1. Grade Point Averages – the current context
Prof. Graham Curtis

2. Scheme of Presentation
Honours Degree Classifications (HDC) – issues and comment
HDC/Grade Point Average (GPA) – current history
GPA – the method and example country models
GPA – benefits, issues and comments
Group of Interested Universities (GIU) – the proposed GPA model
GIU GPA model – testing and comments
GPA – the way forward

3. HDC – Issues and comments
The ‘cliff edge’
Lack of granularity
Discretion and boundary treatments
Different algorithms
Exit velocity weightings
Dropping credit
Use of profiling (e.g. median)
Use of year 1 modules
Different marking practices across disciplines/institutions
Does not motivate students
Fundamental problem of ‘averaging the unaverageable’
Lack of international understanding/comparability (?)
(nb GPA only addresses some of these)

4. HDC/GPA – current history
Reservations of ‘fitness for purpose’ of HDC expressed in national reports e.g.
Dearing Report into higher education 1997
Burgess Reports 2004, 2007, 2012
Group of interested universities (GIU) meet 2011/12 leading to a proposed GPA model (2012)
OBU white paper introduces GPA in tandem with HDC (2012)
December 2012 meeting of DBIS, HEA, UUK plus others to consider GPA model to replace HDC
2013/14 HEA facilitates national HEI debate/consultation/pilot on GPA

5. GPA – the method and models
Not new
Associate a summative number to each module (assessed piece of work)
Calculate an average of these as a final summative mark
Common globally but much variation in detail
Example 1 – the USA
Descriptor
Letter grade
Grade point
Excellent A
4.0
Good/above average B
3.0
Average C
2.0
Minimum passing grade D
1.0
Fail F
0.0
Cumulative GPA (CGPA) can be calculated
Often CGPA of at least 2 required for progression
Letter grades may have + (+0.33) or – (-0.33) added to increase discretion

6. GPA – the method and models
Example 2 – Denmark (7 point scale replaces 13 point scale)
Grade
ECTS 12
Excellent
High level of command of all aspects – no or only a few minor weaknesses A 10
Very good
High level of command of most aspects – only minor weaknesses B 7
Good
good command – some weaknesses C 4
Fair
Some command – some major weaknesses D 02
Adequate
The minimum requirements for acceptance E 00
Inadequate
Does not meet the minimum requirements for acceptance Fx -3
Unacceptable
Unacceptable in all respects F

7. GPA – the method and models
Example 3 – Singapore (NUS)
HDC
CAP
First
4.50 and above
Upper Second
Lower Second
Third
Pass
Fail
Below 2.00

8. GPA – benefits, issues and comment
Greater granularity and transparency
Avoidance of cliff edge
Greater student commitment
Reduction of appeals
Globally understood and international comparability (?)
Compatible with HE marking culture
Possible issues
Continuous pressure on students
Possible grade pressure and inflation (mitigating factors in UK)
Not yet understood in UK
Doesn’t solve all the problems of HDC
Note – summative GPA complements ‘rich picture’ HEAR

9. GIU - membership Initial group meeting in early 2011
Birmingham, LSE, Nottingham, Sheffield, Warwick, UCL, York
Joined later by
Bristol, Kings College London, Leeds, Manchester, Oxford Brookes, Southampton
Reported in Sep 2012 and briefing to DBIS Dec 2012

10. GIU proposed model Grade Standard Grade point UK current descriptor A+
Excellent
4.25
Top 1st A
4.00
Good 1st A-
3.75
Low 1st B+
Good
3.50
High 2.i B
3.25
Mid 2.i B-
Good/Satisfactory
3.00
Low 2.i C+
Satisfactory
2.75
High 2.ii C
2.50
Mid 2.ii C-
2.25
Low 2.ii D+
Adequate
2.00
3rd D
Pass
1.00
Low 3rd or pass D-
Marginal Fail
0.50 F
Fail
0.00

11. GIU - comments
US approach (broadly) of attributing grades/marks at module level for aggregation
13 point scale using F (0) to A+ (4.25) used
Various GIU models tested on Nottingham and Birmingham student data
As far as possible individual student achievement categories are maintained
Results should not disadvantage UK students internationally
Should have the ability to discriminate high achievement
Leaves open the possibility of grade/numerical initial assessment of work in qualitative and quantitative disciplines
Leaves open the possibility of exit velocity
Nottingham and Birmingham SU support
Applicability to taught PG programmes
Relationship to ECTS

12. GPA - Summary
The Honours Degree Classification System is no longer ‘fit for purpose’
Grade Point Average Systems provide a better way forward for provision of a single figure, easy-to-understand, summative measure though does not answer all the criticisms of the HDC
GPA when taken together with HEAR provides both a summative and a rich picture of a student’s achievement

13. Questions and Comments