assessment regulations for postgraduate awards...postgraduate certificate (pg cert) 2010/11...

Assessment Regulations for Postgraduate Awards: Master of Arts (MA) Master of Science (MSc) Postgraduate Diploma (PG Dip) Postgraduate Certificate (PG Cert)

2010/11

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

CONTENTS

Page No. 1. Scope 3 2. Definitions 3 3. Registration 4 4. Attendance 4 5. Methods of assessment 5 6. Word limits 5 7. Submission deadlines 5 8. Extensions to submission deadlines 5 9. Deferral of assessment 6 10. Mitigating circumstances 6 11. Marking and moderation 7 12. Assessment Boards 7 13. Results and feedback 7 14. Publication of marks 7 15. Retrieval 8 16. Grading 9 17. Award 9 18. Academic offences: cheating, collusion and plagiarism 9 19. Academic appeals 10 Annex A: College Postgraduate Grade Descriptors 11 Annex B: Marking & Moderation of Assessment 11 Annex C: Reasonable Adjustments to Assessment & Examination 13 Annex D: Mitigating Circumstances 15 Annex E: Guidance & Rules for Group Work Assessment 18 Annex F: Academic Misconduct: Cheating, Collusion & Plagiarism 20 Annex G: Student Appeals 24

___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Assessment Regulations for Post-graduate Awards 2010/11

- 2 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. SCOPE 1.1 The College seeks to ensure that its assessment practices are fair, explicit

and transparent and that each student shall be assessed in accordance with the published schedule given in the project brief for his or her course.

1.2 Assessment is a matter of judgment, not simply of computation. Marks,

grades and percentages should not be treated as absolute values but as indicators to be used by examiners to communicate their judgment of different aspects of a student's work, in order to provide information on which the final decision on a student's fulfilment of a programme of study's objectives may be based.

1.3 The regulations govern the conduct of assessment. Unless otherwise

specified the regulations apply to all forms of assessment. 2. DEFINITIONS Programme The syllabus of the course: how a course is structured

and the units are related to each other.

Unit A discrete formally structured learning experience with a coherent and explicit set of learning outcomes.

Credit Credit is a quantified means of expressing equivalence of learning. Credit is awarded to a learner in recognition of the verified achievement of the learning outcomes of a unit.

Assessment requirements

Assessment requirements are those specified tasks which enable students to demonstrate that they have fulfilled the learning outcomes of the unit

Submission deadline

The published point by which assessment requirements must be submitted in order for a student to pass a unit.

Retrieval The process by which a student who has failed a unit is permitted a further attempt to retake the assessment without repeating the unit.

Examination Boards

Assessment Boards or assessment boards, formally established by the Academic Board, are responsible for ratifying assessment marks. The constitution and Terms of Reference of each Board are subject to approval by the Academic Board. The Assessment Board deals with awards and outcomes at the end of the course.


- 3 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. REGISTRATION 3.1 A student must be fully enrolled on the course according to College

procedures and her/his registration active before submitting assessment. 3.2 The registration period for the Masters degree is normally 12 months full-time

or 24 months part-time. A student who is categorised as overseas for tuition fees purposes will not normally be permitted to register for the part-time mode.

3.3 Transfer from one mode to another must be approved by the Course

Leader and notified in advance to the Registry. A student who is categorised as overseas for tuition fees purposes will not normally be permitted to transfer from the full-time mode to the part-time mode.

3.4 The maximum registration period for a postgraduate award is normally five

years. Any extension to a registration period must be approved by the relevant Assessment Board.

3.5 The Master of Science award will provide study for students whose first

degree was a bachelor of science qualification. The emphasis of the programme of study will be on technological enquiry and development.

3.6 Master of Arts award will provide study for students whose first degree was a

bachelor of arts qualification. The emphasis of the programme of study will be on artistic or creative enquiry and development.

3.7 Candidates may transfer between awards based on the substantive line of

enquiry of the major project / dissertation. Transfer in these circumstances will be determined by the Subject Leader in consultation with the Dissertation Supervisor.

