3.3 Honours Degree Classification
- 3.3.1 Classification Boards
- 3.3.2 Classification Algorithm
3.3.1 Classification Boards
This policy will be available here soon.
3.3.2 Classification Algorithm
3.3.2.1 Current
(Academic Session 2010/2011 onwards)
The Honours Classification Algorithm uses as the primary determinant of degree classification the credit-weighted mean and median of all grades awarded in the Honours years.
There are no discretionary classification borderzones.
Only one decimal point is used in calculations of means and medians.
From session 2010/2011, this classification system will be in operation for all students, namely those who are continuing (including junior honours students) as well as new entrants. However, under the ‘no detriment’ principle, all current students who had already entered honours programmes in or before 2009/2010 will be considered under both the 2010/2011 and 2009/2010 algorithms and the higher classification will be awarded.
Means, Medians and Outcomes for Honours Classification
| Mean | Median | Classification Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 16.5 or more | any value | I |
| 16.0-16.4 | 16.5 or more | I |
| 16.4 or less | II.1 | |
| 13.5-15.9 | any value | II.1 |
| 13.0-13.4 | 13.5 or more | II.1 |
| 13.4 or less | II.2 | |
| 10.5-12.9 | any value | II.2 |
| 10.0-10.4 | 10.5 or more | II.2 |
| 10.4 or less | III | |
| 7.5-9.9 | any value | III |
| 7.0-7.4 | 7.5 or more | III |
| 7.4 or less | Not of Honours standard | |
| 6.9 or less | any value |
Not of Honours standard |
Calculation Protocols
The Senate Regulations 27-32 refer to the specification that “at least 240 credits should be gained during an approved two year Honours programme” etc. For students who have taken extra modules, the calculation of mean and median must include all modules (allowing for the exceptions noted below). Thus a student cannot take an extra module with a view to disposing of another with a poorer grade. Special provision may, however, be made for students who “step back” from an Integrated Masters degree (MChem/MSci/MPhys/MMath) to a BSc.
Only grades from 3000-level, 4000-level and (where applicable) 5000-level modules are entered into the algorithm. In other words, grades achieved for “dip down” modules taken during the Honours programme do not enter the algorithmic calculation for the Honours degree classification. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 34).
If students are advised into 3000-level, 4000-level or (where applicable) 5000-level modules prior to the normal start of their Honours years, then these results should not count as part of the Honours classification calculation except where the relevant Faculty Business Committee has given its approval to the modules counting as part of a student’s approved Honours programme. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 34).
In the case of a 3000-level, 4000-level or 5000-level module failed with a grade of 3.9 or less, there is no right to reassessment and the original grade is reported and entered into the algorithmic calculation even though no credits are obtained for the module.
In the case of a 3000-level, 4000-level or 5000-level module failed with a grade of 4-6.9, there is a right to reassessment. If the reassessment is passed, the grade reported, recorded on the transcript and entered into the algorithmic calculation is a “capped” grade of “7.0” (not the original failed grade). (Explanation of Senate Regulation 36).
In the case of a failed 3000-level, 4000-level or 5000-level module for which no credit is subsequently obtained at reassessment, the original (failed) grade is entered into the algorithmic calculation even though no credits are obtained for the module. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 36).
If a 3000-level, 4000-level or 5000-level module (as part of an Honours programme) is failed both at the first sitting and at re-assessment (if permitted), but is subsequently re-taken and passed, then (i) the original failed grade should be entered in the algorithm for the session in which the module was first taken, and (ii) the grade earned for the later session in which the module was re-taken and passed should be reported and entered into the algorithm. This may occur when a specified Honours module has to be passed in order to fulfil the stipulations of an Honours programme. In such cases two grades are entered into the algorithm for this module even though actual credit is only achieved at the second taking. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 37).
In the case of receiving a 0X in a 3000-level, 4000-level or 5000-level module, a grade of “0” is entered into the algorithmic calculation (with the credit-weighting of the relevant module), even though no credits are obtained for the module with respect to meeting the requirements of the Honours degree programme. Any properly authorised withdrawal from a module, however, would be ignored by the algorithm. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 38).
