'I know a 2:1 when I see it': Understanding criteria for degree classifications in franchised university programmes

Abstract

Assessment in higher education is criticised for subjective and norm-referenced criteria. It is widely assumed that clear learning outcomes and criteria make assessment more accessible to students and enable teachers to make more reliable grading decisions. Meanwhile, university programmes are increasingly fragmented amongst other departments or franchised to external providers. Universities must therefore communicate expectations of 'standards' to staff who are not part of a day-to-day university culture. The paper argues that, on their own, assessment criteria cannot generate common interpretations of the required level and standard of work. Instead, internalising and using criteria require a more strategic approach to inducting and socialising staff into an academic community. Unless this socialisation takes account of professional, social and affective dimensions, criteria and guidelines will have limited effects on communicating reliable standards and on raising standards of achievement.