asq/2017/0425 blackpool & the fylde college … revised...blackpool & the fylde college...

ASQ/2017/0425

BLACKPOOL & THE FYLDE COLLEGE PROCEDURES

APPENDICES TO LANCASTER UNIVERSITY

UNDERGRADUATE ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS FOR

ASSOCIATE COLLEGES

2017/18

The information denoted in these procedures is particular to Blackpool & The Fylde College and forms an appendix to the Lancaster University Undergraduate Assessment Regulations for Associate Colleges. Procedures are reviewed annually, taking note of any amendments, to ensure that they align with the Lancaster University regulations. Procedures are approved by the Collaborative Provision Teaching Committee in advance of the academic year to which they will apply.

1. Constitution, terms of reference and additional guidelines for Mitigating Circumstances Committees

2. Academic Malpractice Procedure

3. Constitution, terms of reference and additional guidelines for Examination Boards

4. Administration of examinations

5. Review and appeals and challenges

6. Modules approved for percentage marking

This section of the regulations does not relate to the delivery of the University of Salford or Liverpool John Moores University degrees, you may access their regulations here:

• http://www.governance.salford.ac.uk/page/academic_handbook• https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-regulations

B1: Personal Mitigating Circumstances and Interruption of Study has been produced following consideration of the Quality Assurance Agency’s Quality Code.

Students may occasionally experience serious medical or personal circumstances which can severely disrupt their ability to study and affect their performance in an assessment.

This procedure provides students with the opportunity to inform the College of these circumstances.

The personal mitigating circumstances will:

• have prevented a student from performing at their expected level in an assessmentor examination or have prevented them from attending an examination

• are severe and exceptional• are unforeseen or unavoidable• are close in time to the affected assessment

Support mechanisms are established between a student, their tutors and the Student Support and Wellbeing Department in their induction at the start of a programme of study and link to the information provided in the College’s B4 Strategy; personal mitigating circumstances applications will therefore normally only be granted where there has been an adverse change in a student’s circumstances after their enrolment, or where personal mitigating circumstances have been previously granted there must be an adverse change in a student’s circumstances that can be independently evidenced.

Personal mitigating circumstances are a serious, significant event which is unforeseen and/or unavoidable that may appreciably impair a student’s academic performance in one or more assessed activities and may possibly occur over a period of time. Personal mitigating circumstances may include medical matters or events directly affecting someone other than the student.

Please note that where a student is applying for interruption of study the same criteria for approval as Personal Mitigating Circumstances are used i.e. a student may not interrupt their studies without good reason, there must be circumstances beyond their control that will have an adverse effect on their studies.

Page 4 of 14

Appendix 1

Constitution, terms of reference and additional guidelines for Mitigating Circumstances Committees

Introduction

What Are Personal mitigating circumstances?

http://www.governance.salford.ac.uk/page/academic_handbook

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-regulations

ACCEP

EVIDENCE Examples of personal mitigating circumstances may include; but is not limited to:

• significant physical or psychological illness• severe personal difficulties• serious illness or death of a member of your immediate family (e.g. mother, father,

sister, brother, son, daughter)• sudden deterioration in a long standing medical condition or disability• being the victim of a serious crime• legal proceedings requiring attendance at court.

Studying Higher Education undoubtedly places pressure on students. The ability to manage workloads and competing pressures is therefore a skill which is further refined during studies. The following reasons would therefore not be considered as valid claims for Personal Mitigating Circumstances:

• failure to read the examination timetable or coursework deadline properly• pressure of work• failure to save work properly / failure of IT equipment• minor illnesses or self-induced conditions (colds, hangovers etc.)• religious festivals• domestic or personal disruptions which may have been anticipated (e.g. moving

house, holidays etc.)• sporting fixtures.

The list above is not exhaustive and should therefore be used as an indicative guide.

Examples of evidence of personal mitigating circumstances

Serious physical illness Medical certificate/hospital report/report from qualified medical practitioner on letter headed paper

Psychological illness Report from a psychiatrist, psychologist or Counselling Service

Severe personal difficulties Report from a Counselling Service, Welfare Service or another qualified professional

Serious illness or death of an immediate family member or close

A medical report from a qualified medical practitioner or a copy of a death certificate

Page 5 of 14

Grounds for PMC and Acceptable Evidence

Reasons not considered

Supporting Evidence

friend accompanied if necessary by formal documentation confirming relationship with deceased

Sudden deterioration in a long standing medical condition or disability

A medical report from an appropriate qualified medical practitioner

Being the victim of a serious crime Crime report and number

Legal proceedings requiring attendance at court

Documentary evidence from the court or a solicitor

Applications will only be accepted before an assessment date when a student is aware that they will be unable to attend an examination or submit a piece of assessed work and as with all applications evidence must be produced to support the application. Applications submitted before an assessment date should also whenever possible be submitted no more than four weeks in advance of the assessment date.

Where an application is presented after an assessment date it should normally be submitted within 10 working days of the assessment date.

There will be occasions when students are not fit to attend on the day of an examination, test or other form of assessment in such cases they should:

• notify the Programme Leader of their absence• seek medical advice on the day and provide documentary evidence of incapacity• submit a Personal Mitigating Circumstances Application Form within ten working

days

If taken ill during an examination, test or other form of assessment the following action should be taken:

• notify the Senior Invigilator or Academic Tutor in charge so that a report can bemade

• seek medical attention on the day and provide documentary evidence of incapacity• submit a Personal Mitigating Circumstances Application Form within 10 working days

of the assessment

Applications received after 10 working days of the submission or examination date will not normally be considered.

The outcome of an approved application is that, for coursework, a revised assessment deadline or for practical assessments or examinations a new date will be provided to the student by the programme leader. Revised assessments will be provided in keeping with the principles set out in B1.6.

Page 6 of 14

PMC Applications

Applications for Personal Mitigating Circumstances (PMC) and Interruption of Study (IoS) must be supported by relevant documentary evidence.

It is a student’s responsibility to complete and submit the application. In exceptional circumstances a student may nominate an advocate to submit the application on their behalf if they are unable to do so because of physical or mental incapacity. Academic staff cannot initiate the process but may, in exceptionally sensitive situations present a written statement to the Panel in support of a student claim for PMC or IOS.

For both PMC and IoS applications the application form must indicate clearly each module and each assignment covered by the application and must confirm all relevant dates. Failure to complete the form in full will delay applications. Any applications received without evidence will delay the application and may not be approved by the Panel.

Applications should be returned by email [email protected] or via reception to the

HE Student Administration Manager, University Centre,

Park Road, Blackpool.

The Student Administration Manager will acknowledge the receipt of the application by email within three working days of receiving it. HE Learning Mentors will also contact the student to ascertain their support needs. For example, time management; study planning or emotional support.

Normally correspondence will be conducted through college email and students are advised to check their e-mail accounts regularly to monitor the progress of their application.

All applications will be considered by a Personal Mitigating Circumstance and Interruption of Study Panel.

A typical panel is identified in Appendix B1- B – PMC Panel Terms of Reference.

The panel will determine the validity of each application by considering the following:

• The evidence to support the circumstance• The severity of circumstances• The nature of circumstances

In cases of Personal Mitigating Circumstances:

• The time period in which to complete the assessment (i.e. date when an assessmentwas set and deadline for submission)

• Whether there was enough time to complete the assessment if the PMC weredisregarded

Page 7 of 14

PMC and IOS Application Processs

The Panel

mailto:[email protected]

• Whether the period affected corresponds with the date of the assessment

And in cases of Interruption of Study, the panel will establish a return to study plan, in terms of semesters and previous achievement of assessment(s) in individual modules.

The panel will have made available to it the following documentation:

• The HE Taught Award Regulations Part A.• B1: Personal Mitigating Circumstances and Interruption of Study• Any previous PMC/IoS applications.• The Students EBS stage report (Student Assessment Details)• The application form.• Evidence to support the application.• Documentation relating to any support already in place.• The student’s attendance record.

Additional documentation deemed relevant to the circumstance maybe submitted by the academic team or by the student in question where either party believes it may assist the panel in their deliberations.

The Panel is empowered by the HE Academic Standard and Development Committee to determine the validity of each case and will record one of the following outcomes for each application:

Page 8 of 14

Documentation Available to the Panel

Description Action A

ccep

t

The circumstances presented by the student are supported by the documentary evidence provided and are deemed to have had an adverse effect on their performance in the assessments listed on the application.

Personal Mitigating Circumstances

An amendment will be made to the individual student study plan to reflect appropriate adjustments in assessment deadlines or uncapped reassessment following discussion and negotiation with the course tutor.

Where possible the reassessment of PMCs will comprise the original assessment(s) except where a student may gain unfair advantage over that of other students in the same cohort.

To ensure that any subsequent assessment is fair and equitable, the programme leader and student must always complete the Revised Study Plan Form and return it to the HE Student Administration Manager – This document is a formal record of new submission dates and must be adhered to; in not meeting the revised deadlines a student will be penalised through the validating bodies late submission or reassessment procedures.

Interruption of Study

A return to study plan will be created to support individual in their return to the College.

