Are student references just smoke and mirrors?

Several key elements play a part in a graduate getting that first job, that foot in the door – the degree of course, the CV and the application.

Then there’s the reference – the inescapable, somehow mandatory-for-all-jobs character endorsement from someone who knows the applicant. Academics spend no small amount of time each year writing these promissory notes. We all have personal tutees, problem students, eager students, or just those you get to know better. But while not all students are created equal, academic references usually are. And the problem is that they have you in a bind.

That is because no one wants to sabotage a young person’s future by being completely honest about your experience of them, but at the same time it is difficult to vouch for someone who may prove to be a liability. You don’t want to deceive and sully the value of your word. It could mean that an outstanding graduate who applies to an employer doesn’t even get a shot because you had previously sung the generic praises of a less-than-stellar graduate who caused problems.

There is, of course, the occasional escape for us. When it is possible for a student to graduate without really engaging, I have occasionally informed students that, because they have never really talked to me until that moment, my reference will be limited to confirming their enrolment and their grades. But that still feels as though I am doing them a disservice because part of my job is to support them in that chance to build their future.

But should scholars really face this responsibility of spinning what is often little more than some grades on a scoresheet into a testimonial that lays claim to deep insight into someone they do not really know? Should the students themselves not do something with their time at university to earn a true and positive opinion of them beyond good marks?

This is particularly relevant for those who may be aiming a little high after graduation. I get a number of reference requests from students who want to go on to postgraduate medicine. Some of these are fantastic. But inevitably some will have needed several retakes or shown poor engagement. The opposite may also be true; some students have put every hour possible into everything just to keep their heads above water, and they still suffer from stress and anxiety. No one wants to be the one to provide a reference that will likely do them no favours if they subsequently struggle with the added rigours of graduate study.

In these cases, being candid about their aspirations would hardly be supportive. Conversely, those high-flyers who have never really done more than keep their heads down to get the grades may merit a supportive note, but what else can we say beyond confirming their transcript?

That is the problem, but what is the solution? As much as many of us will claim that we’re honest and we never pull the wool over anyone’s eyes, the truth is that in those instances where either we don’t know enough to compile anything particularly compelling or the truth would potentially hinder them, our solution is to get a little...generic. We have rubber stamp-like statements that glaze over the brutal truth, or alternatively we focus more on how nice the student is than on their actual skills and abilities. But does that help the employer, or even the student?

In these situations, student references should use data and analytics to present to employers. An engagement scorecard, so to speak. We now have the ability to monitor attendance, use of the virtual learning environment, timeliness of submissions, library use, and so much more. And it isn’t something that is hidden from students so they cannot recognise and act on it if required.

Using these data as a dashboard of students’ experience beyond their grades would allow employers to gain a more realistic and authentic window into their potential. It would also finally even the playing field by highlighting those imperfections on a student transcript that only “the system” ever sees. The late work that was capped, the assessment offence, the missed submission, or whatever regulatory loopholes enable students to finish but maybe not as strongly as they could have (or even should have).

These are all pit stops on the way to the final degree that unlocks so much after graduation and they offer important insights into a graduate’s ability to manage their time, show up punctually, work to deadlines, work with others and so on. All of this context is missing from student references, which doesn't seem a very intelligent use of the vast amounts of data we can easily gather in this digital age.

That does not mean that scholars cannot also have personal opinions on students. That personal touch needs to remain as evidence of our students having engaged with us because the good ones still do, and we must continue to promote these interactions.

Chris Moore is senior lecturer in anatomy at the University of the West of England.