Degree Outcomes Statement

Table 1: University of Staffordshire good degrees by reporting year (MOA stands for Mode of Attendance)

The University of Staffordshire saw a rise in good degrees – that is, first-class or upper-second class degree classifications for its taught students from 71.9% in 2020/21 to a five-year high in 2024/25 of 76.4% (a rise of 4.5pp). This upward trend evidenced our investment in high quality teaching, notable infrastructure projects and innovative support and pastoral care initiatives as well as our commitment to high academic standards.

Until 2022/23, part-time good degree outcomes exceeded full-time results, reflecting strong performance among students from Armed Forces backgrounds. The subsequent decrease in 2023/24 (from 72.9% to 59.2%) was linked to the expansion of the Police Constable Degree Apprenticeship (PCDA), whose students now comprise nearly half of all part-time graduates.

In response to External Examiner feedback highlighting inconsistencies in marking, the PCDA team implemented a series of targeted actions, including staff training, module reviews, and the introduction of video assessment briefs to support student understanding and inclusive assessment. These interventions have led to improved consistency in marking and greater use of the full marking range, with good degree outcomes rising for part-time degrees to 65.6% in the current year.

For students with Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) (for example those with barriers to education, employment and health), we have been working on closing the awarding gap between those from the most deprived backgrounds (IMD Quintile 1). The University has continued improvement in the awarding gap for Black students in 2024/25 compared with last year. Black students had a good degree achievement rate of 73.8% only 4.8pp lower than good degree awarding rates of students from White backgrounds (78.6%)  This is sustained improvement over the past two years when the 2022/23 the awarding gap between Black and White students was 21.7pp. This is a reduction of 16.9pp  However, the awarding gap for Asian students has increased 14.8pp compared with 8.4pp last year, an increase of 6.4pp.

We continue to address the awarding gaps with the most persistent risks of equality of opportunity through our Access and Participation Plan 2024 to 2028, as approved by the Office for Students (OfS).

Table 2: Full-time good degrees by School

All Schools have developed local plans to reduce gaps in performance focusing on curriculum redevelopment and enhancements to learning and teaching approaches that promote greater academic stretch and achievement for all students.

A number of targeted interventions have contributed to the improved good degree outcomes for full-time students across our Schools, including:

• Enhanced progress monitoring: Monthly student progress reviews focusing on module attainment, with one-to one support sessions offered to students where issues are identified.
• Strengthened academic and language support: Increased input from the Academic Skills and Library team to improve the quality of students’ academic work. The English Language team has provided tailored support for students for whom English is not their first language.
• Inclusive teaching and assessment practices: University-wide neurodiversity training undertaken by staff has enhanced awareness of the diverse needs of the student population, supporting more inclusive and accessible approaches to teaching, learning and assessment.
• Peer mentoring and belonging initiatives: Implementation of peer mentoring schemes providing both academic and pastoral support for students from underrepresented groups, promoting a stronger sense of belonging and confidence in learning.
• Improved assessment and feedback practices:
  • Introduction of vodcasts explaining assessment tasks, enabling students to revisit key guidance.
  • Adoption of consistent feedback approaches that encourage students to reflect on and apply feedback to future assessments.
  • Professional preparation in Nursing:  Continued use of the University’s state-of-the-art simulation facilities to prepare Nursing students for professional practice.

These collective initiatives have strengthened the quality of learning, teaching and assessment, enhanced inclusivity, and contributed to sustained improvements in student attainment across the University.

All courses have learning outcomes mapped to the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) and relevant subject benchmark statements. Detailed academic scrutiny of course proposals ensures that programme content, teaching and assessment aligns with national reference points. Courses are also continually monitored to ensure they are current, valid and appropriate to the changing markets and needs of our students, partners and employers. In addition, courses meet the expectations and assessment requirements of Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs) where applicable.

Assessment strategies are designed to demonstrate that course and module level learning outcomes have been met by a student and ensure that a range of appropriate assessment types are used. Furthermore, we consider the learning needs of all groups of students to ensure that assessments are appropriate to the individual and achievable. The University continues to embed staff guidance on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for staff and students to support our community in the use of this emerging technology. Ongoing training supports awareness and innovation on the use of AI in learning, teaching and assessment.