The student will be enrolled onto a zero cost programme to ensure support is provided through any interruption.

Page 9 of 14

Par

tially

Acc

ept

(PM

C a

pplic

atio

ns o

nly)

The circumstances presented by the student are supported by the documentary evidence provided and are deemed to have had an adverse effect on their performance in some but not all of the assessments listed on the application.

An amendment will be made to the individual student study plan to reflect appropriate adjustments in assessment deadlines or uncapped reassessment following discussion and negotiation with the course tutor.

Where possible, for the pertinent assessments, the reassessment of PMCs will comprise the original assessment(s) except where a student may gain unfair advantage over that of other students in the same cohort.

To ensure that any subsequent assessment is fair and equitable, the programme leader and student must always complete the Revised Study Plan Form and return it to the HE Student Administration Manager – This document is a formal record of new submission dates and must be adhered to; in not meeting the revised deadlines a student will be penalised through the validating bodies late submission or reassessment procedures.

Def

er

The circumstances presented by the student are deemed to have had an adverse effect on their performance in the assessments listed on the application, however the documentary evidence provided is insufficient.

The application is placed on hold and the student is contacted in order to obtain further evidence.

Rej

ect

The circumstances presented by the student are not deemed to have had an adverse effect on their performance in the assessments listed on the application.

The student is subject to the normal assessment regulations relating to non-submission and reassessment.

Where a panel makes the decision to reject an application students may appeal the decision through the College’s Appeals Procedure.

Page 10 of 14

i. A PMC assessment should never advantage a student over their peers.ii. A PMC assessment is not a reassessment, it is an extension to the original

assessment deadline.iii. Tutors must issue a revised assessment front sheet ensuring that the student is fully

aware of where to obtain support and when and how to submit their PMCassessment.

iv. Students are, where appropriate, permitted to improve a pervious submission.However where a student may, for example, have completed the majority of anexamination before falling ill, they must be provided with a new assessment.

v. The amount of time provided to a student to complete the assessment should notexceed the time provided to the students who took the assessment originally.Note: Where a substantial amount of work is to be undertaken through an approvedPMC or when existing assessments may influence a student’s ability to submit PMCwork in the original timescale, tutors should use their academic judgment to select anappropriate deadline outside the original timescale but should always bear in mindprinciple i.

IInterruption of Study Support

Immediately following the approval of an interruption of study, the student will be contacted by the Student Support and Wellbeing (SSW) to discuss their support needs.

During an interruption, students will periodically be contacted by SSW. This contact is provided to:

• maintain support throughout the interruption and in the period before a student’sreturn

• provide the opportunity for a return to study session that will enable a student to re-engage confidently with the College. Where possible the student’s programmeleader will be available at the return to study session, or soon after, to answer anyquestions the student may have and to provide any resources that may aid theirreturn

As soon as is reasonable following the approval of an interruption the HE Academic Registrar, the relevant Programme Leader and the student in question will discuss and complete a Return to Study Plan. This plan sets out the interruption in terms of return dates, modules and assessments. If a student is unable to attend this meeting the plan will be completed in their absence. On completion, the plan will be mailed, by recorded delivery, to the student’s home address. If a student is not content with the details of the plan they must contact the HE Academic Registrar at University Centre, Park Road, Blackpool within 15 working days. If no contact is made by the student it will be presumed that they have accepted the details of the plan.

Students who have interrupted their studies will be withdrawn from their original programme of study and enrolled to a separate course code for the duration of their interruption. This temporary enrolment will ensure that students continue to have access to central college

Page 11 of 14

Principles of PMC Assessment

facilities and support services. Students should not attend classes or undertake any assessments during their period of interruption, nor should they initiate contact with academic staff unless asked to do so by SSW.

Matters to Consider for Students Interrupting Study

Blackpool and The Fylde College will wherever possible offer readmission to the original programme following an interruption of study.

There may however be circumstances when this is not possible. This is most likely when a programme is updated through the College’s validation processes or when the number of students applying to a programme is inadequate to provide a sustainable cohort.

Where changes have been made to the College’s provision, students may in some cases:

• as a requirement of the updating of a programme be required to study additionalmodules in order to successfully achieve a qualification.

• be prevented from returning to the same programme where it is significantly differentfrom their original programme.

• be prevented from enrolling onto the same programme when the programme iswithdrawn.

Students, whenever possible, will be informed of potential changes to the status of their programme prior to their interruption, this however cannot be guaranteed.

Where a programme of study, for whatever reason, following an interruption of study is no longer available, Blackpool and The Fylde College will endeavour to provide a suitable alternative.

Students should also be aware that, on their return, that their tuition fees may have increased. Students should always seek the advice of both the College’s HE Student Administration Manager and the Student Loan Company prior to the approval of an application.

Page 12 of 14

APPENDIX B1-A – PMC AND IOS PROCEDURE FLOWCHART

Circumstances influence a student’s study

Are circumstances extensive or prolonged in

nature?

Form submitted either via e-mail, internal mail or postal mail to HE Student Administration Manager

Student completes personal mitigating circumstances

application form

Student completes interruption of study application form

Form submitted either via e-mail, internal mail or postal mail to HE Student Administration Manager

Receipt of form acknowledged within three working days

Receipt of form acknowledged within three working days

Is the form completed in full?

Is the form completed in full?

Form returned to student

Form returned to student

Application considered by the PMC panel

YesNo

No No

Yes

Application considered by the PMC panel

Yes

Application Accepted?

Application Deferred?

Application Rejected?

Student, Tutor and HELM team

notified of decision

Further information or

evidence requested from

student

Information received?

Yes

Application Rejected

No

Application Accepted

Application Accepted?

Application Deferred?

Application Rejected?

Student, Tutor and HELM team

notified of decision

Further information or

evidence requested from

student

Information received?

Application Rejected

No

Application Accepted

Yes

PMC Amended Study Plan

Return to study plan completed

HELM Support Confirmed

APPENDIX B1-B – PMC PANEL TERMS OF REFERENCE

Personal Mitigating Circumstances and Interruption of Study Panel

Chair • HE Academic Registrar (or nominee)

Membership

• Academic staff x 2 (from separate curriculum area, varying each meeting)

The panel is considered quorate when a minimum of three members are present.

In Attendance: • Curriculum Manager - Student Support and Wellbeing

Minuting • HE Student Administration Manager

Frequency Monthly

Summary of purpose

Responsible to HE Academic Standard and Development Committee; to insure the fairness and reliability of all judgments against Personal Mitigating Circumstances or Interruption of Study applications and to consider whether there are actions or events outside the control of a student which may have caused them to fail to attend an examination, submit work or perform at a lesser academic standard than might have been expected.

Terms of Reference

• To review individual student applications in order to

determine whether the Personal Mitigating Circumstances in respect of formal assessments are valid or invalid

• To review individual student applications relating to Interruption of Study in order to determine whether they are valid or invalid

• To liaise with Student Support and Wellbeing to facilitate additional learner support (ALS).

• To provide an annual report to the HE Academic Standards and Development Committee.

• To establish that evidence is valid, i.e. authentic and appropriate and that it relates to the assessment in question and that it has been submitted by the required date

• To establish, through the HE Academic Registrar, a return to study plan, in terms of semesters and previous achievement of assessment(s) in individual modules, for students with approved Interruption of Study.

Date of last review September 2017

Page 14 of 14

of 13

Introduction

This section of the regulations does not relate to the delivery of the University of Salford or

Liverpool John Moores University degrees, you may access their regulations here:



B3: Academic Malpractice has been produced following consideration of the Quality

Assurance Agency’s UK Quality Code.

Blackpool and The Fylde College unequivocally condemns academic malpractice including

acts of cheating and plagiarism.

This malpractice is any behaviour that gives an unfair advantage to a particular student. It

can usefully be divided into three sub categories: cheating, fabrication of results and

plagiarism.

It is an academic offence for a candidate to commit any act designed to obtain an unfair

advantage with a view to achieving a higher grade or mark than they would otherwise

secure. Any attempt to convey deceitfully the impression of acquired knowledge, skills,

understanding, or credentials, is a serious offence and may constitute grounds for sanctions

up to exclusion.

Detecting Cheating or Fabrication of Results

All members of the College’s Staff or representatives thereof are responsible for reporting

to the Student Administration Manager any instance where cheating or fabrication of results

may be identified as having occurred. The Student Administration Manager will convene an

Academic Malpractice Panel (AMP) and for all other cases, after consultation with the HE

Academic Registrar will convene an AMP where the HE Academic Registrar believes there

is a case to be answered.

Detecting Plagiarism

The primary responsibility for detecting plagiarism in student work continues to rest with the

individual marker, who should be alert to the possibility of finding plagiarism in students’

work, and who must always use their specialist knowledge and academic judgement in

deciding what is and what is not acceptable within that subject. For example, in many

subjects it is difficult to decide what common knowledge is and what should be attributed to

sources, which is where the marker’s expert judgement is exercised.

The College also makes use of plagiarism detection software. To ensure impartially all HE

students must, wherever possible, submit assessed work electronically to tutors. This

Appendix 2

Academic Malpractice Procedure



of 13

software is only employed to assist markers in making decisions; markers will always use

their specialist knowledge and academic judgement to determine whether plagiarism is

evident.