4. ATTENDANCE 4.1 Attendance at lectures, seminars, tutorials and [practical classes is an

integral part of a student’s programme of study and students are expected to be regular and punctual in their attendance. Attendance will be monitored selectively, and any student found to be absent without permission will be required to meet her/his tutor to explain the absence.

4.2 Persistent absence without good cause will lead to an interview with the

Director of Postgraduate Development and Innovation and may lead to a decision that the student has dropped out of the course and should be withdrawn by the Registry.


- 4 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. METHODS OF ASSESSMENT 5.1 Each unit has at least one assessment requirement. In order to pass a unit a

student must normally satisfy all the assessment requirements for that unit. 5.2 The assessment requirements and the criteria by which assessed work will be

judged are specified in unit specifications and published to students in project briefs.

5.3 Special assessment arrangements may be made for a student with a

disability or specific illness/medical condition in accordance with the College’s Policy and Procedure for Reasonable Adjustments to Assessment and Examination Arrangements (see Annex C).

6. WORD LIMITS 6.1 Word limits for assessment to be expressed in ranges will be identified in

each unit specification. Students will be required in include the word count on the front cover of the assessment.

6.2 Students will be penalised by 10% of the total marks if the number of words used diverges from the range by more than 10%.

6.3 Students will be penalised by 25% of the total marks if the number of words

used diverges from the range by more than 25%. 7. SUBMISSION DEADLINES 7.1 Deadlines for the submission of assessed work will be published in project

briefs. 7.2 Deadlines are absolute and extensions to deadlines will only be granted

subject to the conditions set out below in paragraph 8. 7.3 A student who fails to submit an assessment or an element of assessment by

the required deadline will automatically be deemed to have failed that assessment and their retrieval will be capped at a C grade. The only exception to this shall be where an extension has been agreed in advance, in accordance with section 8 below or where the student submits mitigating circumstances which account for the delay in submission and are accepted by the Assessment Board (see section 10).


- 5 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

8. EXTENSIONS TO SUBMISSION DEADLINES 8.1 Extensions to submission deadlines may in exceptional circumstances be

granted. Students who wish to apply for an extension should complete an assessment extension form, approved by the Subject Leader and submit this to the College’s Registry. Extensions must be supported by third party corroborative evidence.

8.2 Provided the request is accepted, the Registry will issue confirmation of the

agreed extension deadline. 9. DEFERRAL OF ASSESSMENT 9.1 Students are not encouraged to defer their studies and may only do so in

exceptional circumstances. Such deferral must be discussed and agreed with the Course Director and is subject to the approval of the Director of Postgraduate Development and Innovation.

9.2 A student who defers from the course without officially notifying the College

will be recorded as having failed the programme of study. 9.3 Any student who wishes to defer must formally notify the college by

submitting a deferral of studies form. A deferral will not normally be backdated and a student will only be permitted to defer once whilst registered on a programme.

9.4 A student who has deferred is no longer entitled to access the College

facilities unless s/he has registered as an Associate Student1. 9.5 It is the student’s responsibility to contact the College to notify of their

intention to resume their studies. If s/he does not return to the course within the specified time period they will automatically be deemed to have withdrawn.

9.6 A student who has deferred and wishes to re-commence her/his studies will

be required to pay a continuation fee for tuition on re-enrolment. The continuation fee will be set annually.

10. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES 10.1 A mitigating circumstance is defined as a serious or significant adverse

event or illness which was unexpected and has impacted upon a student’s academic performance. A student who believes that due to illness or other valid cause (such as bereavement):

a) his/her performance has been adversely affected; OR


- 6 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

b) he/she was unable to submit assessed or reassessed work by the scheduled

deadline

may submit a claim for consideration of mitigating circumstances. 10.2 Technical failure of IT or any other equipment will not normally be accepted

as mitigating circumstances. 10.3 A student who wishes to submit a claim for mitigation should do so in

accordance with the College’s procedure (see Annex D). 10.4 The deadline for submission of a claim is normally no later than seven days

