Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Enigmatic variations

Research

Associated organisational unit

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Enigmatic variations: honours degree assessment regulations in the UK

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Enigmatic variations: honours degree assessment regulations in the UK. / Yorke, Mantz; Woolf, Harvey; Stowell, Marie et al.
In: Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 62, No. 3, 2008, p. 157-180.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Yorke, M, Woolf, H, Stowell, M, Allen, R, Haines, C, Redding, M, Scurry, D, Taylor-Russell, G, Turnbull, W & Walker, L 2008, 'Enigmatic variations: honours degree assessment regulations in the UK', Higher Education Quarterly, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 157-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00389.x

APA

Yorke, M., Woolf, H., Stowell, M., Allen, R., Haines, C., Redding, M., Scurry, D., Taylor-Russell, G., Turnbull, W., & Walker, L. (2008). Enigmatic variations: honours degree assessment regulations in the UK. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(3), 157-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00389.x

Vancouver

Yorke M, Woolf H, Stowell M, Allen R, Haines C, Redding M et al. Enigmatic variations: honours degree assessment regulations in the UK. Higher Education Quarterly. 2008;62(3):157-180. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00389.x

Author

Yorke, Mantz ; Woolf, Harvey ; Stowell, Marie et al. / Enigmatic variations : honours degree assessment regulations in the UK. In: Higher Education Quarterly. 2008 ; Vol. 62, No. 3. pp. 157-180.

Bibtex

@article{5d9efa088dbb48b18bc12aa022e12838,
title = "Enigmatic variations: honours degree assessment regulations in the UK",
abstract = "The debate in the UK about the continued existence of the honours degree classification led to a survey of the assessment regulations in 35 varied higher education institutions. This revealed considerable variation in the way in which honours degree classifications are determined, and also in the handling of weak performances by students. Such variability, deriving from a system in which institutional autonomy is to the fore, raises a question about equitability in the treatment of students. A brief allusion is made to the variability in assessment regulations in the US and Australia.",
author = "Mantz Yorke and Harvey Woolf and Marie Stowell and Rick Allen and Chris Haines and Marian Redding and Dave Scurry and Graham Taylor-Russell and Wayne Turnbull and Lawrie Walker",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00389.x",
language = "English",
volume = "62",
pages = "157--180",
journal = "Higher Education Quarterly",
issn = "0951-5224",
publisher = "Blackwell Publishing",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Enigmatic variations

T2 - honours degree assessment regulations in the UK

AU - Yorke, Mantz

AU - Woolf, Harvey

AU - Stowell, Marie

AU - Allen, Rick

AU - Haines, Chris

AU - Redding, Marian

AU - Scurry, Dave

AU - Taylor-Russell, Graham

AU - Turnbull, Wayne

AU - Walker, Lawrie

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - The debate in the UK about the continued existence of the honours degree classification led to a survey of the assessment regulations in 35 varied higher education institutions. This revealed considerable variation in the way in which honours degree classifications are determined, and also in the handling of weak performances by students. Such variability, deriving from a system in which institutional autonomy is to the fore, raises a question about equitability in the treatment of students. A brief allusion is made to the variability in assessment regulations in the US and Australia.

AB - The debate in the UK about the continued existence of the honours degree classification led to a survey of the assessment regulations in 35 varied higher education institutions. This revealed considerable variation in the way in which honours degree classifications are determined, and also in the handling of weak performances by students. Such variability, deriving from a system in which institutional autonomy is to the fore, raises a question about equitability in the treatment of students. A brief allusion is made to the variability in assessment regulations in the US and Australia.

U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00389.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00389.x

M3 - Journal article

VL - 62

SP - 157

EP - 180

JO - Higher Education Quarterly

JF - Higher Education Quarterly

SN - 0951-5224

IS - 3

ER -