The dissertations of all third year degree students will all be subject to the plagiarism

detection software in order to assist markers with their judgement.

Process for Suspected Plagiarism

Plagiarism

Plagiarism can be defined as: the action of utilising or closely imitating the language / work

of another author as if the product were one's own. Blackpool and The Fylde College

Academic Regulations categorise any such behaviour into one of the two types below.

A clear distinction must be drawn between inexperienced academic study and writing skills

(especially among first year undergraduates and international students) and deliberate

deception. The former requires remedial teaching and only the latter deserves severe

penalties. Intentionality is difficult to establish, so the framework allows a first offence based

on “benefit of doubt”, with a relatively light penalty and a requirement that the student seeks

appropriate study skills advice. Subsequent plagiarism offences are more likely to be

deliberate, so the penalty system becomes progressively more serious.

Ignorance of proper procedures or of good practice in academic writing is no excuse,

particularly if a student has previously been accused of plagiarism or poor academic

practice, advised to seek study skills help, and fails to learn the lessons.

Minor Offence (Poor Academic Practice)

Minor offences would include poor referencing, unattributed quotations, inappropriate

paraphrasing, incorrect or incomplete citations, or up to several sentences of direct copying

without acknowledgement of the source. For classification of a minor offence it must be the

marker’s judgement that the affected text results from poor academic practice rather than a

deliberate intent to deceive.

Major Offence

A major offence shall be defined as copying multiple paragraphs in full without

acknowledgement of the source, taking essays from the Internet without revealing the

source, copying all or much of the work of a fellow student with or without his/her

knowledge, submitting the same piece of work for assessment under multiple modules or

two or more recorded minor offences.

Plagiarism Operational Practice

All markers shall make a positive effort to identify possible plagiarism using their specialist

knowledge, academic judgement and available software tools.

of 13

All markers shall inform their students of the procedures for detecting and dealing with

plagiarism, the process and implications of not applying good academic practice will be

reinforced throughout a student’s tutorial sessions.

Where a piece of assessed work in the academic judgment of a marker is subject to poor

academic practice, at level 3 or 4 only, the marker must consult with both the relevant

programme leader and curriculum manager (or head of curriculum area where the maker is

either of aforementioned people) to consider the appropriate action. If all parties are in

agreement and believe that the student has committed an offence that is considered a

Minor Offence they must:

Contact the Student Administration Manager to confirm whether a warning letter has

been issued to the student previously.

Meet with the student (module tutor and programme leader) to discuss the poor

academic practice and the support mechanisms that will be put in place by the

academic team and HE Learning Mentors to assist the student.

If no letter has been issued previously and the student is content to accept a warning

The programme team will complete the warning letter (Appendix B3 - C) and provide

it to the Student Administration Manager who will issue the letter to the student by

recorded delivery and note the offence on the student’s record.

If a warning letter has been issued previously or the student is unwilling to accept a

warning, the procedure set out below will be initiated.

In cases of suspected plagiarism the following must be adhered to:

A Plagiarism Report Form is to be completed by the marker

Included with the report should be the student’s annotated work identifying which

elements are deemed to be plagiarised

The source of original information must be identified

All documentation must be presented to a second marker for ratification

Evidence must always be provided by the marker to confirm plagiarism has occurred.

If the second marker disagrees with the findings of the marker the HE Academic Registrar

will act as an adjudicator and will make a judgement on whether to continue or to close the

investigation.

If the judgement is confirmed as being one of suspected plagiarism, the annotated material

and the Plagiarism Report should be forwarded to the Student Administration Manager who

will send to the student a copy of the assessed work with the feedback from the first and

second marker (Plagiarism Report) and a copy of the software plagiarism report. Copies of

all documents must be kept by Student Administration Manager and forwarded to the head

of curriculum area. The Student Administration Manager will convene an academic

malpractice panel. The panel will receive copies of the plagiarised work and a copy of the

of 13

first and second marker reports and the software plagiarism report. They will also receive

evidence as to whether the student has attended a session regarding plagiarism and/or any

other pertinent reports; all reports available to the panel must also be made available to the

student.

Note: If the head of curriculum is also the marker or second marker then a nominee must

be appointed.

The timing of the panel will be arranged to try to ensure the student can attend. The student

may be accompanied by a friend or relative, any person accompanying a student is present

to support a student and as such should not contribute to the meeting unless at the behest

of the student and only when invited to do so by the Chair. The student may write a letter to

outline their position regarding the allegations if they wish. If the student does not attend the

panel at the agreed time and date, the panel will convene and make their decision based

solely on the documentary evidence available.

A short meeting will take place before the panel meeting with panel members only to

familiarise members with the case. At the panel meeting the chair may request that the

marker present the evidence to the panel or it may be provided as documentary evidence

only. In either case the student will be present to hear or review the evidence from the

marker. The student will then be asked to present their case to the panel.

Once the panel has heard the evidence and asked for any further questions of clarification

the marker, the student and anyone accompanying them will be asked to leave the meeting.

The panel will then discuss the case and use the awarding body regulations guidelines for

plagiarism to inform their discussions and decisions. Normally, the student will be advised

of the panel decision verbally by the Chair on the day. The student will be informed in

writing of the decision and if appropriate, the penalty within five working days by the

Student Administration Manager. In complex situations the decision of the panel may be

delayed, however the Student Administration Manager will ensure that the student is

informed at each stage.

The Student Administration Manager (normally through the Programme Leader) will provide

the outcomes of any plagiarism panels to the relevant Board of Examiners.

Process for Suspected Cheating and Fabrication

All staff are responsible for reporting cases of suspected cheating or fabrication. Where

member of staff suspects such an incident they must complete the Academic Malpractice

Report and provide it to the Student Administration Manager within, wherever possible, 24

hours. The Student Administration Manager will in turn arrange for the HE Academic

Registrar to review the report. If the HE Academic Registrar agrees that there is a case to

answer the Student Administration Manager will convene an Academic Malpractice Panel

and inform the student of their right to attend, supplying them with the appropriate

documentation.

of 13

Individual Responsibility (Chartered Management Institute)

Under the Chartered Management Institute’s Whistleblowing Policy, it is the right of any

individual, where they feel it appropriate, to report directly any instance of

suspected malpractice to the professional body.

The panel will consist of:

From another curriculum area, an independent head of curriculum as chair

The HE Academic Registrar or nominee

An academic colleague from same curriculum area unrelated to the assessment or

second marker

The member of staff asserting malpractice or Achievements Officer where

appropriate

Student Administration Manager to minute the meeting and maintain records of all

decisions and outcomes

Documentation available to the panel

The Student Administration Manager is responsible for, in most cases through the

academic team, providing the following documentation to the academic malpractice

panel: (document requirements will differ dependant on the type of offence)

The Plagiarism Report Form (completed by both first and second marker) OR

The Academic Malpractice Report Form

And

The assessment brief(s) in question.

The students submission(s) (annotated)

The TurnItIn report

The Students EBS stage report (Student Assessment Details)

Evidence as to whether the student has attended a session regarding plagiarism and

whether a warning letter have previously been issued

The student’s attendance record

In both instances, additional documentation deemed relevant to the circumstance maybe

submitted by the member of staff asserting malpractice or by the student in question where

either party believes it may assist the panel in their deliberations. All documentation must

be provided to the Student Administration Manager for distribution to all parties prior to the

meeting.

Academic Malpractice Panel

of 13

External Reporting

Where it is the policy of an accrediting professional body and where a suspected case of

malpractice is identified, the Student Administration Manager, on receipt of an academic

malpractice report, will inform the relevant body. Accrediting bodies requiring to be

informed of malpractice are listed below.

Accrediting Body Contact details Procedure

Chartered

Management

Institute’s

http://www.managers.org.uk/

contact-us/contact-us-

education-providers

https://www.managers.org.uk/~/media/Angela-Media-

Library/New%20EP/PolicesProcedures/Procedures/C

MI%20malpractice%20and%20maladministration%20

procedure.pdf

The Academic Malpractice Panel will consider all suspected cases of academic malpractice

and has the following actions available to it:

If it is determined that there has been no offence, then the academic marker shall be

instructed to mark the work in question normally.

If it is determined that there is satisfactory evidence that an offence has been

committed one of the following must be considered.

i. Advisory letter issued (level 4 only)

ii. Cap a passing assessment to the minimum pass grade (examinations only).

iii. Scottish Qualification Authority Higher National programmes only; cap a

passing assessment to the minimum pass grade (examinations only) and limit

all graded units to a minimum pass grade.

iv. Where a student will still meet the minimum pass mark, exclude any work

within the submission identified as being subject to academic malpractice

practice and consider the remaining work without penalisation.

v. Award zero or equivalent for the assessment in question and permit its

reassessment, restricted to the minimum pass mark. The module in such

cases will not be capped.

vi. Award zero or equivalent for the assessment in question and permit its

reassessment. The module in such cases will be capped.

vii. Award zero or equivalent for the assessment in question, permit its

reassessment and restrict all modules at the same level to the minimum pass

mark.