before the meeting of the Assessment Board. 11. MARKING AND MODERATION 11.1 Student work is marked in accordance with the College’s policy and

procedure on marking and moderation (see Annex B). 12. ASSESSMENT BOARDS 12.1 The Assessment Board will meet annually to confirm unit marks, prior to

commencement of the dissertation. 12.2 The Final Assessment Board will meet at the end of the course year to

confirm unit marks and student achievement. 12.3 All marks issued are provisional and subject to change until ratification by

the Assessment Board. 13. RESULTS AND FEEDBACK 13.1 Students will normally receive written feedback on any summatively

assessed work during the course of the year. The student will also receive a provisional result, normally within three to four weeks of the assessment deadline, but no later than six weeks.

14. PUBLICATION OF MARKS 14.1 Pass lists will be approved by the validating partner prior to publication. No

results may be released until the pass list has been approved.


- 7 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

14.2 The Registry will issue the pass list on the appropriate student notice boards within 24 hours receipt of the approved pass list from the validating partner. Candidate numbers will be used for the pass list.

14.3 Results letters will normally be sent to students within ten working days of the

Assessment Board meeting. 14.4 Results letters will not be issued to students who owe monies to the College. 15. RETRIEVAL 15.1 Students are normally permitted one opportunity to retrieve a failed unit or

unit component, the result of which is capped at a C grade. 15.2 Exceptionally the Assessment Board may permit the student a second

opportunity to retrieve a marginal fail. 15.3 Students will not normally be permitted to continue to the project and/or

dissertation carrying any failed credits. 15.4 A failed unit may not be compensated at post-graduate (M) level. 16. GRADING 16.1 The College currently expresses its final unit outcomes at M level as grades

(A to C and fail). The College’s minimum grade for a pass at M Level is C. Grades are expressed according to the following scale:

Categorical Marking Scheme

Grade Bands

Mark Bands

Predetermined marks (% Grade Points)

Marking intervals

A 70-100 100 90 High A+ 90 – 100 80 Medium A 80 – 89 74 Low A- 70 – 79 B 60 – 69 68 High B+ 67 – 69 65 Medium B 64 – 66 62 Low B- 60 – 63 C 51 – 59 58 High C+ 57- 59 55 Medium C 54 – 56 52 Low C- 51 – 53 PASS 50 50 Bare pass PASS 50 F <50 45 Marginal Fail F+ 40- 49 35 Fail F 30 – 39 20 Poor F- 0 No submission


- 8 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

17. AWARD 17.1 To be awarded a Masters degree, a student must have successfully

completed the units specified in the Course Handbook, with a minimum of 180 credits, comprising 60 credits at the post-graduate certificate stage, 60 credits at the post-graduate diploma, and 60 credits at the final project/dissertation stage.

17.2 A student who withdraws from the course having successfully completed 60

credits at the post-graduate certificate stage and 60 credits at the post-graduate diploma stage is eligible for the award of Post-graduate Diploma.

17.3 A student who withdraws from the course having successfully completed 60

credits at the post-graduate certificate stage is eligible for the award of Post-graduate Certificate.

17.4 A student who achieves an overall average within the ‘A’ band, calculated

on all course units contributing to the degree will be awarded a Masters with Distinction. There is no award of Distinction for the award of Post-graduate Certificate or Post-graduate Diploma.

17.5 A student who achieves an overall average within the ‘B’ band, calculated

on all course units contributing to the degree will be awarded a Masters with Merit. There is no award of Merit for the award of Post-graduate Certificate or Post-graduate Diploma.

18. ACADEMIC OFFENCES: CHEATING, COLLUSION AND PLAGIARISM 18.1 Cheating may be defined as an attempt to gain an unfair advantage by

breaching regulations, by bribery or inducement, or by deception. 18.2 Collusion is taken to mean unauthorised collaboration to produce

individually assessed work, without acknowledgement to those who have contributed to the work. It is distinct from authorised collaboration on projects which is strongly encouraged.