Coursework assignments, submission and feedback dates are made available at the start of a module wherever possible. Students are provided with generic and contextualised criteria for success, enabling them to align their learning to meet the learning outcomes and ensure a clear grasp of expectations. Formative (ongoing) assessment methods allow students to receive regular feedback on their progress and feed forward into their summative (final) assessment.

Assessments, submitted electronically where appropriate, are scrutinised with similarity checking software. Marking is also undertaken electronically, with tutors providing marks and feedback to students online, where appropriate. University policy is to provide marks and feedback within 20 working days of submission.

For both University and partner-delivered courses, assessments are second marked, moderated internally and then scrutinised by external examiners (EEs) to ensure consistency. EEs are experienced, independent Higher Education professionals, who are appointed and trained according to a formal process, culminating in an annual written report. See our External Examiner Policy. EE feedback confirms that the University continues to maintain its academic standards. An overview of this feedback is provided to the University’s Education Committee.

Where students experience and report exceptional circumstances, these are considered in accordance with our Exceptional Circumstances Procedure.

Academic Board reports to the Board of Governors and is responsible for the planning, development, oversight and resourcing of all the academic work of the University, including teaching, research and knowledge transfer. The Academic Board appoints sub-committees, including the Education Committee, Apprenticeships Committee and Collaborative Academic Partnerships Committee which are responsible for the maintenance of standards and oversight of all teaching quality assurance.

University Committee Structure

In addition, Academic Board approves the University’s Academic Award Regulations and all associated policies and procedures governing assessment practice. These ensure marking practices are followed.

Award Boards are appointed to receive module results and confirm progression and award decisions for both on-campus awards and those delivered through partnership arrangements. The Terms of Reference and membership of these are outlined in our Assessment Policy and Procedures. Mandatory training for Award Board Chairs is provided by the Registry.

Where an Award Board considers that the University’s Academic Regulations are resulting in a disproportionate and/or unintended negative outcome for a student or groups of students, they can make a referral to the University Award Board for Exceptions (UABE). The UABE is empowered to make decisions to vary regulations in such exceptional cases, in line with established good practice and case law. Provision for appeals against the decision of Award Boards is set out in our Complaints and Appeals Procedure.

Academic standards at partner institutions are additionally monitored through the University’s Collaborative Academic Partnerships Committee which receives reports on collaborative academic partnerships.

Policies focusing on the management and quality assurance of collaborative provision

The University of Staffordshire Academic Regulations emphasise getting decisions right first time, timely completion, strong early support, a smooth transition through study, and  progressive development to ensure graduates are work-ready. Students were pivotal in the development of our ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ approach to these and were consulted from the outset.

At the modular level, undergraduate students who have passed at least 90 credits at a given stage may have up to 30 credits condoned for modules with marks between 35% and 39%. Condonement allows the University to award the credits while retaining the original mark. It is applied only when a student is eligible to progress and cannot be used for final-stage undergraduate modules, or where academic misconduct has occurred.

There is one criterion for an uplift in classification: where a student’s base classification falls within 2% of the higher band (i.e. 48% or 68%) and they have achieved at least 60 Level 6 credits in that higher classification. The University also limits the number of re-sit opportunities in line with sector norms. Students are permitted one opportunity to re-sit an assessment, with the mark capped at the pass threshold, and one opportunity to retake a module the following year if required.

A rigorous Impact Assessment was undertaken on the new regulations, including the revised classification approach and its potential impact on the distribution of good degrees.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, the University implemented temporary regulations to recognise the challenges of studying and being assessed remotely, where this would not normally have been the mode of delivery. These arrangements applied specifically to the 2019/20 and 2020/21 academic years.

The underlying principle was that students should engage with all aspects of assessment while acknowledging that some flexibility was necessary. The temporary regulations therefore:

• allowed for a greater degree of condonement (up to 45 credits, compared to 30 previously) and
• permitted a reduced level of completed assessments at the module level (66%) where it was not possible for students to undertake all assessments.