Penalties

http://www.managers.org.uk/contact-us/contact-us-education-providers



https://www.managers.org.uk/~/media/Angela-Media-Library/New%20EP/PolicesProcedures/Procedures/CMI%20malpractice%20and%20maladministration%20procedure.pdf




of 13

Where the offence is deemed to be most severe, the panel should make an initial

recommendation for a penalty which could be applied and additionally:

viii. Refer to the College’s Stage 3 Disciplinary Panel for consideration of

exclusion

Where the College’s Stage 3 Disciplinary Panel does not exclude the student, the original

penalty should be applied and the student informed accordingly.

The penalties above become progressively more punitive and will be applied by panels with

consideration of:

any academic writing support a student has received

a student’s level of study

whether there have been any previous instances (including warnings for poor

academic practice)

the category concerned i.e. cheating, fabrication of results or plagiarism

the scope of the offence

Where a student is deemed to have committed an offence the Student Administration

Manger will send the student the appropriate warning letter confirming the decision and

advising the student of the consequences of any further offence.

The Panel Letter

For each offence the Academic Misconduct Panel will send the student a formal letter which

identifies what they have done wrong, and why it is wrong

points them towards appropriate sources of study skills help

reminds them of the need to discuss their work with academic staff if they are

uncertain about how to avoid subsequent allegations

warns of the serious consequences of subsequent offences, and spells out the

sanctions that will be applied

Appeal

Where a student has been found guilty of malpractice and is dissatisfied with the findings of

an Academic Malpractice Panel they have the right to, under the regulations set out in B9

Academic Appeals, appeal the decision.

of 13

Appendix A – Academic Malpractice Procedure Flowchart

Cheating /FabricationSuspected

Plagiarism

Suspected

Do marker and second marker

agree?

Student’s work is second marked and a report is created

Student’s work is

annotated to

identify the material

and source

Adjudication by the

HE Academic

Registrar

Has plagiarism been identified?

SAM informed and

sends reports to

student

Yes

Process Complete

Report created by

invigilator and sent

to Student

Administration

Manager (SAM)

No

Yes

No

Academic Malpractice

No case to answer

Student informed by first

marker

Guilty?

Yes

No

Academic

Malpractice

Panel

convened by

SAM

SAM advises

student of outcome

(In the case of

censure)

Board of Examiners

applies penalty

Potential appeal

Report reviewed by

HE Academic

Registrar

Does HE Academic Registrar agree?

Yes

SAM informs

student that there

is no case to

answer.

No

of 13

Appendix B – Terms of Reference Academic Malpractice Panel

Terms of Reference Academic Malpractice Panel

Chair Independent Head of Curriculum

Membership

HE Academic Registrar

Member of staff asserting malpractice or Achievements Officer whereappropriate.

Academic member of staff (from the same curriculum area but unrelatedto the assessment)

Minuting HE Student Administration Manager

Frequency As required

Summary of purpose

The Academic Malpractice Panel exists as an impartial body to judge cases of alleged academic malpractice, based upon the evidence brought before it.

The Academic Malpractice Panel will only make a decision on the malpractice itself and not take account of any other factors. Boards of Examiners will make the ultimate decision on the student’s progression or award, failure and reassessment.

Terms of Reference

To consider the evidence as presented.

To interview the student and appropriate employees as necessary.

To review the process taken in the identification, investigation andawarding of the penalty.

To review the record of penalties applied to ensure the penaltyapplied is consistent.

Where it is determined that the process of investigation, decisiontaken or penalty imposed is not in accordance with the Collegeregulations.


Appendix C - Poor Academic Practice Warning Letter

Ref:

Date:

Strictly Private and Confidential

Dear [student name],

Re: Warning of poor academic practice

I am writing to you regarding an assessment submission made by yourself on [submission date] for assessment [number] of [module name].

Following your meeting with the module tutor [tutor name] and myself [programme leader name], it has been decided that a formal warning letter should be issued to you to meet the requirements of the College’s regulations.

Poor academic practice will almost certainly negatively influence your degree classification and perhaps even influence whether you pass your degree. It should therefore not be treated lightly. Any further instances would potentially be considered as plagiarism resulting in an investigation and possible exclusion from College.

Although this is a formal warning and will be retained on your College record it will not in any way influence any academic decisions made by a board of examiners and will only be referred to if another such case should arise. Your transcript will not include any reference to this incident.

The programme team are here to support your progress and are able to provide additional assistance, I would highly recommend that you engage with this support. The College also has support available through the HE Learning Mentors who can be contacted on email: [email protected] or telephone: 01253 504494.

If you have any queries regarding this letter or wish to discuss the matter further please contact your Head of Curriculum [name].

Yours sincerely

Programme Leader

Page 13 of 13


of 15

This procedure specifies the function, membership and conduct of Boards of Examiner meetings held for taught award programmes validated by Blackpool and The Fylde College, Lancaster University, BTEC and SQA. Programmes awarded by the University of Salford or by Liverpool John Moores University follow the procedures outlined by the awarding body.

This procedure includes guidance relating to:

The role of Module and Programme Boards of Examiners

Membership of Module and Programme Boards of Examiners

Ratification of marks and decisions

Reassessment tracking and recording

Blackpool and The Fylde College operates a two-tiered approach in relation to board of examiner meetings where each tier has a defined purpose. The first tier, the Module Board of Examiners, is responsible for the ratification of module marks and for the recommendation of reassessment decisions to the Programme Board of Examiners. The second tier, the Programme Board of Examiners is responsible for making decisions on progression and the award of qualifications.

Curriculum areas oversee the operation of Boards of Examiners for modules and programmes of study in their areas. The standard membership for Module and Programme Boards of Examiners is defined within the Terms of Reference (see appendices B7-B and B7-D).

The Programme Boards of Examiners are chaired by a head of curriculum who is independent to the oversight of the programmes under consideration and will be minuted by the area secretary from the curriculum area in which the programme(s) reside. There is no requirement for an independent head of curriculum to chair a Module Boards of Examiners for any other provision.

Wherever possible a representative of the HE Directorate will attend all meetings in order to provide advice and guidance relating to the conduct of the board and on matters relating to academic regulation.

All Boards of Examiner meetings should:

operate in an objective and consistent manner in reaching decisions;

ensure the information presented and considered is dealt with in a sensitive andconfidential manner;

ensure that all decisions are correctly recorded and duly communicated in a timelymanner.

Boards of Examiner meetings are conducted utilising a standard agenda and supporting documentation.

Appendix 3

Constitution, terms of reference and additional guidelines for Examination Boards

Introduction

Membership and Conduct

of 15

Declarations of any conflict of interest should be minuted along with the action taken. The Chair may require the member of staff to withdraw whilst a particular student is presented or the minutes may record “no action necessary”.

For both Module and Programme Boards of Examiners, the board shall normally take all decisions. A Chairs action may be used exceptionally and must adhere to the following guidelines:

a) A Chairs action should be mandated in advance by the full Board wherever possible;b) A Chairs action must not be used as a way of circumventing the full Board;c) A Chairs action should be supplemented by wider consultation with identified key

members or all members of the Board;d) A Chairs action should be reported to all members so that they know what action has

been taken;e) The outcome of a Chairs action must be appended to the record of the full Board

meeting.

A record of all decisions, including the ratification of marks, taken by a Board or by a chair’s action shall be signed or confirmed in writing by:

a) the Chair of the Board;b) the External Examiner for the programme;c) the Programme Leader

Minutes should include a record of the decision made for every student along with any relevant additional information such as:

extent and outcomes of moderation

actions taken in response to Personal Mitigating Circumstances (PMC) /Interruptionof Study (IoS) decisions

details of students who will undertake reassessment including identification ofindividual assessments and associated deadlines and arrangements

implementation of penalties determined by an Academic Misconduct Panel

condonation of module results

where appropriate discussions relating to the scaling of module results and anyassociated action taken

notes of the scope of any Chairs action agreed by the Board

The minutes should be confirmed by the Chair of the Board and retained by the curriculum. Confirmed minutes should also be sent to the HE Directorate for archiving.

In the case of student withdrawal, Boards should consider all results of any assessments taken by students up to the point of the cancellation of their registration.

Conflict of Interest

Members of either a Programme or Module Board of Examiners meeting must not act in

any manner in which they have an academic or personal interest and the College’s

Information Security Policy (2010) should be observed where staff have access to

assessment results and exam board minutes.

of 15

No student may be a member of an examination board, or of any subsidiary examination

committee appointed by it, or attend any examiners’ meeting other than as a candidate for

assessment. If, however, a person who is otherwise qualified to be an examiner for a

course, such as a member of staff or an approved external examiner, is a student because

they are registered on another course either within the College or in another institution of

higher education, that shall not in itself disqualify that person from carrying out normal

examining commitments unless there should be a conflict of interests. Where there is any

unavoidable potential clash of interests the procedures below must be followed.

1. Any examiner who is aware of any potential conflict of interest (for example being

related to, or a close friend of, any student registered on the degree programme for

which that person is an examiner) must declare their interest as soon as the

possibility arises and must not be the sole examiner for the student concerned on

any individual contributory module.

