Degree Outcomes Statement
1. Institutional Degree Classification Profile
The degree classification profile for Swansea University for the academic years 2018/19 to 2024-25 is illustrated in the table below:
| Classification | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2020-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | 28.7% | 33.6% | 36.3% | 33.2% | 33.9% | 28.8% | 30.7% |
| 2:1 | 47.3% | 45.3% | 44.1% | 46.3% | 43.6% | 45.4% | 45.9% |
| 2:2 | 18.8% | 17.4% | 15.3% | 15.9% | 18.2% | 20.7% | 18.2% |
| 3rd | 2.3% | 1.5% | 1.7% | 1.4% | 1.4% | 2.2% | 1.9% |
| ** Unclassified | 3.0% | 2.2% | 2.5% | 3.3% | 3.0% | 2.8% | 3.3% |
*Figures in 2024/25 are from internal analysis. Previous years’ data is based on HESA data which may include variations in definitions to attain the student population.
Degree Outcomes
The data shows that the University’s profile of First Class Honours and Upper Second Class Honours increased by 1.9% and 0.5% respectively.
**Unclassified figures are calculated separately and therefore do not contribute to the total of outcomes provided above.
The University has continued to maintain standards and enhance the quality of the University’s programmes, to ensure students have the best chance of graduating with First or Upper Second-class degrees and to enable them to secure graduate employment.
Growth in the profile of degree outcomes, notably First Class and Upper Second-Class outcomes, are attributable to a range of factors focused on enhancement of quality, standards and the student experience:
- Continued enhancements in learning and teaching, assessment, student experience and student support, including Personal Tutoring, which has impacted positively on student performance and outcomes.
- A focus on and improvements in weaker subject areas providing increased consistency across the portfolio. The University consistently reviews across a range of metrics the performance of modules and programmes, and this includes the breadth of degree outcomes, across the range awarded. This will be continued with the implementation of Continuous Enhancement Monitoring and, as required, targeted interventions.
Good Degrees
Good Degrees is a measure used in league tables which calculates the percentage of degree outcomes at 1st or 2:1 classification.
| Good Degrees | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2020-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Sector (Russell Group Average) Benchmark 1st or 2:1 |
85.9% | 89.8% | 91.0% | 87.7% | 85.3% | 84.7% | Available Jan 26 |
| Sector (Average) Benchmark 1st or 2:1 | 77.2% | 82.4% | 83.5% | 79.2% | 77.4% | 77.0% | Available Jan 26 |
| Swansea 1st or 2:1 | 79.0% | 81.5% | 82.7% | 82.4% | 79.6% | 76.7% | 79.3% |
*Figures in 2024/25 are from internal analysis. Previous years’ data is based on HESA data which may include variations in definitions to attain the student population.
The data shows that the University’s profile of First Class Honours and Upper Second Class Honours combined has increased in comparison to 2023/24 by 2.6%. There was some variation in the University’s performance compared to the sector in 203/24, however, the comparative data will be available in January 2026 to identify current performance.
2. Assessment and Marking Practices
For all programmes, learning outcomes and assessment are clearly mapped against the QAA Quality Code, meet PSRB requirements, consider QAA Subject benchmark statements and align to the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications and Credit and Qualifications Framework Wales. This provides assurance that degree standards are maintained and that external experts, (PSRBs representatives, service users, students, employers, stakeholders) inform and quality assure our programmes.
The University’s Assessment, Marking and Feedback Policy (updated 2025) provides principles of assessment and requirements and drives enhancement in assessment practice. The Policy includes requirements for marking and assessment design, and links to the University’s regulations for Assessment and Award. Assessment design and marking is also overseen by expert External Examiners, who review and approve assessment design to ensure consistency and validity and provide an annual report on assessment processes and attend the relevant Examination Boards.
Recent amendments to the policy have addressed the following key areas:
- Moderation sample size and clarification on minimum requirements
- Clarification of marking of assessment and module marks ending in 9
- Enhancements to promote reasonable adjustments and inclusive assessment practices
- Enhancements to assure standards considering Generative AI
- Clarification/Enhancement in terms of working with partners
Further amendments have also been made to support Assessment in Welsh/Another Language and align to the wider Assessment, Marking and Feedback policy. In addition, a review was undertaken to develop an enhanced assessment cover sheet to provide a more streamlined and automated solution in a single location and provide consistency across the faculties.
Academic Integrity
Continuing the work undertaken across the institution as part of the programme of enhancement activity ‘Ymlaen’; further amendments have been made to Academic Integrity procedures to ensure ongoing evaluation and review as well as responsiveness to the changing landscape.
Key amendments have included:
- Clarity regarding process of examinations
- Clarity regarding communication processes with students
- Clarity regarding guidance on vivas
- Further guidance on evidence required
- Streamlining of process and systems
The wide-spread use of Generative Artificial Intelligence has required further changes and considerations to policy and practice. Further clarification and guidance has been provided in all relevant policies to ensure staff and students are familiar with the institutional position on GenAI in relation to assessment and academic integrity.
3. Academic Governance
Academic governance is essential to protecting the value of qualifications that are awarded by the University. The University Education Committee is responsible for the oversight of Quality and Standards and provides an Annual report to the University’s Council (Governors), which provides assurance to them that quality and standards are being maintained. The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Quality Enhancement Review was conducted in November 2020, in compliance with the requirements of the Quality Assessment Framework for Wales, with next review point of May 2026.
Alongside this review, the Governors are asked to confirm a number of statements on an annual basis as part of the Quality Assessment Framework for Wales including, for providers with degree awarding powers, that the standards of awards for which they are responsible have been appropriately set and maintained.
