I've heard a lot of good things about their program, until now. http://news.scotsman.com/education.cfm?id=174872005
It isn't very clear and says "according to research by a London academic. " Isn't there a fomal agency that monitors those things?
This story is kind of incomprehensible to a Californian like me. Students at the city university need a minimum mark of just 57.5 per cent to be awarded the top award - the second lowest in Scotland... The findings by John Curran, an economist at London Metropolitan University, has renewed fears that degrees are being devalued. But Heriot-Watt defended its record, saying it awarded a lower ratio of first class degrees than many other universities... A minimum mark of 70 per cent is the standard requirement for a first-class degree. But in some cases this does not have to be attained in all modules throughout the course. That doesn't seem to make very much sense. Are British "modules" standardized nation-wide? Does every student in the same module take the same national examination? If modules can have different content, and if a university's examinations are specific to that university, then how can scores be compared like this? What if one university sets a difficult exam while another university sets an easy one?
A storm in a teacup. The grading scale in the U.K. is much different from that used in the U.S. For example, at Birkbeck the class of an undergrad degree was determined by the average percentage of the student's eight best exam marks. An 8-best average of 35% was enough to get you a pass, and 40% would get you third class honours. By U.S. standards, this seems ridiculous. But the scale used for grading was such that it was not easy to get a score of more than 50%.
This topic I believe was also discussed in an earlier thread, or perhaps it was on the Watercooler. There were also some follow up articles in the Scotsman. Apparently, the methodology used for the study is the subject of much debate amongst UK academics in terms of accuracy and statistical manipulation. The popular press articles summarizing the study apparently do not well treat the debate over the accuracy of the study. In any event, the study looked at onsite teaching of undergraduate degrees, which is very different that the distance learning MBA program offered by the Edinburgh Business School at Heriot-Watt University. So one should probably not draw any correlations as to the MBA program quality based upon this study.
My opinion on this... I wouldn’t place too much credence to the finding of this economist. All it indicates (from what I gather) is that under some believed worst-case-but-presumed-possible conditions, it is deemed statistically possible to earn a first-class degree with less than a 70 per cent. It is also possible that under unlikely conditions I will win a vast sum of money by entering one of the various state lotteries. We don’t know the exact methodology used to arrive at these figures, nor does the article state any actual figures proving that anyone HAS ever earned a first class degree from HW with less than a 70%. I don’t know if this is a case of math abuse. Yet, I do urge anyone reading the article to consider that we live in a world where numbers are often manipulated for a purpose. We are often told that we can “save” by spending, and figures exceeding one-hundred percent of a whole are tossed around like party favors.
Yes, but it's always been possible to get a first without a 70% average. If you have 7 first class marks awarded at 70% and one 2:1 at 60%, you've got a 68 (ish)% average and a first overall, as most UK universities have historically used the numbers of courses on which you got a certain class as the indicator of the overall class of degree. My own degree result (a 2:I as can be seen from elsewhere on degreeinfo) is made up of 5 2:Is and 3 2:IIs. Given that my mother died in the middle of my final year and I didn't petition for a year out or for this to be taken into account when my exams were marked, I'm pretty certain that at least one of the 2:IIs is well down at the 50-55% end and might actually have dragged my overall grade perilously close to (or even under) being 60%. I've still got a certificate that says 2:I, though. Angela
As has already been discussed what happens at H-W does not correlate across to EBS especally given EBS do not award 1sts, 2nds etc for the MBA degree. I earnt the MBA 'with Distinction' and to do so you need to average 70%. I believe I read somewhere that approximately 5-7% of students earn the MBA with Distinction but I have no idea where I heard this or how accurate it is.
As has already been discussed what happens at H-W does not correlate across to EBS especally given EBS do not award 1sts, 2nds etc for the MBA degree. I earnt the MBA 'with Distinction' and to do so you need to average 70%. I believe I read somewhere that approximately 5-7% of students earn the MBA with Distinction but I have no idea where I heard this or how accurate it is.
Today Heriot-Watt is in the 'news' on Degreeinfo! In this case with an old story well discussed when it appeared. The University subjected the paper on which the astonishing headline was delivered by a journalist to a study of its methodology. I did too. Let me assert that nobody could get an honours degree at any university in Britain, let alone Heriot-Watt, with "a minimum mark of just 57.5 per cent to be awarded the top award - the second lowest in Scotland..." First class degrees are awarded for an average of 70 per cent, period. It is not what the minimum mark for a single paper is but what the actual marks for all the other papers are. To focus on the single paper mark is misleading - typical journalism. If a candidate got 75 in 12 exam papers and 10 in the 13th, he would get an average of 70 (if he was absent from the 13th he would get 69.2). Should we say you need a minimum of 10 marks to get a First? Having attended many Honours level examination boards at three British universities I know that this is not a purely arithemtical average calculation - that is why we have Exam Boards - and the discussion of the award of a degree to each and every candidate is often quite prolonged. To assist consistency between Exam Boards and different years with different candidates, there is a multiplicity of rules and regulations to set the parameters. It was these rules, etc., that the economist used to write his paper studying all English and Welsh universities in his first paper and then separately the Scottish and Northern Irish universities for his second paper. The main conclusion was that there is such a wide variety of rules and regulations that comparisons among all UK universities made them unrealiable. Of course, the researcher could only read the regultations. There is no way he could analyse the hours of discussion and argument (sometimes 'noisy') from every university's Exam Boards, which use the regulations as a guide, not as a mandate, and take contributions on each student's academic performance over the final year and, sometimes, over years of his or her study into account, if it will help them make an appropriate and reliable award. Incidentaly, the university with the lowest regulation requirement after Heriot-Watt was Strathclyde (55). Another arithmetical fluke. At EBS you must get a clear average of 70 for a Distinction. Anything close to 70 in 8 papers out of nine and a fail or resit would bring candidates below 70. Our Distinction average of 70+ is about 7 per cent of the candidates and remains steady. Interestingly, the economist compared his own institution (Middlesex University, until recently a polytechnic college) with East Anglia University. He found that under the formal regulations, it was 'easier' to get a First at East Anglia than Middlesex, i.e., by implication, Middlesex had a stricter exam regime than East Anglia. He also had the integrity to admit by assertion, that it was unlikely that any student likely to admitted to apply to enter East Anglia would apply to Middlesex and, interestingly, that any student admitted to Middlesex would be likley to be accepted for admittance to East Anglia. We are not even comparing the same populations and the university system knows this.
Let me add to what Bill and Professor Kennedy have put forth: comparing numbers doesn't matter if you don't have a common standard. A 70 on one test could be better than a 90 on another. In the U.S., we have this notion about equating grades with percentages. But this utterly ignores the performance measures that go into these scores. A score of 95 doesn't necessarily indicate superior (or "A") work any more than a 60 indicates failure. You have to (a) know upon what the scores are based and (b) have commonality between measurements. Be more concerned about what the degree--and the underlying learning--means to you and your career, not what some test score says.
I wasn't trying to insinuate anything about HW by posting a link to the article. I was simply passing on information. As a matter of fact, I am considering studying for the MBA from Heriot Watt after I earn my undergrad degree. Yes, I know I could do so now without the BA, but it's the way I choose to do it. My only concern is if a potential employer happens to "Google" HW, what kind of impression will they be left with here in the U.S.? A lot of people here are not familiar with the program.
Mr. Cord, if you are considering the EMS MBA program, then I would encourage you to visit the Watercooler at http://forums.delphiforums.com/hwmba/. This is a student-run forum for prospective, current and former students of the EBS program. There is a great deal of useful information there.
