Fair Marking
Introduction
The term ‘fair marking’ is increasingly being used in the sector to highlight the importance of
students’ assessments being treated without bias to ensure equity and fairness; it can be used as a
synonym for ‘anonymous marking’. Although there is no intention to suggest that marking is not fair
at BU, this paper sets out a discussion and some principles that we believe are worthy of
consideration to enhance the student experience and to increase the perception of impartiality.
Proposed Principles
There are many valid arguments on both sides of the debate around anonymous marking and the
research evidence is equivocal as to whether or not unconscious bias exists in marking (for example
Batten et al 2013, Brennan 2008, Newstead & Dennis 1990, 1993). However we can often go around
in circles if we do not try and frame our thoughts around what we are trying to achieve and the crux
of our aim is to improve the student experience. We know from extensive work by the NUS
campaign on anonymous marking, that students perceive that bias may affect marking and this
should not be ignored. Therefore, in this paper SUBU and CEL have attempted to consider four key
principles which form our thoughts on the subject in order to commence a wider discussion on
these. If we can agree a set of principles on this subject, we should be able to find a way to move
forward together which will allow for expression of any differences of opinion on this complex issue.
The 4 principles which we have refined our thoughts are:
1. Being human – we should recognise that unconscious bias exists and we should seek to help
minimise its impact where we can.
2. Managing student perception - “Not only must justice be done; it must also be seen to be
done”
3. Enhancing trust – effective development of assessment systems should seek to enhance
trust across BU, not reduce it.
4. Recognising limitations – whilst anonymous marking may not always be appropriate, the
application of the above principles can still happen.
1.
Being human
An Equality Challenge Unit report in 2013 looking at unconscious bias in higher education states;
“Unconscious bias is a term used to describe the associations that we hold which, despite being
outside our conscious awareness, can have a significant influence on our attitudes and behaviour.
Regardless of how fair minded we believe ourselves to be, most people have some degree of
unconscious bias. This means that we automatically respond to others (e.g. people from different
racial or ethnic groups) in positive or negative ways. These associations are difficult to override,
regardless of whether we recognise them to be wrong, because they are deeply ingrained into our
thinking and emotions”- ECU September 2013.
With reference to marking, it is easy to see how it could be perceived that there may be bias when
students are known to the assessor. The reality may be very different, but this does not change the
fact that the perception is there and that all humans have unconscious bias. We should protect both
students and staff from this perception, and reality, of bias.
The ECU report cites many cases where bias has been shown to exist. If we accept that unconscious
bias exists in many, if not all of us, then we must also accept that if we can do anything to minimise
this impact within Bournemouth University, we have a moral responsibility to do so. In fact, the ECU
report goes on to state:
“Acknowledging and taking responsibility for unconscious bias is not just a moral imperative, it is also
financially and reputationally important. For HEIs, making biased decisions affects the recruitment
and selection of staff and students, and the ability of those staff and students to achieve their full
potential.”
2. Managing Student Perceptions
Our Student Representatives often report that they are worried about raising issues that have been
brought to their attention because they think it might negatively impact their marking. They also tell
us that students have individually come to them with worries about how to raise issues without it
affecting their grades. Implementing anonymous marking, where possible, would mean this
perception of fairness would change so students could feel comfortable speaking out in other areas
of university life without fear of retribution. This fear might well be unfounded and we would
certainly expect all academics to be as fair as they can- that is not in question- but without a system
which confirms to students that there is no chance of any bias, be that positive or negative, the
perception that bias exists will always be there at some level.
If we can do anything to reduce this perception that bias exists, by building systems that are beyond
reproach, we should do so. “Not only must justice be done, it must also be seen to be done.”
3. Enhancing Trust
Any system that seeks to address and question how we currently assess students’ work is bound to
be emotive. It should be clear that we are not suggesting that the current system is ‘unfair’, but
there could possibly be ways to enhance the system which also enhances trust in the system.
Some staff may perceive that to introduce anonymous marking is a comment on their integrity and
might therefore resist the development. Our argument would be that any system which seeks to
recognise the potential for unconscious bias, and the need for justice to be seen to be done, can only
enhance the integrity of the relationship between staff and students by showing an open and honest
approach to the subject. The scale of modern day higher education – with some units having over
200 students - also means that we cannot rely on personal relationship development alone to build
the most trustworthy system of marking possible.
Systems we implement should seek to protect staff and enhance the student experience. If we can
develop our systems such that the protection of staff is increased at the same time that any risk of
the perception of unfair marking from students is minimised, then this can only be good.
4. Recognising Limitations
The principles that lead us towards anonymous marking as an enhanced step forward in the student
experience at BU should not in any way detract from any quality experience which already exists. On
that basis, any implementation of anonymous marking should be managed carefully and only in
places where it will enhance the principles of this document at the same time as enhancing the
experience for students.
We recognise that through the multitude of assessment methods used in higher education
anonymous marking is not always appropriate, but the principles in this document can always be
considered. This will ensure that where anonymous marking is not appropriate, concerns around
minimising unconscious bias, the perception of bias, and enhancing trust should still be considered.
We should also recognise that anonymous marking is most important in summative assessment. In
fact, as far as formative assessment is concerned, anonymous marking may hinder the positive
relationships developed between academics and students.
Conclusion
There are clearly issues to consider around anonymity of students when work is being assessed.
Since this part of the higher education experience is fundamentally about the relationship of the
student with the institution, it is not surprising that many view the issues as too emotive to address.
However, we believe that the benefits to both students and academics of introducing anonymous
marking outweigh the risks.
This paper has highlighted what we see as the key issues in considering any development by
proposing some key guiding principles. We believe that, although there are good arguments on both
sides of this debate, the principles in this paper point to the fact that we should at least be looking to
do something rather than nothing.
A student perspective;
“I do [think anonymous marking would be beneficial], I think it removes the concerns for students
who may feel that their assignment will be marked differently/biased. Whether it's because their
name is known amongst the lecturers for various reasons or they feel their assignment has been pre
judged based on questions asked when support has been needed. Anonymous marking allows
everyone to be marked fairly without being judged. This may also encourage students to ask more
questions during the assignment period because when it comes to the assignment being marked the
lecturer won't be able to know based on who it was that needed help.”- Student Rep
Recommendation
Our recommendation is that ESEC adopt these principles and develop guidance for their application
across BU, aiming for every student experiencing at least one anonymously marked summative
assignment on each year of their programme.
References
Batten J, Batey J, Shafe L, Gubby L & Birch P. 2013. The influence of reputation information on the
assessment of undergraduate work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38, no 4:417-435
Brennan, DJ. 2008. University student anonymity in the summative assessment of written work.
Higher Education Research & Development 27, no 1:43-54
Equality Challenge Unit (2013), ‘Unconscious Bias and Higher Education’.
Newstead SE & Dennis I. 1990. Blind marking and sex bias in student assessment. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education15, no2: 132-139
Newstead SE & Dennis I. 1993. Bias in student assessment. The Psychologist 6, no 10:451-2
NUS http://www.nus.org.uk/en/news/mark-my-words-not-my-name/
Ellie Mayo-Ward
SUBU Vice President Education
September 2015
Professor B Gail Thomas
Head of the Centre for Excellence in Learning