18.3 Plagiarism is the passing off by one person of another person’s work, without

acknowledgement to the original author. Any material used in a piece of work which is not original MUST be acknowledged to the original author in the approved format, or it will be treated as plagiarism, which is regarded as an extremely serious academic offence amounting to theft of ideas. Such material may be text or image, and may be derived from published or unpublished work, from any source (e.g. books, journals, newspapers, the internet, fellow students’ notes etc.).

18.4 Suspected cases of cheating, collusion and plagiarism will be dealt with

under the College’s procedure (See Annex F). ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Assessment Regulations for Post-graduate Awards 2010/11

- 9 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

19. ACADEMIC APPEALS 19.1 An appeal may only be made on one or both of the following grounds:

That there was a material error, either in the conduct of the assessment itself, or in the proceedings of the Assessment Board, which materially affected the Assessment Board’s decision; AND/OR

That the student was subject to extenuating circumstances at the time of the assessment which:

meet the definition of extenuating circumstances as set out in the Assessment Regulations, and

were unknown to the Assessment Board, and were not made known to the Assessment Board via the

Extenuating Circumstances Regulations for a demonstrated, valid and over-riding reason1.

Dissatisfaction with the decision or academic judgement of the Assessment Board is not alone a valid ground for an appeal.

19.2 An appeal, with appropriate evidence, should be submitted to the

University Officer nominated by Senate or his/her nominee within 28 days of the release of results following the Assessment Board. (See annex G)


1 The following will not normally be considered as acceptable reasons for delay: that the student says that s/he was unaware of the extenuating circumstances regulations at the time; or that the student made an assumption at the time of the assessment that his/her performance would not be affected by an event which s/he has since decided has resulted in extenuating circumstances.

- 10 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

ANNEX A COLLEGE POSTGRADUATE GRADE DESCRIPTORS

Grade descriptors define the standards of performance at each grade by describing the characteristics typical of work at that grade. Grade Description Outcome A Outstanding in most respects, very few minor omissions.

Based on substantial preparation (reading, research, planning) and effective self/group management, demonstrating an authoritative grasp of concepts, content and methodology. Evidence of originality, insight and learning beyond the curriculum. A sense of what is contextually appropriate and an ability to sustain an argument or idea, to think analytically/critically and to synthesise material effectively. Able consistently to produce comprehensive and appropriate ranges of original and creative solutions to problems presented by professional projects.

Distinction

B Very high standard of work, but with some relatively minor defects. Demonstrates a sound, consistent and above average level of understanding of concepts, methodology and content appropriate to the subject, drawing on a wide range of appropriate sources. Evidence of critical judgement, ability to synthesise material, leading to insight, some originality and an awareness of what is contextually appropriate. Able on occasion to produce original, creative and appropriate solutions to problems presented by professional projects.

Merit

C Generally sound, but a number of notable defects. Based on a sound basis of preparation (e.g. reading, research), self/team management and understanding of key concepts, a grasp of relevant material and an ability to structure and organise arguments. Outcome may be rather routine but the work will demonstrate a degree of accuracy, clarity and critical analysis and occasional originality. Able to produce a range of appropriate solutions to a professional brief, some of which will be creative. There will be few serious omissions or irrelevancies.

Pass

Pass Bare pass Pass F Unsatisfactory Fail


- 11 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

ANNEX B MARKING AND MODERATION OF ASSESSMENT

UNDERGRADUATE AND POSTGRADUATE COURSES POLICY AND PROCEDURE

1. Policy Statement 1.1 The College’s Assessment Policy states that assessment shall be:

designed, approved, monitored and reviewed; an integral part of the curriculum; explicit and transparent; valid and reliable; fair, equitable and take account of the diversity of the student body; efficient and fit for purpose.

1.2 The Marking and Moderation Policy underpins the Assessment Policy by

aiming to:

develop and maintain academic standards; ensure fairness in the assessment process.

1.3 The aim of moderation specifically is to overcome variation between

assessors both within a unit and across the units of a course. Moderation is applied to both the process of assessment and the outcome of assessment.

