about your grade. A SNG is “a ranking within a letter grade. In your case, the SNG places you near the top level of a "Pass" grade. In regard to this mark, you must remember that it is common practice for raw marks to be scaled in arriving at SNGs, and that grading is qualitative as well as quantitative, and based on all of the available evidence.” In LING214, 75% of the final mark is based on performance in the major report (for which you scored 53%) and the exam (for which you scored 58%). These marks, taken in combination with your critique and experimental participation marks, and your overall performance relative to other students in the unit, placed you at the top of the Pass grade: Hence, the mark of 63.

Overall, I got

5/5.
16/30.
18/20
26/45.

So, that's 65.

Yeah as Pwar has said, if the marker has done a good job, scaling shouldn't even factor in, I mean they should be marking to a rubric and that should explicitly tell them and you, what mark they should be getting. That is unfair to be scaled down based on raw marks that should be a Credit, unfortunately they usually have a clause that effectively means that they can fiddle with marks and raw marks aren't usually 'right' even though they should be. Standard practice if you're doing that, is that you only include the actual band (ie, pass, credit, distinction) rather than the raw mark so that students don't end up running into the issue you're experiencing where they should be getting Credits but are in fact getting Passes

 

[bimatty]

Yeah as Pwar has said, if the marker has done a good job, scaling shouldn't even factor in, I mean they should be marking to a rubric and that should explicitly tell them and you, what mark they should be getting. That is unfair to be scaled down based on raw marks that should be a Credit, unfortunately they usually have a clause that effectively means that they can fiddle with marks and raw marks aren't usually 'right' even though they should be. Standard practice if you're doing that, is that you only include the actual band (ie, pass, credit, distinction) rather than the raw mark so that students don't end up running into the issue you're experiencing where they should be getting Credits but are in fact getting Passes

Thanks, I totally agree with you. How could I go about contesting this?

 

[xeuyrawp]

Thanks, I totally agree with you. How could I go about contesting this?

Firstly, you need to decide whether it's worth it. Essentially cost/benefit of whether you want any relationship with the person you're complaining against.

If you want to complain, you need to tell the convener - respond to that email and say that you're not happy with it and that you're going to lodge a formal complaint. Then you basically work your way up the chain. It depends on what faculty you're in - check online.

You'll probably lose, though.

 

[Azure]

I agree with the above.

I've tried fighting something like this before and I can tell you from experience that you won't win. Sorry to be so frank, but academics generally tend to instinctively disregard any complaint you have (unless it is something ground breaking which you can prove).

If you're still intent on fighting it then I'd suggest you make sure that you can afford to get the person in question off side. If you'll be seeing them again in another class things could get pretty awkward.

 

[Begbie4017]

I thought from this year there was no more scaling. This is the policy document re grading http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/grading/policy.html

 

[Begbie4017]

oh I see what the uni has done. So, no scaling compared to normative data or other students.However, your SNG must meet the criteria of a pass or credit grade etc...So they still get to pick your grade for you based upon how well they think you have met those criteria ...tough

 

[xeuyrawp]

oh I see what the uni has done. So, no scaling compared to normative data or other students.However, your SNG must meet the criteria of a pass or credit grade etc...So they still get to pick your grade for you based upon how well they think you have met those criteria ...tough

Yeah, exactly. It's pretty lame.