I want to share this background to why we have a pass-fail option at all and why it is recommended. But it is alright to skip this section if you are in a hurry.

A core element of this course's philosophy is that learning should be driven by each student's needs, goals, and interests. The most important outcome for the course should be the skills you have developed and the knowledge you have gained, not some number on your transcript. Marking and assessment should be appropriate to the goals of the course and based on what you have learned, and should support learning rather than get in its way.

As I have developed the History of Science course over the years, it has become clear to me that the 0-100 marking scale used for most courses at this university is not just inappropriate but an obstacle to the kind of learning I want students to undertake. I am very privileged to teach a course that is an elective for every student. You are all here because you want to be here. Nobody is required to take this course to progress in their degree, and nobody's degree outcome will formally depend on what they do in History of Science, provided they complete the course eventually (with a generous approach to resits if it doesn't work out the first time). We are free to build a community based on learning, and that is a really special privilege even at a great university like ours.

I want History of Science to be an inclusive course that welcomes students from all subjects, thrives on your interactions with each other, and supports you in defining and achieving what you individually want from the semester. I want your engagement for the course to be based on its relevance to your lives and your studies, which can look very differently for different students. I think students who become passionate about the subject and spend lots of time on the course and students who use the course as a refreshing break from intensive study in their own fields are each gaining something valuable that I want to encourage, and I don't think it is fair to compare or rank them. I want to teach lots of exciting ideas and cultivate a variety of useful skills, without having to spend the time and energy needed to thoroughly prepare every student to demonstrate a single standard of achievement on a fixed scale. I share the concern of many academics, at this university and around the world, about the harmful and distorting effects of educational systems that put too much priority on particular kinds of marking and expect teaching and learning to follow rather than lead.

The standardized numerical marking system used in much of this university and much of the UK developed to serve particular needs of rating and ranking. We will explore some of this history in the course, because it directly affected major areas of science! One broad trend has been that as educational systems have become more inclusive and open to more segments of society, rigid ratings and rankings have developed as tools of gatekeeping and austerity, affirming that the privilege of the privileged was deserved and limiting the mobility of the rest to an exceptional few.

The current form of pass-fail marking comes from student protest movements of the 1960s that sought to promote a different future for the greatly expanded post-World War 2 universities of the (mainly Western) world. Where I was trained and started my career in the United States, it was a normal expectation that a certain proportion of a student's courses should be taken for the sake of learning alone, rather than for a mark, and students could in many cases choose for themselves which marking option was appropriate for their goals. While such marking approaches did not usher in a utopia of free exploration and learning, they are generally understood to contribute positively to student learning and wellbeing as part of a balanced diet of good pedagogy and support.

Between 2019 and 2022, I made a number of changes to the course to make the existing numerical assessment scheme as humane and flexible as possible, and students who currently require a numerical mark will get the best possible version of that system that I can responsibly offer. During that time, I undertook a lengthy process of convincing those in charge of regulating our marking system that a pass-fail option, which has long been formally possible in the university's marking rules and was used successfully on a widespread emergency basis during the 2020 lockdowns, could be safely and fruitfully adopted for History of Science. My efforts ran in parallel to others at the university, notably the Edinburgh Futures Institute where pass-fail marking is now the default approach. I look forward to thoughtful alternatives to numerical marking becoming more normal here.

The Pass-Fail marking option (following Taught Assessment Regulation 35.3, if you're curious) awards students credit for the course without assigning a numerical mark. The purpose of the assessment is to demonstrate that you have met the course learning outcomes, and you have a great deal of flexibility in how you demonstrate this. Feedback on your assessment focuses on what you have learned and what you can do next, based on your own views of your goals and accomplishments.

The Numerical marking option awards students marks based on the university's 0-100 marking scheme. In addition to satisfying the course learning outcomes, the assessment must demonstrate specific levels of achievement specified by the university. We have been as accommodating as possible in supporting students to make these meaningful for their personal goals and interests, but the numerical scale still limits what can count as a valuable way to complete the course. Feedback on your assessment focuses on how well you match the criteria of the 0-100 marking scheme and how you could meet criteria for higher numbers.

Apart from your own different experience of the assessment process and the flexibility in what kinds of feedback we can offer, there is no difference between the options. You have identical access to course resources, learning opportunities, and support, and we treat both options the same except for the relevant aspect of your final submission and marking.

The different experience of assessment can be a big deal, though. You may enjoy the chance to be more creative with your coursework, or you may appreciate the greater flexibility and reduced stress that lets you focus on the aspects of the course that are most meaningful to you at the times that work best in your schedule. I know some students enjoy the validation and challenge of reaching for a high numerical mark, and will see this as a challenge to find other equally (or more!) validating and challenging standards for their work in the course.

Formally, you have to enrol in the version of the course that corresponds to your marking option:

• Pass-Fail marking corresponds to STIS08011
• Numerical marking corresponds to STIS08005

Everyone is being asked to confirm within the first two weeks of the course that you are enrolled in the correct version. You have until the course change deadline for your degree programme to change options, using your programme's course change process.

Depending on your programme, your Student Adviser, Personal Tutor, Cohort Lead, Visiting Student adviser, or other person responsible for advising your course selection should be able to help you confirm that you are taking the right version for your programme needs.

Most students take this course as a pre-honours elective where the only thing that matters to their programme is that they pass, with the mark not making a difference. In most cases, the pass-fail option should be compatible for this.

If you are taking the course as an honours or visiting student, or if the course meets a special pre-honours requirement,¹⁾ your programme may require you to report a numerical mark for the course. You should check the requirements with an appropriate person from your programme.

Resits. Under either option, if you do not complete the course on your first attempt you may submit an updated assessment at a future resit diet, and you are free to build on the work already done prior to the resit. We know that sometimes students don't complete the course, and there are lots of perfectly understandable reasons. We encourage you to submit whatever you have at the marking deadline so that you can use the feedback when improving your submission to demonstrate the learning outcomes (or numerical mark) in the resit submission.

Academic Integrity. As discussed on the Assessment page, this course has an approach to 'academic integrity' that is a little different to the centrally-enforced university approach. In practice, another benefit of the pass-fail option is simplifying what is sometimes a confusing and arbitrary-seeming required process of weighing marks and deductions for alleged integrity issues. For numerical marks, someone with no knowledge of the course has to come up with a number for how much a student 'benefits' from poor scholarship or misconduct (as though these were beneficial in the first place!); with the pass-fail option, the course team simply asks whether the submission (still) demonstrates the learning outcomes.