2. Internal moderation 2.1 Subject Leaders are responsible for ensuring that the internal and external

examiners are fully informed of the marking criteria and standards when marking or moderating work.

2.2 All assessment contributing to a final award must be verified through internal

moderation. Course staff will choose those most appropriate. Amongst these are:

2.2.1 team assessment: the assessment team will assess simultaneously and

agree on a grade through discussion; 2.2.2 double marking: one assessor will blind mark the submission and

another assessor will verify that s/he agrees with that mark and when the assessor disagrees with the first marker then confers with the first marker to agree a mark.

2.2.3 double blind marking: may be appropriate for some assessments. In

this case both assessors mark without any knowledge of each other’s judgement and then agree on a single mark.


- 12 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

2.2.4 group assessment: individual grades will normally be moderated by the assessment team conducting the group assessment at the point when a final grade is determined. (See Annex E: Guidance and Rules for Group Work Assessment).

2.3 In cases where no agreement can be reached on a final moderated grade

by the internal assessment team the work should be subject to a third opinion. If, subsequently, agreement is still not possible then the External Examiner will moderate the final grade

2.4 All component mark sheets must be signed and dated by two markers or

the team of markers. 2.5 All other summative assessment may be single marked but a sample of 10%

must be internally moderated. 2.6 Written feedback should be provided to all students on any formatively and

summatively assessed work. 3. Moderation by External Examiners 3.1 External examiners will decide whether overall the grading for the unit is

appropriate (rather than remarking individual candidate’s work). A sample of work will be sent for external moderation to include:

at least 20% of work; one exemplar of each class of award; the work of all students proposed for the highest available category of

the award; all borderline candidates; all failed candidates; any work from candidates the internal assessors found significant

difficulty in marking. 3.2 The external examiner is responsible for moderating the assessment process

and the grades awarded to individual students. S/he normally reviews the process of assessment as well as a range of work from all units contributing to the final award across a range of grade bands.

3.3 The external examiner does not normally act as a third marker at

Ravensbourne, however s/he can recommend changes to the grading of a candidate’s work. If an external examiner wishes to do this all the submissions in that unit of assessment must be scrutinized to ensure that no candidate is disadvantaged by having their work selected for scrutiny by the external examiner.

3.4 In exceptional circumstances, the external examiner may recommend the

regrading of the entire cohort. This must be reported to the appropriate meeting of the Assessment Board.


- 13 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

ANNEX C

REASONABLE ADJUSTMENTS TO ASSESSMENT AND EXAMINATION ARRANGEMENTS POLICY AND PROCEDURE

1. Policy Statement 1.1 The College has a duty to ensure that assessment and decisions about

assessment are conducted in accordance with its equal opportunities policy and current legislation.

1.2 It is the responsibility of the student to declare a disability and inform Student

Services of any difficulties they may have at the earliest opportunity, preferably at the beginning of the course. Failure to do this may affect the effectiveness of support arrangements or the ability for the College to implement reasonable adjustments.

1.3 Reasonable adjustments to assessment arrangements may be made for

candidates who have a disability, either permanently or temporarily. 1.4 Each request for reasonable adjustments will be considered by the Course

Leader, in consultation with the student and the Student Services. 1.5 In exceptional circumstances, an alternative form of assessment may be

agreed, provided it can be demonstrated that s/he will achieve the learning outcomes. Such requests must be approved by the exam board/external examiner/validating body.

1.6 A candidate for whom reasonable adjustments have been made may not

normally use the same reason as a ‘mitigating circumstance’. 2. Procedure 2.1 Students should submit a request for consideration for reasonable

adjustments to the Students Services in the first instance. Reasonable adjustments are individually considered and where appropriate may also take account of any required adjustments to learning and teaching and patterns of attendance that may be affected by the nature of the disability.

2.2 A student who makes a request must submit appropriate evidence, or in the

case of dyslexia, the report of an education psychologist, confirming the condition.