2. Any examiner who has a potential conflict of interests as described above, must

draw this to the chair(s) of the appropriate examination board(s) and the connection

must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting, and the person involved shall not

take any part in any discussion covering the student(s) concerned; but may, at the

discretion of the chairperson, be permitted to remain in attendance for the duration of

the discussion.

Module Board of Examiners

Each module will be presented by the lead module tutor (or the Programme Leader if the

Lead Module Tutor is not in attendance at the meeting) using the College’s Module Review

proforma. The presentation should comprise of:

An overview of the approach taken in moderation of module assessments (both prior

to the distribution of the assessment and of an appropriate sample of marked work)

and any issues arising through these processes;

Consideration of scaling where appropriate in accordance with the regulations of the

awarding body;

Identification requiring remedial work required for individual students, including those

requiring reassessment or deadline extensions in the case of approved Personal

Mitigating Circumstances.

The Module Board of Examiners should have available to them:

Terms of reference;

A customised agenda utilising the standard template clearly identifying the

programmes and modules under consideration within the meeting;

Details of approved or pending applications for Personal Mitigating Circumstances;

Details of approved or pending applications for Interruption of Study;

Presentation of Results

of 15

The Module Assessment Matrix report for each module under consideration.

Documentation Requirements

Module board of examiner meetings will have available to them:

The HE Taught Award Regulations Part A.

B7: Board of Examiners.

B1: Personal Mitigating Circumstances and Interruption of Study.

Where appropriate the awarding body regulations.

EBS Module Matrix Reports – for each module being considered.

Module Report – for each module being considered.

Superordinate Module Board of Examiners

Superordinate Module Boards of Examiners are convened by exception when the

circumstances of the students presented to the meeting are as such that any reassessment

opportunity they are provided with would disadvantage them in terms of timeliness of

reassessment and/or separation from the delivery of the module content.

Where the programme team identify the potential need for a Superordinate Module Board

of Examiners, confirmation to convene a meeting must be granted by the Director of HE

and confirmed through email.

Superordinate Module Boards of Examiners follow the same format as a Module Board of

Examiners (B7.4.1) with the exception of, as identified in the terms of reference, members

of the board do not recommend reassessment to a Programme Board of Examiners but

confirm reassessment in the meeting itself.

Programme Board of Examiners

Each programme will be presented by the Programme Leader (or a Curriculum Leader or Curriculum Manager from the curriculum if the Programme Leader is not in attendance at the meeting). The presentation should comprise of:

An overview of the approach taken in moderation of module assessments (both prior

to the distribution of the assessment and of an appropriate sample of marked work)

and any issues arising through these processes;

The details of any scaling actions considered or applied by a preceding Module

Board of Examiners;

The presentation of overall module results for each student. These should be read

in the order presented within the report and should comprise of only the percentage

or aggregation score awarded for each module.

o Where remedial action is required, the Programme Leader should present the

action agreed at the Module Board of Examiners.

The Programme Board of Examiners should have available to them:

of 15

Terms of reference

A customised agenda utilising the standard template, clearly identifying the

programmes and programmes under consideration within the meeting;

Details of approved or pending applications for Personal Mitigating Circumstances;

Details of approved or pending applications for Interruption of Study;

The Programme Assessment Matrix report for each module under consideration.

The Module Assessment Matrix report for each module considered (if required)

The minutes of preceding meetings of the Module Board of Examiners.

Documentation Requirements

Programme board of examiner meetings will have available to them:

The HE Taught Award Regulations Part A.

B7: Board of Examiners.

B1: Personal Mitigating Circumstances and Interruption of Study.

Where appropriate the awarding body regulations.

EBS Programme Matrix Reports – for each programme being considered.

Minutes from the preceding module board of examiner meetings.

Confidentiality7.5

CONFIDENTIALITY

Students should be aware that all assessment results are to be considered as provisional

until ratified by a meeting of the Programme Board of Examiners and for the award of a

Lancaster University programme considered as provisional until ratified by Senate at the

University. To ensure no breach of the Data Protection Act 1998, programmes teams need

to agree and implement a secure method of communication to students, for example:

• Secure post (recorded delivery)

• Face to face

• Prior agreed telephone communication (confirm student identity with student

number/address etc.)

It should be noted that only the College’s email system (to and from) can be used to

communicate the outcomes of Programme or Module Board of Examiner meetings, external

e-mail systems (Gmail/Yahoo etc.) are not a secure method of communication.

Board of Examiners Minutes Process

The management of board of examiners meeting minutes is a stage/level process; minutes will therefore not be taken to meetings in the subsequent year. The process comprises of three distinct parts: module, programme and reassessment meetings.

The process originates at curriculum area module board of examiner meetings (usually two per year) the minutes of which are taken to the subsequent curriculum area programme board of examiners meetings.

of 15

All actions relating to module board of examiners meetings should be closed in the relevant meeting minutes up to the date at which the programme board of examiners meeting is held. After the programme board of examiners meeting actions from the module board of examiners should be carried forward to and closed in the programme board of examiners minutes and an update to the module board of examiners minutes should also be performed.

Where reassessment has occurred, students will be presented to the College Reassessment Board of Examiners. The minutes of all curriculum area programme board of examiners meetings will be made available to the board, for information. These minutes will be confirmed to the chair as having been checked by the relevant curriculum area for accuracy prior to the meeting. Matters arising of any minutes, due to the nature of the board, will form the content of the agenda and as such will be dealt with during the presentation of results.

Any actions resulting from the business of the reassessment board of examiners are required to be closed within the minutes of the meeting, actions will therefore not be carried forward to the next academic year.

of 15

APPENDIX A – BOARD OF EXAMINERS STRUCTURE AND OVERVIEW

End of Semester Module Board of Examiners

•Typically two boards per year at the end of each semester (asrequired for Superordinate module boards of examiners)

•Ratification of assessment and module marks (ensuringaccuracy)

•Consideration of scaling where applicalble/appropriate

•Consideration of PMC panel outcomes and adjusted deadlines

•Reassessment recommendations made to the ProgrammeBoard of Examiners except in the case of Superordinate boardswere reassessment decisions are made at the module board

•Chair:

•Lancaster, BTEC, SQA and LJMU: Head of Curriculum(Independant for Superordinate meetings)

•Independent representation

•Minuting: Curriculum Secretary

End of Stage and Reassessment Programme Board of Examiners

•Recommendations for progression and award (includingapplication of associated regulations)

•Reassessment decisions confirmed

•External Examiner and ProgrammeConsultant/Link Tutorpresent

•Chair

•Lancaster, BTEC and SQA: Independent Head of Curriculum

•Independent representation

•Ex officio: Lancaster University Registrar or nominee

•Minuting: Curriculum Secretary

of 15

APPENDIX B TERMS OF REFERENCE: MODULE

Module Board of Examiners - Terms of reference

Chair Head of Curriculum

Ex-officio Membership Deputy Principal

Vice Principal Higher Education and Student Enhancement

Director of Quality and Standards

Head of Higher Education

Higher Education Academic Registrar (Independent Member)

Membership Programme Leader

All internal examiners

External Examiner (invited but not required)

Programme Consultant ( PC invited but not required)

Minuting Curriculum Area Secretary

Frequency Normally two per academic year

Summary of purpose To consider the assessment results of individual modules and to ratify

the overall module result awarded to each student under consideration

and where necessary to make recommendations for reassessment to

the Programme Board of Examiners. To maintain oversight of module

operation including marking and moderation, and external stakeholder

feedback on assessment.

Terms of Reference To ensure that the examination and assessment of students is

conducted in accordance with the regulations and procedures of the

College and the Awarding Body

To consider the extent and outcomes of module moderation.

To consider the achievement profiles of individual modules

To consider the claims for personal mitigating circumstances

through the agreed College protocol and to take appropriate

decisions in the light of these circumstances

To formally recommend reassessment opportunities to the

Programme Board of Examiners in accordance with the regulations

and procedures of the College and the Awarding Body

To receive and consider the recommendations of the Independent

Member on matters relating to process and consistency in

institutional/awarding body procedures and regulations

of 15

APPENDIX C – TERMS OF REFERENCE: SUPERORDINATE MODULE

Superordinate Module Board of Examiners - Terms of reference

Chair Independent Head of Curriculum








External Examiner

Programme Consultant

Minuting Curriculum Secretary




and where necessary to make recommendations for reassessment. To

maintain oversight of module operation including marking and

moderation, student feedback and external stakeholder feedback on

assessment.




To consider the extent and outcomes of module moderation.

To consider the achievement profiles of individual modules




To formally recommend reassessment opportunities in accordance

with the regulations and procedures of the College and the Awarding

Body




of 15

APPENDIX D – TERMS OF REFERENCE: PROGRAMME

Programme Board of Examiners - Terms of reference

Chair Independent Head of School








External Examiner

Programme Consultant / Link Tutor

Minuting Curriculum Area Secretary

Frequency Normally one per academic year



and secure recommendations for reassessment where necessary. To

maintain oversight of programme operation including marking and

moderation and external stakeholder feedback on assessment.