Grades that are achieved (after suitable translation) from modules taken outwith St Andrews (usually abroad) as part of an Honours programme are entered into the algorithmic calculation. If ungraded credits are received from abroad (as in Integrated Year Abroad programmes) or graded credits that are not formally approved as part of an Honours programme, then these will not influence the algorithmic calculation, although such credits will normally appear on transcripts. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 35).
Consideration of Special Cases
“SCB” refers to the University’s Special Classification Board.
Students who are S-coded do not need to be brought to SCB, so long as the S-coding does not cover more than 25% of the total Honours credits for a degree programme (or 50% of the total credits for the taught component of a Postgraduate Masters degree). These cases should be dealt with by School Examination Boards, which will make the decision about the classification of a degree after running the results through the algorithm twice: once with the S-coded modules included; once without the S-coded modules included. Which ever result produces the higher classification of degree should be approved by the School Examination Board.
Only exceptional cases should be referred to the SCB. These exceptions include the following types of case:-
- students who are marginally short of the required number of credits for a degree;
- students who have been S-coded for more than the maximum number of credits stated above;
- any other anomalies.
Where anomalies are to be brought to SCB the School must provide a minute of the discussion held at the School Examination Board, along with a recommendation from that Board.
3.3.2.2 Archive
(Academic Sessions 2007/2008, 2008/2009, 2009/2010)
The Honours Classification Algorithm uses as the primary determinant of degree classification the credit-weighted mean of all grades awarded in the Honours years, but takes into account the credit-weighted median in defined borderline cases.
Means, Medians and Outcomes for Honours Classification
| Mean | Median | Classification Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 16.50 or more | any value | I |
| 16.00-16.49 | 16.50 or more | I |
| 16.00-16.49 | Borderzone (requiring referral to SCB for the award of a I) | |
| 15.99 or less | II.1 | |
| 13.50-15.99 | 16.50 or more | II.1, but may be referred by the Exam Board to the SCB for the award of a I |
| 16.49 or less | II.1 | |
| 13.00-13.49 | 13.50 or more |
II.1 |
| 13.00-13.49 | Borderzone (requiring referral to SCB for the award of a II.1) | |
| 12.99 or less | II.2 | |
| 10.50-12.99 | 13.50 or more | II.2, but may be referred by the Exam Board to the SCB for the award of a II.1 |
| 13.49 or less | II.2 | |
| 10.00-10.49 | 10.50 or more | II.2 |
| 10.00-10.49 | Borderzone (requiring referral to SCB for the award of a II.2) | |
| 9.99 or less | III | |
| 7.50-9.99 | 10.50 or more | III, but may be referred by the Exam Board to the SCB for the award of a II.2 |
| 10.49 or less | III | |
| 7.00-7.49 | 7.50 or more | III |
| 7.00-7.49 | Borderzone (requiring referral to SCB for the award of a III) | |
| 6.99 or less | Not of honours standard | |
| 6.99 or less | 7.50 or more | Not of honours standard, but may be referred by the Exam Board to the SCB for the award of a III |
| 7.49 or less | Not of honours standard |
Calculation Protocols
The Senate Regulations 27-32 refer to the specification that “at least 240 credits should be gained during an approved two year Honours programme” etc. For students who have taken extra modules, the calculation of mean and median must include all modules (allowing for the exceptions noted below). Thus a student cannot take an extra module with a view to disposing of another with a poorer grade. Special provision may, however, be made for students who “step back” from an Integrated Masters degree (MChem/MSci/MPhys/MMath) to a BSc.
Only grades from 3000-level, 4000-level and (where applicable) 5000-level modules are entered into the algorithm. In other words, grades achieved for “dip down” modules taken during the Honours programme do not enter the algorithmic calculation for the Honours degree classification. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 34).
If students are advised into 3000-level, 4000-level or (where applicable) 5000-level modules prior to the normal start of their Honours years, then these results should not count as part of the Honours classification calculation except where the relevant Faculty Business Committee has given its approval to the modules counting as part of a student’s approved Honours programme. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 34).
In the case of a failed 3000-level, 4000-level or 5000-level module for which credit is subsequently obtained by passing the re-assessment, the grade reported, recorded on the transcript and entered into the algorithmic calculation is a “capped” grade of “7.0” (not the original failed grade).1 (Explanation of Senate Regulation 36).
In the case of a failed 3000-level, 4000-level or 5000-level module for which no credit is subsequently obtained at reassessment, the original (failed) grade is entered into the algorithmic calculation even though no credits are obtained for the module. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 36).
