Is a 17 mark difference between dissertation markers normal or am I right to appeal?

Hi there,

I have just completed my master's and was quite unhappy with my dissertation grade and felt that something did not feel right about the situation. I decided to appeal based on a feeling that there was potential unconscious bias involved with my supervisor due to his close involvement with the business area. He scored my dissertation as a 52 (2 marks above the pass mark), whereas the blind second marker scored my dissertation as a 69 (1 mark below a distinction).

I am unfamiliar with how this works, due to this being my only dissertation and never having had multiple markers. I was given 59% when they came together to discuss the grade. I also feel that with my supervisor holding a top position within the business school there is a power difference within that scenario and that it has quite conveniently sat just below a merit which is closer to my supervisor's mark than that of the 2nd marker.

Does this look like a scenario where a 3rd marker should have been brought in or am I completely wrong to think that 17 marks was quite a big difference?

Reply 1

UEA Rep Jas

Official Rep

Hey!

This sounds like a tricky situation to be in. I think you're right, 17 marks is quite a big difference, I would be concerned about that too. I'm not sure about your university specifically, but I think a lot of the time marks are moderated, to ensure work is being marked accurately and fairly. If there is a 17 mark discrepancy, it sounds like it ought to be reviewed. If it is of no detriement to you or your mark, I would look into that!

However, be prepared that your grade could go down, if it is found that the 2nd marker was being generous- hopefully this won't be the case though!

Good luck!

Jas :smile:

UEA Rep

Reply 2

martin7

Original post

by Anonymous

Hi there,
I have just completed my master's and was quite unhappy with my dissertation grade and felt that something did not feel right about the situation. I decided to appeal based on a feeling that there was potential unconscious bias involved with my supervisor due to his close involvement with the business area. He scored my dissertation as a 52 (2 marks above the pass mark), whereas the blind second marker scored my dissertation as a 69 (1 mark below a distinction).
I am unfamiliar with how this works, due to this being my only dissertation and never having had multiple markers. I was given 59% when they came together to discuss the grade. I also feel that with my supervisor holding a top position within the business school there is a power difference within that scenario and that it has quite conveniently sat just below a merit which is closer to my supervisor's mark than that of the 2nd marker.
Does this look like a scenario where a 3rd marker should have been brought in or am I completely wrong to think that 17 marks was quite a big difference?

I would recommend that you seek advice from your student union.

17 marks sound like a very significant difference in marks, so it was right that the two markers got together to discuss your work and to come up with an agreed mark -- rather than, for example, simply to take the average of the two marks.

Whether or not a third marker should have been brought in will depend on what your university's policy is on such things -- it might be, for example, that they'd only bring in a third person if the first two markers could not come to agreement over an appropriate mark between themselves.

Reply 3

University of Salford Student Rep

Official Rep

Original post

by Anonymous

Hi there,
I have just completed my master's and was quite unhappy with my dissertation grade and felt that something did not feel right about the situation. I decided to appeal based on a feeling that there was potential unconscious bias involved with my supervisor due to his close involvement with the business area. He scored my dissertation as a 52 (2 marks above the pass mark), whereas the blind second marker scored my dissertation as a 69 (1 mark below a distinction).
I am unfamiliar with how this works, due to this being my only dissertation and never having had multiple markers. I was given 59% when they came together to discuss the grade. I also feel that with my supervisor holding a top position within the business school there is a power difference within that scenario and that it has quite conveniently sat just below a merit which is closer to my supervisor's mark than that of the 2nd marker.
Does this look like a scenario where a 3rd marker should have been brought in or am I completely wrong to think that 17 marks was quite a big difference?

Hey,

A 17-mark difference between two markers is huge, and anyone in your position would be questioning how that happened. In most universities, dissertations are double-marked precisely to catch this kind of situation. Usually there is a first marker and a second marker, often blind, and if the marks are close enough, they agree a final mark or average it. When the difference is large, a third marker or moderator is often brought in. What counts as a large difference varies by institution, but 17 marks is certainly not a small discrepancy in any marking scheme.

The second marker being blind and awarding a much higher mark strengthens the argument that the quality of the work is at least debatable rather than clear-cut. In many universities, a gap of ten marks or more is often the trigger for third marking or additional moderation.

Appeals usually cannot challenge academic judgement, meaning they will not re-mark the work simply because you disagree with the outcome. However, appeals can succeed if you can show that the correct marking or moderation procedures were not followed, or that there was a procedural irregularity or a potential conflict of interest that was not handled properly.

I would strongly suggest checking your university’s marking and moderation regulations for dissertations and, if you have access to them, reviewing the marking sheets and any moderation comments. If your students’ union offers academic advice, it is also worth speaking to them, as they are usually very experienced with appeals and can help you frame this properly.

You are not being unreasonable for questioning this. A 17-mark gap is significant, and at the very least it is fair to expect a clear explanation of how the final mark was reached and whether the proper process was followed. Even if the outcome does not change, you are absolutely justified in wanting transparency and reassurance that this was handled correctly.

Good luck 😊
Arslan – University of Salford Student Representative

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Articles for you

The biggest differences between school or college and university

How The Student Room is moderated

To keep The Student Room safe for everyone, we moderate posts that are added to the site.

Try out the app

Continue on web