To consider comments for the external examiner in relation to the

extent and outcomes of moderation within the programme

To formally consider and make recommendations on the grades

awarded to students for each module of their programme

To formally consider reassessment arrangements where applicable

in light of any decisions taken by preceding meetings of Module

Boards of Examiners




To receive and action the recommendations of the External

Examiner/External Verifier/ Programme Consultant

To nominate students for special awards and prizes where available




To ratify recommendations made for each student in relation to

progression, award or continuation as appropriate.

of 15

APPENDIX E – TERMS OF REFERENCE: REASSESSMENT

Reassessment Programme Board of Examiners - Terms of reference

Chair Head of Higher Education Development








External Examiner (invited but not required)

Programme Consultant / Link Tutor (invited but not required)

Minuting HE Directorate Development Co-ordinator

Frequency Normally one per academic year



and secure recommendations for reassessment where necessary. To

maintain oversight of programme operation including marking and

moderation and external stakeholder feedback on assessment.




To consider comments for the external examiner in relation to the

extent and outcomes of moderation within the programme

To formally consider and make recommendations on the grades

awarded to students for each module of their programme




To receive and action the recommendations of the External

Examiner/External Verifier/Programme Consultant

To nominate students for special awards and prizes where available




To ratify recommendations made for each student in relation to

progression, award or continuation as appropriate.

of 15

APPENDIX F BOARD OF EXAMINER MINUTES PROCESS

Board of Examiner (BoX) Minutes Process

Curriculum Area


Curriculum Area


College


(Reassessment)


Module Board of Examiner Minutes

Chairs Actions

Chairs Action Update



Minutes

Chairs Actions


Minutes of theprevious meeting


(Reassessment Board)

Programme Board of Examiners (RA Board) Minutes

Chairs Actions


Minutes taken for information

Appendix 4

Administration of Examinations

1. Scope and purpose of policy

1.1. This policy applies to all staff involved in the planning, organisation andmanagement of Higher Education examinations to ensure they are conducted efficiently, in a timely manner and in the best interest of students whilst maintaining security of all examination resources and compliance with awarding body regulations.

1.2. The policy encompasses all summative prescribed and non-prescribed Higher Education examinations conducted by the College in controlled conditions; to include university partners, professional bodies, awarding bodies and distance learning provisions.

Definition:Summative assessments are normally used to evaluate student learning at the end of an instructional period by comparing it to a standard or benchmark – typically at the end of a project, course, semester or programme.

2. Policy Statement

2.1. Blackpool and The Fylde College is committed to ensuring that every student isgiven equal opportunities whilst undertaking summative examinations as part of their programme of learning.

2.2. To ensure and maintain the integrity and security of examinations the Collegeadheres to the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) regulations for Higher Education examinations. This policy is part of a wider exams practice to ensure robustness in managing exams procedures and processes across the whole College.

2.3. For class based assessments in controlled conditions, the Controlled Assessment policy and associated procedure must be followed.

3. Academic Appeals and Malpractice

3.1. Blackpool and The Fylde College’s policy and procedure on academic appeals and malpractice is contained within the College’s HE Taught Award Regulations.

4. Accountability

4.1. Heads of School:Ensuring compliance with the policy and associated procedure in their curriculum areas.

4.2. Head of Student Administration and Achievements and Student Administration Manager:Ensure that the policy and procedure is adhered to, and to oversee and manage the administration and organisation of examinations.

5. Linked Policies and Procedures

Blackpool and The Fylde College HE Exams ProcedureBlackpool and The Fylde College HE Award Taught Regulations (Part A)B1 - Personal Mitigating Circumstances ProcedureB6 - Assessment and Feedback ProcedureB3 - Academic Malpractice ProcedureB9 - Academic Appeals ProcedureControlled Assessment PolicyControlled Assessment Procedure

1. Scope and purpose of the procedure

This procedure is to ensure that the planning, organisation and management of HigherEducation Examinations is conducted efficiently, in a timely manner and in the bestinterest of students whilst maintaining security of all examination resources andcompliance with Awarding Body Regulations.

The processes and responsibilities outlined in this procedure relate to the HEExaminations Policy which must be adhered to.

2. Procedure statement

2.1. TimescalesCurriculum teams are to liaise with and provide the required information to theachievements Team by the timescales below:

Examination Dates /Details to Achievements

Examination Paper & HE Exam Checklist to Achievements

Semester One Exams 30th September By 3rd Week in October

Semester Two Exams 30th September By 3rd Week in January

For examinations that take place outside of the main semester one/two timeframe, papers MUSTbe submitted to the Achievements team at least SIX weeks before the examination date

A “Notification of HE Examinations to Achievements” form must be completed and submitted to Achievements. Any additions or changes to examinations are to be sent to Achievements on a monthly basis.

Examination papers are to be emailed to the Achievements Team at [email protected]. The completed Checklist for HE Examinations should accompany the examination paper, and the examination paper must be in the final format ready for distribution to the students.

2.2. Examination Papers and Security

Academic staff writing examination questions must:

In liaison with Programme Leaders check against papers within the last three yearsto ensure there are no duplicate and/or similar questionsArrange for an Academic Colleague within their School to internally verify theexamination paper

Ensure the paper meets the requirements of the Awarding Body in regard to externalverification prior to sending to the Achievements team and distribution to studentsUpon approval, send the examination paper to Achievements along with thecompleted Checklist for HE Examination Papers in accordance with deadline datesAll examination papers are in the required standard format including the front sheet,templates can be downloaded from SharePoint in the following location:https://athena.blackpool.ac.uk/sites/HE/HEDocuments/Forms/AllItems.aspxIt is strongly advisable for Module Tutors writing examinations to include a period ofreading time at the start of the examination

Upon receipt, the appropriate number of copies will be printed under secure conditions and stored in a place of high security with access strictly controlled to the Achievements Team.

Examination question papers will not be opened until ten minutes before the appointed start time of the examination by the invigilator in the presence of the students. Any papers removed for students sitting in alternative venues will be put into sealed envelopes correctly marked with the examination and student details and the original pack will be resealed and will remain under strict security until the commencement of the examination.

At the end of the examination, invigilators will ensure the secure transit of all examination material to the Achievements Office and they will be stored securely. Programme Leaders MUST collect these within 24 hours of the examination for marking.

2.3. Examination Access Arrangements and Legislative Requirements

Examination Access Arrangements allow students who are unable to sit formal examinations under usual examination conditions as a result of a disability or other conditions, to have the same opportunities through differing ways to demonstrate their skills and abilities, as other students. This is by minimising the impact of a student’s disability or other conditions on performance in assessment through adjustments to the examination arrangements; this enables students to demonstrate their knowledge and competence without changing the demands or validity of the assessment. An access arrangement which meets the needs of a student with disabilities constitutes a ‘reasonable adjustment’, representing different ways in ensuring equality in assessment.

Appropriate documentation is required as supporting evidence of a disability, specific learning difficulty, mental health difficulty or other condition for which a student requests individual arrangements. The assessment by the relevant professional should indicate the ways and degree to which the condition might affect performance in examinations. The Professional assessment evidence includes; educational psychologist reports and approved assessments carried out by specialist’s qualified teachers.

What are the timeframes?All arrangements are required to be processed and approved before an examination or assessment, and approvals must be in place six weeks prior to the examination date. The only exception to this is where the student’s condition arises from a sudden accident or illness.

Awarding Bodies may have application deadlines for examination access/reasonable adjustment arrangements. Contact the Achievements team for clarification of application dates.

Programme Leaders are to liaise with the HE Access Arrangements Team to ensure student assessments and/or professional diagnostic evidence is in place to prevent the student being unfairly disadvantaged.

2.4. How Examinations are Conducted

Where required the Achievements Team will book examination rooms and will ensure that Campus Services are notified of exact requirements so that the rooms can be set out accordingly. Rooms will be appropriate for the type of examination and number of students. The Achievements Team will need access to the examination room an hour prior to the examination starting to ensure that rooms are set up and the appropriate signage is displayed within the room.

A seating plan will be posted outside of the examination room at least thirty minutes prior to the scheduled start time of the examination to enable each student to familiarise themselves with their seating position before entering the room.

Each student will have a desk card placed at their allocated examination desk containing their student details and the paper reference for the examination they are sitting.

Tutors must be present at the start of the examination in the event of there being a query and they must supply a contact number on which they can be contacted for the duration of the examination.

To ensure and maintain the integrity and security of examinations once they are underway the College adheres to JCQ Regulations for Higher Education Examinations and students are required to observe and adhere to the following:

Students are required to provide their photographic student ID to enable theinvigilator to verify their identityStudents’ are not permitted to use mobile phones and/or electronic devices at anytimes and these must be switched off and placed at the front of the examination roomStudents’ personal belongings must be placed at the front of theexamination room but remain their own responsibility and the College accepts noliability for their loss or damage

Any students who have been found to cheat during the examination are dealt with in accordance with Blackpool and The Fylde College or Awarding Body Regulations as appropriate.

Students will be permitted to enter the examination room up to half an hour after the start of the examination but will only be permitted the time remaining.