To assist the Governors in making that assurance, there is a reporting mechanism that feeds up through the institution via Faculty/School and Institutional level Quality Assurance Committees and Boards to the University Education Committee. There is also a Collaborative Partnership Board, which oversees all Partnership arrangements. Together, this governance structure ensures local bodies are empowered, but the University has clear oversight of quality and standards.
Throughout 2023/24, the education governance frameworks and quality assurance processes were reviewed to ensure they remain fit for purpose, efficient and impactful. This resulted in a redefined and streamlined education governance framework, and newly defined quality assurance and enhancement approaches were implemented in 2024/25 to support a move responsive ‘continuous enhancement’ approach to the student experience.
With a clear focus on continuous enhancement, internal quality review processes were also amended to provide ongoing reflection, data analysis, action planning and evaluation. The Continuous Enhancement Monitoring approach has removed the need for Annual Programme Review and Quality Review, favouring ongoing reflection points and reducing administrative burden. The new approach also support more responsive action planning and enhancement activity that are timely and impactful.
The External Examiners and External Subject Specialists are critical to the design, approval and ongoing review of programmes, and are engaged in all design or review of programmes. At institutional level, the Progression and Awards Board receives a Faculty/School level External Examiner report and provides an institutional report to the University Education Committee. Faculties/Schools are required to provide a response at local level, and the University responds to and oversees any action taken in response to External Examiner Reports at institutional level.
As part of the Continuous Enhancement Monitoring approach, the institution was keen to maintain strong external expertise. External Examiner processes were reviewed and the following key developments implemented in 2024/25:
- Programme Teams to utilise expertise and availability of existing External Examiners prior to nominating replacement External Examiners, or External Examiners for new programmes.
- Automatic extension of External Examiner contracts where no issues of concern raised (5 years is the maximum tenure).
- Implement a flat fee, with an additional 'uplift' payment for each extra programme added to an External Examiner’s portfolio. (With further update for 2025/26 for additional payments).
- New External Examiner fees to be implemented from September 2024.
- External Examiners to visit Swansea University once per tenure.
4. Classification Algorithms
Swansea University’s classification regulations are published within its Academic Regulations. These regulations are kept under review.
The candidate’s class of degree will normally be determined by the weighted average mark for all modules, including marks of the tolerated failures, contributing to the honours assessment using the following classification boundaries:
Band 3: Best marks achieved in 80 credits pursued at Level 6, given a weighting of 3
Band 2: Level 6 marks from the remaining 40 credits pursued and the best marks achieved in 40 credits pursued at Level 5, given a weighting of 2
Band 1: Marks achieved in remaining Level 5 credits pursued, with a weighting of 1
A formula is then applied to calculate the degree classification average.
| Class of Degree Weighted Average | |
|---|---|
| First Class Honours Degree | 70%+ |
| Second Class Honours, Division I | 60-69.99% |
| Second Class Honours, Division II | 50-59.99% |
| Third Class Honours Degree | 40-49.99% |
| Pass Degree | 35-39.99% |
Window of Opportunity: Students who are within 2% of the classification boundary can be considered for uplift to the next classification if they satisfy the following criteria.
Preponderance Principle: In order that the student be awarded the higher classification, a student must have achieved marks in the higher classification band in modules attracting a credit weighting equal to half or more of those contributing to the degree classification.
Exit Velocity: The University Progression and Awards Board shall consider the non-weighted average of the Final Year of Study. Where the student's Final Year average is in the higher classification band, the University Progression and Awards Board shall normally award the higher-class degree.
5. Continuous Enhancement
Curriculum Transformation
The institution has initiated a significant Curriculum Transformation project. The main aims of the Curriculum Transformation project are to create a more positive, enriching educational experience for students and staff; a more flexible and adaptable Curriculum to suit diverse students' needs; an enhanced offer in developing students' skills and opportunities; more agility and competition in local and global markets; and less complex, and more efficient, resilient, and easily managed programmes.
The project so far has approved 45 programmes, 22 programmes re-designed and approved for Sept 2026 start in addition to the 23 programmes approved for 2025 start. A further 14 programmes are currently in review with the remainder of programmes being finalised and approved by December 2025.
Alongside regular monitoring, the University has been focusing on continuous enhancement of the student experience, with particular effort placed on enhancement in key areas which directly impact on student performance.
Targeted Enhancements:
In 2023/24 the university introduced ‘Targeted Interventions’ in those subject areas requiring significant support to improve their National Student Survey results. The approach was evaluated following the NSS 2024 outcomes and improvements made for 2024/25.
The outcomes of the Targeted Enhancements in 23/24 and 24/25 showed improvements in all subjects in the majority of the internal Student Experience Survey and National Student Survey thematic areas, with an average improvement of 3.9% at thematic level. The process has since been embedded within Continuous Enhancement Monitoring introduced in 2024/25 with a relaunch in early 2025/26.
Learning, Teaching and Assessment
The University continues to focus its efforts on improving key areas of the student experience, enhancing provision and quality. The institution has focused on earlier intervention in learning, teaching and assessment with further emphasis on student feedback outside of the National Student Survey (NSS). Internal student experience surveys for undergraduates and postgraduates have provided earlier intervention points, further clarity on priorities and a longitudinal view of the student experience. These surveys, along with other sources of student feedback via Unitu and module feedback, are key to earlier enhancement activities and intervention at programme, school, faculty and institutional level and have been a key component of the Targeted Enhancements mentioned above.
The outcomes of the National Student Survey saw improvements in both scores and sector ranks, reinforcing the ongoing enhancement activity and alignment with the sector. However, the University remains committed to improving the student experience with a key focus on engaging teaching, timely feedback and constructive feedback to support future assignments, and closing the feedback loop. Analysis of qualitative data correlates this but provides further context to enable targeted enhancement activities to support the student experience.