Students in larger module groups ‘tend to get lower grades’

One factor not discussed in the article is why such modules exist. Large modules in STEM are more liely to be foundational material offered to a wide cohort of students rather than designed specifically for thos on specialist programmes, e.g. introduction to analysis or introduction to programming. In some case these may be recommended or required modules for other programmes. Thus the students will have a wider range of backgrounds than say those on 'complex analysis' or 'scientific computing' where the cohort have a deeper background in the topic, and have possibly met higher entry requirements. The benefit of running larger modules with a broader intake is probably seen as ensuring that students can get exposure to the material usually delivered by specialist in the home dept for the material. Obviously the challenges need to be offset by support elsewhere, e.g. more tutorial/lab classes But to quote Euclid: " There is no royal road to geometry" If some material is offered to larger more diverse cohorts. It is hardly surprising that outcomes will be mixed esp so in STEM where lower prior exposure may create a greater mountain to climb than i the dual case of a large mixed-cohort studying non-STEM material, where you'd hope/expect an undergraduate to have sufficient background from [say A-levels] to engage with the material