Students will not be allowed to leave the examination room in the first thirty minutes after the published starting time. Once they have left they will not be allowed to return.

No students will be allowed to leave the examination room during the last ten minutes of the examination.

2.5. Special Consideration

Should a student be too ill to sit an examination, suffer bereavement or other trauma on the day of the examination then it is the student’s responsibility to notify the College. They must submit a Personal Mitigating Circumstance Application at the earliest opportunity with the appropriate evidence, for example a letter from their doctor, within 10 working days of the examination to the Student Administration Manager.

Should a student be taken ill during the examination then they must inform the Invigilator so that a report can be made. The student must submit a Personal Mitigating Circumstance Application at the earliest opportunity with the appropriate evidence, for example a letter from their doctor within 10 working days of the examination to the Student Administration Manager. A copy of the Invigilator report is also to be sent to the Student Administration Manager to support the application.

2.6. Invigilators

Independent invigilators will be used for all final examinations with recruitment and training the responsibility of the Student Administration Manager.

The number of invigilators allocated to each examination will be decided by the Student Administration Manager based upon the number of students and Awarding Body Regulations.

Upon appointment, invigilators are required to successfully undergo training prior to undertaking their role.

Where appropriate for in class assessments and tests the Controlled Assessment Policy and Procedure must be followed.

3. Academic Appeals & Academic Malpractice

Blackpool and The Fylde College has published a separate procedures contained in theCollege’s HE Taught Award Regulations which is available to all students.

4. Accountability

Heads of SchoolEnsuring compliance with this policy in their curriculum area.

Curriculum Managers, Curriculum Leaders and Programme LeadersResponsible for liaising with Achievements and providing the examination details,together with the submission of the ‘Notification of HE Examinations’ form, ExaminationPaper, and ‘HE Exams Checklist’ form.

Head of Student Administration and AchievementsEnsure that this policy and procedure is adhered to.

Student Administration ManagerTo oversee and manage the administration and organisation of examinations.

StudentsAre responsible for complying with College Policy, and Awarding Body Regulations.

of 9

Introduction

This section of the regulations does not relate to the delivery of the University of Salford or Liverpool John Moores University degrees, you may access their regulations here:



B9: Academic Appeals has been produced following consideration of the Quality Assurance Agency’s Quality Code Chapter B9: Academic Appeals and Student Complaints.

An academic appeal differs from a complaint and therefore appeals and complaints

are considered under different procedures. A complaint is defined as a formal

expression of dissatisfaction made by either a single student or a group of students

about the provision of their programme of study or related academic service or

facility or any other service provided by the College and therefore the Appeals

Procedure cannot be used to bring complaints

Scope

The purpose of this procedure is to establish the facts and come to a reasonable

and just resolution, which is both relevant and proportionate.

A prima facie case for appeal will be deemed to exist if there is evidence of one or

more of:

a material administrative error or irregularity in conduct of assessment which

has affected the student’s results and/or classification

the production of significant new evidence concerning personal mitigating

circumstances

prejudice or bias on the part of one or more of the examiners

For all cases, evidence should not have been available to the relevant board of

examiners or panel and will therefore not have influenced an outcome.

Appendix 5

Review and appeals and challenges




of 9

Appeals should be received by the HE Academic Registrar on the College

Academic Appeals Pro-forma within 15 working days of a student being notified in

writing of the decision against which they wish to appeal. Submissions can either be

emailed to [email protected] or handed to any campus reception area.

Stage 1 - Informal Stage

The HE Academic Registrar or nominee will on receipt of an appeal arrange for a

meeting between the student and the HE Academic Registrar to discuss the

student’s circumstances. Stage 1, to better support a student, may occur virtually,

that is to say that the meeting may not be in person e.g. by telephone or email and

will wherever possible occur within 15 working days from the receipt of an appeal.

Where this is not possible the student will be informed in writing.

As a consequence of this meeting one of the following outcomes must be agreed.

The student is content not to continue with their appeal.

Proceed to the formal stage

Students will in all cases be informed of the outcome of the informal stage in writing.

Any student wishing to proceed their appeal to Stage 2 should inform the Student

Administration Manager in writing within 10 working days of receiving the outcome

letter containing the decision of Stage 1.

Stage 2 - Formal Stage

Where a student wishes to continue with their appeal the HE Student Administration

Manager will convene an Appeal Panel to hear the formal stage of the appeal.

Appeals Panel

To avoid any conflict of interest, the chair of any appeals panel must not have been

party to any preceding decision that may have initiated the appeal.

The Panel will consist of:

Head of Higher Education (Chair)


Independent Head of curriculum

Student Representative

Academic tutor (independent of the Curriculum Area in question)

Appeals Process


Documentation available to the Panel

The Student Administration Manager is responsible for providing the following

documentation to the appeal panel:

Appeal Pro-forma

Student assessment detail report

Additional documentation deemed relevant to the circumstance may be submitted

by a member of staff or by the student in question where either party believes it may

assist the panel in their deliberations. All documentation must be provided to the

Student Administration Manager for distribution to all parties prior to the meeting.

Panel Process

Students have a right to be accompanied at the Stage 2 Academic Appeal Panel;

any person accompanying a student is present to support a student and as such

should not contribute to the meeting unless at the behest of the student and only

when invited to do so by the Chair. There is no right for a student to have legal

representation at an Academic Appeals Panel.

The timing of the panel will be arranged to try to ensure the student can attend. If

the student does not attend the Academic Appeals Panel, the Panel may continue

to consider the appeal in the student’s absence. The Panel may, if it wishes,

adjourn the meeting if reasonable grounds for non-attendance have been provided

(e.g. sickness absence).

The Student Administration Manager will convene the appeal panel. The panel will

receive copies of the appeal pro-forma and student assessment detail report

alongside any other evidence submitted in relation to the appeal. All reports

available to the panel must also be made available to the student.

A short meeting will take place before the panel meeting with panel members only

to familiarise members with the case. The student and academic colleagues will

then be asked to join the meeting to present their case to the panel.

Once the panel has heard the evidence and asked for any further questions of

clarification, the student, academic colleagues and anyone accompanying them will

be asked to leave the meeting. The panel will then discuss the case and use the

awarding body regulations guidelines for appeal to inform their discussions and

decisions. Once a decision has been reached, the student and academic

colleagues will be invited to re-join the meeting.

Normally, the student and academic colleagues will be advised of the panel

decision verbally by the Chair on the day.

Page 6 of 9

of 9

Possible Outcomes

To uphold the appeal based on the evidence presented and to amend the

record of the student accordingly.

Or

To partially uphold the appeal based on the evidence presented and to

amend the record of the student accordingly.

Or

To dismiss the appeal.

The HE Student Administration Manager is responsible for ensuring that the student

is informed in writing of the decision of the Appeals Panel and the reasons for the

decision, normally within 10 working days of the Appeal Panel being held. The

letter, where appropriate, will advise the student of their right to refer the matter if

they are unsatisfied and will describe the means to do so.

Once all internal procedures have been exhausted, which for Lancaster University

students may include the right to refer the appeal to the University, if the student is

still not satisfied they have the right to take the case to the Office of the Independent

Adjudicator (OIA) for Higher Education, for further review.

The application to the OIA must be made within 12 months of the issue of the

Completion of Procedures letter. Information about the OIA and its processes can

be found at http://www.oiahe.org.uk/

Adjudication

of 9

Appendix A – Appeals Process

Student receives result

Progress appeal?

Yes

Appeal received?

Yes

No

No

Stage 1


discusses appeal with

student

Stage 2

Panel Convened

No

Yes

Complete

Student informed of the

decision by letter

Student

contests decision No

Student must reply to

outcome letter within 10

days

No action required

Lancaster student and

appeal related to award?

Student referred

to Lancaster

Yes

10 working days to

convene meeting

15 working days in which to

submit appeal

Student is issued with an

outcome letter

Student informed of

decision within

10 working days

Student referred

to OIA

Student replies to outcome

letter

of 9

Appendix-B – Terms of Reference Academic Appeals Panel

Terms of Reference Academic Appeals Panel

Chair Head of Higher Education

Vice Principal Higher Education and Student Engagement

Membership

Head of Higher Education (when not chair)


Independent Head of curriculum

Student representative

Academic tutor (independent of the Curriculum Area in question)

Appeal panels will be considered quorate only when all the above members are in attendance

Minuting HE Student Administration Manager


Summary of purpose

Responsible to HE Academic Standard & Development Committee; to insure the fairness and reliability of all judgments of formal decisions relating to the outcomes of the College’s assessments and to where appropriate to make recommendations of the remedial action to be taken by the College in the light of appeals considered. To produce an annual report to the Academic Standards and Development Committee. To adjudicate on matters relating to Personal Mitigating Circumstances, the admissions process of the College and the decisions made by the Academic Malpractice Panel.

Terms of Reference

Under agreed College procedures, to provide an opportunity to anyindividual to appeal against a final decision of an academic bodycharged with making decisions on student progression, assessment andawards.

Under agreed College procedures, the Chair of the Panel will be able tosubstitute a decision on behalf of the College.

