EXCLUSIVE

STUDENTS who score as little as 13% in degree exams at a Scottish university are being passed in a drive to boost the number of graduates it produces.

A series of internal documents obtained by The Herald claim lecturers at Heriot-Watt University have doctored marking criteria and dumbed-down classes to increase the number of students passing courses.

A confidential memo from Principal Professor Alistair MacFarlane encourages staff to take action to raise pass rates by 10% including ''adjustment to the syllabus'' and ''modification of teaching and assessment methods''.

Professor MacFarlane was later warned that he risked a backlash from genuinely

successful students if the university was refusing to fail their less able and

conscientious counterparts.

The situation is known to date back two years and, in one department, it has reached ''crisis level'' according to a member of the Senate who has called

for

an independent investigation.

The principal's memo to all academic staff, dated February 6, 1996, revealed the university's completion rate was 80% and that senior executives were ''extremely concerned at the apparent lack of progress''. It said the ''Executive and the Deans Committee is seeking to achieve an immediate improvement to a pass rate of 90% for each module.

''Hence I have instructed your heads of department to consult urgently with

all

those having primary responsibility for modules which have consistently

failed

to reach the desired pass rate, in order to rectify the reasons and to determine appropriate remedial action.

''Such action, where deemed necessary, may involve adjustment to the syllabus and modification of the teaching and assessment methods.''

A response from the Heriot-Watt branch of the Association of University Teachers warned: ''There is a growing discipline problem arising out of the perception amongst the student body that we are reluctant to fail them, a perception which a knowledge of the contents of your letter would help to fuel.

''Students who show a flagrant disregard for the requirements of a module, in terms of attendance, application and submission of work account for a very

high

proportion of the failures.

''The majority of able and motivated students quickly become discontented when

they see how the others are being handled and, indeed, can become bored with the slow pace resulting from any 'adjustment of the syllabus' made for the

sole

purpose of increasing module pass rates.''

Senate member Dr Brian Dodds wrote an official complaint relating to what he calls the ''adulteration of the assessment process and the associated dumbing-down of modules'' in the mathematics department.

Dr Dodds, a maths lecturer, attempted to submit his concerns to last week's Senate meeting but he was advised the proper procedure was first to raise them

within his own department.

His letter states: ''What level have we reached? In module A an original failure rate of about 46% becomes a more presentable 23% by simply lowering

the

pass mark to 24 out of 100. Similarly in other modules a failure rate of 27% becomes one of 9%; one of 23% becomes 10%; one of 52% becomes 19% and so on.

''Candidate X obtains 13 out of 100 in a module exam, the exam counting for

80%

in the assessment of the module. By revising the mark upwards, adding 'continuous assessment' and then scaling the whole upwards, the candidate passes the module.''

Heriott-Watt was ranked Scotland's third top university in a national survey published last week. One criteria which boosted its rating was the number of first class degrees it conferred.

The Government plans to introduce trained examiners in response to an alleged blind-eye approach to failing standards under the current system of self-policed assessment. Heriot-Watt, along with six other universities in Scotland, is opposing the proposals.

A spokesperson for the university said: ''A member of the mathematics department has requested that the university discusses developments towards improving progression rates in maths modules, a normal part of the

university's

review of quality issues.

''The staff member was advised that the route to tabling this for discussion was not directly through Senate, but first at a forthcoming deparmental academics meeting and subsequently, if necessary, at the University Quality Forum. It appeared that the staff member agreed to this, and did not raise the

issue at Senate.''

The spokesman stressed that the university's external examiners had not expressed any concerns about the system.