2.3 The Student Services will refer the request to the Course Leader, who will

then determine in consultation with the student and the Student Services what arrangements are deemed appropriate.

2.4 Examination arrangements may include:


- 14 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

[a] Allowing the candidate extra time at the end of an examination in accordance with public examination practice;

[b] Providing suitable rooms for examinations to take place; [c] Providing support services, such as a reader or amanuensis.

2.5 Where an alternative form of assessment is granted the alternative mode

must test the same learning outcomes as those tested by the ‘original’ mode of assessment.

2.6 The Course Leader will report any reasonable adjustment or alternative

forms of assessment that has been granted at the next meeting of the Assessment Board.


- 15 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

ANNEX D

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES POLICY AND PROCEDURE

1. Policy Statement 1.1 The College has a duty to ensure that assessments are conducted fairly and

in accordance with its Equal Opportunities Policy and that each student has the opportunity to demonstrate her/his true level of academic performance.

1.2 A mitigating circumstance is defined as a serious or significant adverse

event or illness which was unexpected and has impacted upon a student’s academic performance. A student who believes that due to illness or other valid cause (such as bereavement):

[a] his/her performance has been adversely affected; OR [b] he/she was unable to submit assessed or reassessed work by the

scheduled deadline

may submit a claim for consideration of mitigating circumstances. 1.3 It is expected that students will take reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable

problems and technical failure of IT or any other equipment will not normally be accepted as mitigating circumstances, neither will pressure of work, transport or financial problems.

2. Procedure for submitting a claim for mitigating circumstances 2.1 A student who believes he/she has mitigating circumstances should obtain

a Mitigating Circumstances form, available from the Registry. 2.2 When completing the form the student should state clearly the grounds for

mitigation and the date(s) when the circumstances occurred. 2.3 The claim must be corroborated by independent (third party) evidence

such as a medical certificate, a solicitor’s letter, or any other official document. A claim will not normally be considered without independent evidence. Original documents must be submitted but these will be copied and returned to the claimant.

2.4 The claim must be countersigned by a Course Tutor to confirm that s/he

supports the claim. 2.5 The deadline for submission of a claim is normally the deadline for the

assessment to which the mitigating circumstances relate. Where circumstances prevent a student from submitting a mitigating circumstances form at that particular point, s/he should submit it at the


- 16 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

earliest opportunity but normally no later than seven days before the meeting of the Assessment Board.

2.6 Mitigating circumstances will not be taken into consideration if the

procedure has not been followed. 3. Confidential information 3.1 All claims for mitigating circumstances are confidential to the Mitigating

Circumstances Panel and will not be disclosed outside the meeting. 3.2 If the student feels the circumstances are of a particularly sensitive or

personal nature, s/he may submit the claim and corroborating evidence in a sealed envelope marked confidential with the student’s name, ID number and the unit(s) against which a claim is being made.

4. Consideration of evidence 4.1 The claim will be considered by a Mitigating Circumstances Panel which

shall normally comprise: [a] The Head of Student Services [b] The Head of Registry [c] An academic member of staff 4.2 The Panel will consider each claim and decide upon an outcome which it

will recommend to the relevant Assessment Board. In making its recommendation, the panel will take into account:

[a] the supporting evidence; [b] the timing of the circumstances, namely do they correspond with the

date of the affected assessment; [c] the nature and severity of the circumstances.

4.3 The Panel will only take into account claims of mitigation which have been

submitted formally. It will not consider claims which have not been submitted according to the College’s procedure.

4.4 If the Panel accepts the student’s claim for mitigation the student may be

required to submit/sit the assessment for a first attempt or in the case of a resubmission/resit the student may be required to resubmit the assessment under the original conditions.

4.5 Mitigating circumstances do not permit the examiners to raise marks,

however where the Panel may recommend to the Board that it may use its discretion in borderline cases to raise a student’s overall degree classification, subject to meeting any other criteria to raise the classification.