To monitor the outcomes of individual cases.

To report on trends and issues, including any need for policy changearising from consideration of an individual case or cases.

To keep under review the above procedures, and from time to time tomake recommendations on improvements.

To make judgements on the relevance of evidence that was notsubmitted in accordance with the deadline for Personal MitigatingCircumstances (PMC) applications.

To make judgements and adjudicate on decisions made by theAcademic Malpractice Panel.


Appendix 6

Modules Approved for Percentage Marking

Construction

FD in Construction Management and Sustainable Development

(CT4MD011) Practical Mathematics in Quantity and Land Surveying

Assessment 1: Written Exam Assessment 3: Coursework

Rationale: Contain mathematical calculations only

Computing

FdSc. Network Engineering, Security and Systems Administration

CMP451 Network Principles 20 credits

Assessment 1: Examination Assessment 4: Examination

Rationale: Online multiple choice assessments that only provides a percentage outcome.

CMP452 Routing Concepts and Protocols 20 credits

Assessment 3: Examination

Rational: Online multiple choice assessments that only provides a percentage outcome.

CMP453 LAN Switching and Wireless 20 credits



CMP554 Enterprise Network Technologies 20 credits



CMP453 LAN Technologies 20 credits Assessment 2: Practical

Rationale: Timed practical activities assess a set of core competencies that are quantifiable in nature and offer a greater level of precision in assessing the level of achievement.



CMP554 Enterprise Network Technologies 20 credits

Assessment 2: Practical




CMP555 Virtualisation and Cloud Computing 20 Credits

Assessment 1: Practical


FdSc. Software Engineering and Game Development

CMP461 Maths and Physics for Gameplay

Assessment 1: Coursework Assessment 2: Coursework Assessment 3: Written Exam

Rationale: These assessments are largely calculation based and quantifiable. The nature of the subject area means that more accurate measurement of performance for students can be attained using this method.

Engineering and Science

FD Automotive Engineering and Technology

(EA3MD001) Automotive Mathematics 15 Credits


Rationale: Pure Mathematics based assessment with no descriptive questions or answers required.

FD Autosport Engineering & Technology With Foundation Year

(EA3MD001) Automotive Mathematics



BENG Automotive Engineering

(EA6MD042) Mathematics



BENG (Ord) Mechatronics & Mechanical Production Engineering

(ET5MD108) Mathematics 15 Credits



(ET5MD111) Further Mathematics 15 Credits



FD Aerospace Engineering

(ET4MD176) Mechanical Engineering Science 20 Credits

Assessment 2: Written Exam

Rationale: The examination for Mechanical Engineering Science is based on discrete questions, almost all of which are analytical, and all of which are quantifiable. A few questions call for short descriptive answers, and these are all unambiguously graded using discrete marks (e.g. one mark for each advantage, and one for each disadvantage of a mechanical system). This examination would be most suitably graded as a percentage.

(ET4MD177) Electrical and Electronic Engineering Science 20 Credits


Rationale: The examination for Electrical and Electronic Engineering Science is almost entirely analytical. The minority of ‘written’ questions typically require short sentence answers with one or two marks unambiguously assigned for correct responses (e.g. “With regards to electronic systems, briefly describe what is meant by Linearity”) thus percentage grading is most suitable.

(ET4MD178) Analytical Methods for Engineers 20 Credits


Rationale: The examination for Analytical Methods for Engineers is entirely mathematical (e.g. vectors, matrices, calculus and differential equations) and thus entirely quantifiable as discrete marks (e.g. marks out of 100). This examination would be most suitably graded as a percentage.

(ET5MD182) Further Engineering Science 20 Credits


Rationale: The examination for Further Engineering Science is entirely quantifiable with discrete marks. The paper is split broadly into further mechanical principles and further electrical principles, both of which are clearly graded using discrete marks (e.g. marks out of 100). This examination would be most suitably graded as a percentage.

(ET5MD185) Aircraft Propulsion 20 Credits


Rationale:This examination for Aircraft Propulsion demands both written (comprehension) and analytical(calculation) questions. Where written questions are given, the mark scheme unambiguously assigns marks to each acceptable key point. Quality of grammar or prose gains no additional marks, leaving no room for subjective marks. Where analytical questions are given, the marks are also unambiguously assigned (e.g. one mark for recalling correct formula, one mark for calculation, one mark for correct answer, one mark for correct units used). This examination would be most suitably graded as a percentage.

(ET5MD186) Aerodynamic Principles and Aircraft Design 20 Credits


Rationale: The Aerodynamic Principles and Aircraft Design examination consists mostly of analytical questions. Some questions call for short descriptive answers with just one or two marks for description. Some questions call for a diagram (e.g. “Sketch the streamlines around a cambered airfoil with positive angle of attack”). For questions with diagrams, marks are unambiguously awarded for each key point demonstrated (e.g. one mark for showing a stagnation point, one mark for showing a downwash at the trailing edge). This examination would be most suitably graded as a percentage.

FD Nuclear Engineering

(ET4MD182) Mechanical Engineering Science 20 Credits


Rationale: Similar to the FD Aerospace Engineering module (ET5MD176), the examination for Mechanical Engineering Science is based on discrete questions, almost all of which are analytical, and all of which are quantifiable. A few questions call for short descriptive answers, and these are all unambiguously graded using discrete marks (e.g. one mark for each advantage, and one for each disadvantage of a mechanical system). This examination would be most suitably graded as a percentage.

(ET4MD184) Analytical Methods for Engineers 20 Credits


Rationale: Similar to the FD Aerospace Engineering module (ET4MD178), the examination for Analytical Methods for Engineers is entirely mathematical (e.g. vectors, matrices, calculus and differential equations) and thus entirely quantifiable as discrete marks (e.g. marks out of 100). This examination would be most suitably graded as a percentage.

(ET4MD185) Electrical and Electronic Engineering Science 20 Credits


Rationale: Similar to the FD Aerospace Engineering module (ET4MD177), the examination for Electrical and Electronic Engineering Science is almost entirely analytical. The minority of ‘written’ questions typically require short sentence answers with one or two marks unambiguously assigned for correct responses (e.g. “With regards to electronic systems, briefly describe what is meant by Linearity”) thus percentage grading is most suitable.

(ET5MD188) Further Engineering Science 20 Credits


Rationale: Similar to the FD Aerospace Engineering module (ET5MD182), theexamination for Further Engineering Science is entirely quantifiable with discrete marks. The paper is split broadly into further mechanical principles and further electrical principles, both of which are clearly graded using discrete marks (e.g. marks out of 100). This examination would be most suitably graded as a percentage.

(ET5MD191) Nuclear Physics 20 Credits


Rationale: The examination for Nuclear Physics is expected to be sat in Semester 2 2017/2018. The majority of questions will be analytical in nature and assigned unambiguous marks (e.g. for recall of formula, for calculations, for answer and for correct units). Where descriptive answers are required, the marks will be awarded unambiguously for hitting on the key points. Thus this examination would be most suitably graded as a percentage

FD Marine Biology And Coastal Zone Management

AI4MD024 Marine Biology

Assessment 1 Assessment 3

Rationale: High level of quantitative data analysis linked to the analysis of factors that affect the marine ecosystem such as rates of photosynthesis.

AI5MD122 Marine Invertebrate

Assessment 2

Rationale: High level of quantitative data analysis linked to the analysis of invertebrate distribution, behaviour or other relevant factor

AI5MD123 Fish Biology

Assessment 2

Rationale: High level of quantitative data analysis in assessment linked to the module content

FD Human Biosciences

ES4MD002 Human Anatomy and Physiology

Assessment 1

Rationale: Specific identification of anatomical and physiological features required throughout.

ES4MD005 Laboratory Skills

Assessment 2

Rationale: High level of quantitative data analysis in assessment linked to the performance of specific laboratory techniques.

ES5MD001 BIOCHEMISTRY

Assessment 1

Rationale: High level of quantitative data analysis in assessment alongside specific identification of formulae for key biological molecules

ES5MD002 Introduction to Human Health and Disease

Assessment 2

Rationale: High level of quantitative data analysis in assessment linked to health statistics.

ES6MD003 DRUGS AND DISEASE

Assessment 1

Rationale: Extensive data analysis throughout

Maritime Operations

FD Marine Engineering

MH4MD106 (12/13) Mathematics for Engineering Credits: 15

Assessment 1: Coursework

Rationale: A high element of mathematics within this assessment

MH4MD107 (12/13) Marine Management Credits: 10

Assessment 3: Practical Exam

Rationale: Multiple choice questions within assessment

MH4MD108 (12/14) Ship Stability and Construction Credits: 15

Assessment 3: Coursework Assessment 4: Practical Exam


MH4MD109 (12/13) Engineering Mechanics Credits: 10

Assessment 1: Coursework Assessment 2: Coursework Assessment 3: Coursework Assessment 4: Practical Exam


MH5MD061 (13/14) Mechanical Principles Credits: 15

Assessment 1: Coursework Assessment 2: Coursework Assessment 3: Coursework Assessment 4: Written Exam


MH5MD067 (13/14) Further Mathematics Credits: 10