If a 3000-level, 4000-level or 5000-level module (as part of an Honours programme) is failed both at the first sitting and at re-assessment,2 but is subsequently re-taken and passed, then (i) the original failed grade should be entered in the algorithm for the session in which the module was first taken, and (ii) the grade earned for the later session in which the module was re-taken and passed should be reported and entered into the algorithm. This may occur when a specified Honours module has to be passed in order to fulfil the stipulations of an Honours programme. In such cases two grades are entered into the algorithm for this module even though actual credit is only achieved at the second taking. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 37).
In the case of receiving a OX in a 3000-level, 4000-level or 5000-level module, a grade of “0” is entered into the algorithmic calculation (with the credit-weighting of the relevant module), even though no credits are obtained for the module with respect to meeting the requirements of the Honours degree programme. Any properly authorised withdrawal from a module, however, would be ignored by the algorithm. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 38).
Grades that are achieved (after suitable conversion) from modules taken outwith St Andrews (usually abroad) as part of an Honours programme are entered into the algorithmic calculation. If ungraded credits are received from abroad (as in Integrated Year Abroad programmes) or graded credits that are not formally approved as part of an Honours programme, then these will not influence the algorithmic calculation, although such credits will normally appear on transcripts. (Explanation of Senate Regulation 35).
Criteria for the Non-Automatic Classification of Degrees
“SCB” refers to the University’s Special Classification Board.
In all cases where the classification outcome currently requires referral beyond the Exam Board, these will be considered by the SCB. This provides cross-faculty consistency and external oversight. Furthermore, any decision by an Exam Board to award the higher classification in a zone described as “Borderzone” should also be presented to the SCB as a recommendation requiring its confirmation.
The large majority of students will be automatically classified using procedures encapsulated in the algorithm table. Where students fall into the zones where classification is not automatic, care must be taken in order (i) to classify appropriately and fairly students’ performance; (ii) to ensure that there is comparability of decision making across Schools; and (iii) to ensure that the decisions taken are transparent and defensible.
Criteria which relate to the personal characteristics of the candidate, their future aspirations, or any other information which cannot be deduced from the spread of grades available to the Examination Board must not be used. The referral of the Examination Board recommendation to the University’s SCB for confirmation helps to ensure transparency that such personal information has not been applied. Where personal circumstances affecting modules have led module boards to apply S-coding, the discussion of the final degree classification, if affected, must in any case take place at the SCB. To undertake this final review the SCB will be provided with the minute of the School Special Circumstances Board.
Examination Boards may use the following criterion as a positive reason for awarding a higher class of degree in those zones immediately below a classification boundary, where the lower classification is the default. Fulfilment of this criterion must be present to a degree that is indisputable and clearly differentiates the student from any other candidate in the same zone just below a classification boundary. If the Examination Board cannot agree this to be case, the lower class of degree should be awarded.
Criterion: Clear achievement in modules in the higher classification, such as where there is significant evidence of high grades in the higher classification and/or half the grades in the higher classification. Where this criterion is met, Examination Boards may also attach weight to instances where the clear achievement above the borderline is particularly associated with the final year performance, which can indicate that the student has shown increased capacity to fulfil the learning outcomes associated with the programme. (This is not the same as differential weighting of level 3 and level 4 modules.)
Where consideration is given to one student in a cohort, care must be taken to ensure that any decision is fair to all other students in that cohort; and all students with a comparable mean and median should be treated in the same way. This evidence should be provided to the SCB along with the Examination Board recommendation(s).
Use of the above criterion should be clearly set down in advance of the examiners' meeting, published to students and any additional local information confirmed by the Deans. Its application should also have the express approval of the External Examiners. All such cases referred to the SCB should come with a clear recommendation from the Degree Classification Board, supported by the External Examiners, based on the criterion above. In cases of Joint Honours Boards, where there is disagreement over the outcome, the case should be referred to the SCB.
1 Prior to session 2009/2010, grades were capped at “5”.
2 As of the academic year 2009/2010, reassessment is only permitted for a fail grade of 4-6.9. Fails of 3.9 or less are simply reported and entered into the algorithm. Students will only be permitted to retake a failed module with the clear approval of the School.