4.6 The Panel reserves the right to reject a claim that does not adequately

account for mitigation of a non submission or failure. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Assessment Regulations for Post-graduate Awards 2010/11

- 17 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

4.7 The Head of Registry will report the Panel’s recommendations to the

relevant Assessment Board. The Panel however will not disclose the nature of the circumstances.

5. Data Protection 5.1 Following the decision of the Panel, a copy of the mitigating circumstances

will be stored in a sealed envelope in the student’s central file marked ‘confidential’.


- 18 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

ANNEX E

GUIDANCE & RULES FOR GROUP WORK ASSESSMENT 1. Preamble 1.1 In order to ensure that group work is assessed in accordance with the

principles of the College’s Assessment Policy, group work should be distributed fairly and all group members should contribute equally to the group project.

1.2 Unit leaders are responsible for ensuring that all students are allocated to

groups and that each group agrees upon the topic and learning aims. 1.3 Students are responsible for ensuring that they participate fully in agreed

group activities. Reasonable adjustments to group work may be applied to disabled students where this is appropriate.

1.4 The College reserves the right to change or allocate group members. 2. Selection of the group 2.1 Students are encouraged to work collaboratively on group projects, to

which each member will contribute individual expertise and qualities. 2.2 Tutors will normally allocate groups in consultation with students. 3. Participation 3.1 At the outset of the project, the group topic and learning outcomes and

the responsibilities of each group member will be clearly specified. The written specification will be agreed by the tutor

3.2 The group will be required to

[a] plan the work and agree responsibilities; [b] identify team roles, allocating tasks equitably and consulting group

members where a change of plan is necessary; [c] evaluate the project outcome and review the performance of the

group as a whole and the individual contribution. 4. Expectations 4.1 Each group is expected to define its own set of formal group protocols to

which each member must adhere. This will cover:

[a] allocation of group activities and what is expected of each group member;

[b] attendance and participation at all group activities;


- 19 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

[c] a schedule of activities and deadlines by which tasks must be completed

4.2 Additionally each student is expected to

[a] respect the contribution of each member; [b] work collectively according to the learning outcomes specified by

the group; [c] complete all agreed tasks by the deadline.

5. Disputes and non-participation 5.1 Disputes will be mediated by the Tutor. If it is impossible to reach a

compromise the Tutor may either reallocate a member to another group or set an individual task which should enable the student to meet the learning outcomes.

5.2 Where a group member fails to contribute to the group in any way, that

group member will receive a non-submission (0) mark for the group work. 6. Assessment 6.1 The internal markers will agree an indicative grade of the performance of

the group against the agreed project learning outcomes. 6.2 Peer assessment: groups will be expected to reflect on the participation of

each group member by allocating a percentage mark based on the individual contribution to the overall group project.

6.3 Self assessment: each group member will award her/himself a grade for

her/ his portfolio presentation, against the learning outcomes and assessment criteria defined in the project brief and against any personal learning outcomes and agreed contributions to the project specified in the Learning Plan.

6.4 Each member of each group will be expected to make a personal portfolio

presentation, detailing:

[a] her/his participation in the project; [b] the progress of the project through reference to her/his project diary; [c] the materials produced.

6.5 Self assessment and peer assessment outcomes will be moderated by the

tutors, and an individual grades will be negotiated for each student, normally through group discussions and individual feedback tutorials.

6.6 In the event of irreconcilable disagreement within the allocation of marks

for the peer assessment or self assessment, the decision of the internal markers will prevail.


- 20 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

ANNEX F ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT: CHEATING, COLLUSION AND PLAGIARISM

POLICY AND PROCEDURE 1. Policy Statement 1.1 The College treats academic misconduct extremely seriously and the

penalty for candidates found guilty of misconduct or deception may result in the student being permanently excluded from the College.

1.2 Academic misconduct includes cheating, collusion, plagiarism, or any other

attempt to gain unfair advantage. 1.3 Cheating - may be defined as an attempt to gain an unfair advantage by

breaching regulations, by bribery or inducement, or by deception. 1.4 Collusion - is taken to mean unauthorised collaboration to produce

individually assessed work, without acknowledgement to those who have contributed to the work. It is distinct from authorised collaboration on projects which is strongly encouraged.