This means that some students might not have completed up to one third of their assessments during this period. All other aspects of the University’s degree outcome regulations remained unchanged.

The application of these temporary measures focussed on supporting students who had missed assessments or experienced failed outcomes through no fault of their own. As a result, those who benefited from these arrangements did not typically have high award classification profiles, and therefore these measures did not contribute to any increase in the awarding of good honours.

The use of the exceptional regulations remained in use during 2021/22 due to the Omicron outbreak but was rescinded at the end of the academic year. Standard regulations were in place from the start of 2022/23.

Our commitment to high quality teaching and its significant impact on our degree classification is illustrated by some of our achievements outlined below:

• The University’s overall positivity rate in the National Student Survey (NSS) has improved by 4pp to 81.5% (NSS 2025) from 77.5% (NSS 2024). [1]
• The University has seen two of its subject areas ranked in the Top 10 of the Guardian University Guide [2]
• The University has achieved ahead of time its KPI of 75% of positive graduate outcomes by 2027 [3]
• The University is second for social inclusion in the Times and Sunday Times Good University Guide 2026 [4]
• The University is ranked 5^th for the proportion of students from Low participation neighbourhoods in the Times and Sunday Times Good University Guide 2026 [4]
• We are second in the UK for Quality Education (UN Sustainable Development Goal 4 in the THE Impact Rankings 2025) [5]
• Significant capital investment in facilities and learning resources to enhance teaching, learning, and student experience – over £75M in recent years. This includes:
  • £30M Science Centre, supporting innovation in STEM disciplines
  • £11.5M Cadman Studios and £8.7M Digital Kiln, providing industry-standard creative and digital production environments.
  • £5M Beacon Specialist Learning Building, providing a vibrant environment designed to enhance collaboration and creativity.
  • £5.5M Centres of Excellence in Healthcare Education, enhancing health and professional education.
  • £43M Catalyst Building, a state-of-the-art hub for collaborative learning and innovation.
  • £2.7m multidisciplinary simulation facility, in the remodelled Ashley 2 building.
  • £2m Esports arena in the Beacon building, supporting emerging digital disciplines.

The University’s review has identified the following strengths:

• A strategic and evidence-led approach to student engagement and academic mentoring is strengthening interservice support for students and contributing to improved outcomes.
• The development of a  Curriculum Framework for the University which identifies our signature strengths to ensure these are built-in across all provision to benefit all students.
• The introduction of a single ‘front door’ for student support services, enabling student autonomy in navigating support and streamlining their student journey.
• The development of a risk-based approach to course monitoring, which targets support in areas with the weakest student metrics to improve consistency of quality.

We will be undertaking the following key actions over the coming year:

• Implementation of the University’s Curriculum Framework
• A revised approach to student voice to improve response rates and insights arising.
• Continuing action to close attainment/award gaps for students at risk of a lack of equality of opportunity, taking evidence-based action informed by sector research.
• A review of the Degree Outcomes Statement as part of our commitment to assure the value and consistency of our awards.

This statement was originally prepared in 2020 by a cross-University working group, which included staff and student representation. External advisors, the University’s Collaborative Academic Partners, and an external examiner also contributed to its development and review.

It has since been reviewed and updated annually by teams across the University, including Curriculum and Academic Affairs, Business Intelligence and Management Reporting, and individual Schools and is submitted to the Academic Board and Board of Governors for approval.

First published: July 2020

Revised: October 2021, October 2022, October 2023, October 2024, and October 2025.

[1] National Student Survey 2025 : National Student Survey data: provider-level dashboard - Office for Students

[2] Guardian University Guide 2026 : The Guardian University Guide 2026 – the rankings | University guide | The Guardian

[3] Percentage of graduates who find graduate level jobs, or are in further study at Professional or HE level, within 15 months of graduation: 75% Career after 15 Months The Guardian University Guide 2026 – the rankings | University guide | The Guardian

[4] UK university rankings 2026 | The Times and The Sunday Times

[5] Top universities pursuing sustainable development goals in 2025 | Times Higher Education (THE)