Across the sector, there are known inequalities in which students are awarded ‘good degrees’, i.e. a 1st or a 2i. Students from educationally disadvantaged areas are less likely to be awarded a ‘good degree’, and Black students are less likely to be awarded a 1st or 2i than their white peers. These inequalities are known as awarding gaps.
The University of Hull has made four awarding gap targets to the Office for Students via our institutional Access and Participation Plan (APP). We have pledged to halve awarding gaps for the following groups of students:
These targets are also formalised as Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in the University of Hull Education Strategy 2020-25, which establishes the aim to create a truly inclusive university.
To achieve this, the university has appointed me as a 0.5 FTE Senior Fellow of the Teaching Excellence Academy to develop resources and strategies for closing awarding gaps. This includes identifying effective practice from within the institution and across the sector, and working with academic and professional services areas to implement a coherent approach to closing awarding gaps.
At the heart of the awarding gap strategy is making high quality data available to the right people. In collaboration with the data team, we have built an interactive awarding gap dashboard that gives subject level data to programme teams. Programme teams will be required to report on their awarding gaps through our routine quality assurance processes, and identify intervention strategies where large or persistent gaps are identified.
Analysis of the historical awarding gap data has also helped identify important issues. For example, the data demonstrates that there is a significant awarding gap for BTEC students, and that our awarding gaps persist even when controlling for entry qualifications and tariff.
Being able to see awarding gap data at subject area level has meant that we can take a targeted approach to reducing educational inequality. The dashboard reveals that awarding gaps differ significantly in different areas in the university. Some subject areas have large POLAR awarding gaps, while others have large ethnicity gaps, while other areas do not have persistent gaps.
Having local awarding gap data means that programme teams can take responsibility for their own issues, and target interventions more appropriately. Analysis of the data has also helped to identify subjects where gaps have closed, and to identify effective practice that might be appropriate elsewhere. Example of effective practices identified include use of clear and transparent marking rubrics, and using the personal supervision system to actively help students understand their feedback.
