My results in the M263 TMAs are already released (TMA01: 88%, TMA02:93%, TMA03: 90%, TMA04: 91%). Grading (OCAS) before substitution: 91%. Grading (OCAS) after substitution: 91%.
(drums) Ladies and gentlemen, once
again in my life: Unnecessary substitution!
It happens to you when the grading in a module before and after substitution
is applied is exactly the same but not all your TMA gradings are the same.
First of all, I think substitution is
not a help at all else a way of masking mediocrity. How many times
people that is not good at something have appeared as they are just because
of substitution? How many of those helped by substitution would have jump in a job queue
over others that have had the same grades in a different country where
substitution didn't apply? How many of the "helped" ones that didn't need the substitution at all have been harmed by the unnecessary textual "gift" added? If one of
your TMAs is at 50% level why should other TMAs compensate your
ignorance in that part?
I hope that this time The
OU has solved their issue and it doesn't appear the
mention "(Substitution applied)" in my module description document.
The OU has "gifted" me with the textual mention already in other 3 modules I have completed 2 years ago, where my grading
before and after that "substitution" was the same (M255: 94%, M364: 90%,
M256: 88%).
In fact the only real substitution I have had in all my OU studies was in M359 that year also where a 91.25% was converted into a 92% (oh, thank you ever so much indeed for such a huge difference).
Just to start: Did I really need any kind of substitution
in those cases? For a Distinction only 85% is needed ...wasn't really clear for the OU that I did not need any "help"?
Second, if my grading before and after is the same what substitution
has been applied? Third, what kind of help is adding a "substitution
applied" text in a case like this? Fourth, why is not allowed to opt out of substitution? IMHO They are harming hardworking individuals through those mentions in their academic statement records, benefiting only the mediocre ones through the substitution practice.
The issue with the mention seems to be due
to an OU rule stating that if not all your TMA grades are EXACTLY the
same this textual mention will appear because the substitution system
will fire (even if the system has really not added any value to you with
the substitution!).
Sometimes I wonder if the person that
dictates this kind of rules really thought about
all the possible scenarios and decided that in a case like this the
system would include the textual mention anyway or if it's a bug.
Just a helpful code in case it's a bug:
if (valueBeforeSubstitution != valueAfterSubstitution) then {
//print the "helpful" mention only in this case.
//No worries, the other cases do not need your "help", believe me
}
Coding that
was easy, isn't it...well, not if we look at how The OU answered my email two years ago when I contacted them regarding this case. They replied me inviting me to use a
form that is in place to claim should you're not happy with your grading.
...and that
wasn't exactly the case, was it?
