Abstract:

This study asks whether students enrolled in different degree and double-degree programmes achieve systematically different academic performance in the same finance subjects, despite sharing identical teaching time and materials. We analyse 3.107 final marks (scale 0–10) from three finance courses—Introduction to Finance, Financial Mathematics and Financial Economics—taught between 2020 and 2025 in the Business Administration and Management degree and in three double degrees with Computer Engineering, Telecommunications Engineering and Food Science and Technology at the Universitat Politècnica de València. The dependent variable is the final course grade, while the main explanatory factors are the course (subject), the student group (degree/double degree code) and the academic year (cohort). To test for mean differences in performance between groups, we estimate linear models by course and apply Type III ANOVA and Tukey-adjusted multiple comparisons, obtaining adjusted marginal means by group that control for cohort effects. Results show statistically significant and consistent differences between groups: the double degree in Business Administration and Computer Engineering systematically achieves higher adjusted mean marks (around 0.8–1 point above the other groups), while the double degree with Food Science and Technology exhibits the lowest performance, particularly in Financial Mathematics. These findings highlight the need to design differentiated teaching and support strategies tailored to each group profile and illustrate a reproducible statistical approach that instructors can apply to diagnose performance inequalities in their own courses.

Keywords:

Academic performance, ANOVA, mixed-effects models, finance education, university assessment.