1.5 Plagiarism - is the passing off by one person of another person’s work,

without acknowledgement to the original author. Any material used in a piece of work which is not original MUST be acknowledged to the original author in the approved format, or it will be treated as plagiarism, which is regarded as an extremely serious academic offence amounting to theft of ideas. Such material may be text or image, and may be derived from published or unpublished work, from any source (e.g. books, journals, newspapers, the internet, fellow students’ notes etc.).

2. Procedure for Investigating Suspected Irregularities 2.1 Examination offences

2.1.1 A candidate may be disqualified or be liable to such other penalties as the Assessment Board may determine:

[a] for having access to, or attempting to gain access to, any

books memoranda, notes, mobile telephones, pagers, electronic organisers, unauthorised calculators, or any other unauthorised materials or devices;

[b] for aiding or attempting to aid another candidate, for

obtaining aid or attempting to obtain aid from another candidate, or any other communication within or beyond the examination room during the period of the examination.

2.1.2 Where an irregularity is suspected, the invigilator should allow the

candidate[s] to continue with the examination, but, if appropriate, ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Assessment Regulations for Post-graduate Awards 2010/11

- 21 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

any unauthorised material must be confiscated. At the end of the examination s/he should inform the candidate[s] that a formal report of the incident will be prepared and submitted to the relevant Head of Faculty or Director of Postgraduate Development and Innovation. The report must be countersigned by the second invigilator.

2.1.3 The invigilator should mark on the relevant examination script[s] that

a suspected offence has taken place.

2.1.4 Following investigation and where there is explicit evidence of an offence, the relevant Head of Faculty or Director of Postgraduate Development and Innovation will write to the student, informing them of the nature of the allegation and inviting them to produce a written defence. The student will be given ten working days to respond.

2.1.5 If no defence is received or if the student chooses not to refute the

allegation, the relevant Head of Faculty or Director of Postgraduate Development and Innovation shall prepare a written report, to include factual supporting evidence, which will be submitted to the Chair of the relevant Assessment Board.

2.1.6 If the student refutes the allegation, the relevant Head of Faculty or

Director of Postgraduate Development and Innovation shall convene a Panel to hear the evidence formally. The Panel shall consist of an academic tutor from the Faculty not associated with the student, the relevant Head of Faculty or Director of Postgraduate Development and Innovation (chair) and a representative from Academic Services. The Panel will normally meet within ten working days of receipt of the student's letter. The student will be invited to attend and may be accompanied by a friend who will attend as an observer. The subject leader will not normally attend, unless invited by the Panel to appear as a witness.

2.1.7 Following the Panel meeting the relevant Head of Faculty or Director

of Postgraduate Development and Innovation shall prepare a written report, to include factual supporting evidence, and the Panel’s recommendation which will be submitted to the Chair of the relevant Assessment Board.

2.2 Plagiarism

2.2.1 Where an irregularity is suspected, the subject leader shall report the matter immediately to the Director of the Information Services for further investigation.

2.2.2 Following investigation and where there is explicit evidence of an

offence, the Director of the Information Services will write to the student, informing them of the nature of the allegation and inviting them to produce a written defence. The student will be given ten working days to respond.


- 22 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

2.2.3 If no defence is received or if the student chooses not to refute the

allegation, the Director of the Information Services shall prepare a written report, to include factual supporting evidence, which will be submitted to the Chair of the relevant Assessment Board.

2.2.4 If the student refutes the allegation, the Director of the Information

Services shall convene a Panel to hear the evidence formally. The Panel shall consist of an academic tutor from the Faculty not associated with the student, the Director of the Information Services (chair) and a representative from Academic Services. The Panel will normally meet within ten working days of receipt of the student's letter. The student will be invited to attend and may be accompanied by a friend who will attend as an observer. The subject leader will not normally attend, unless invited by the Panel to appear as a witness.

2.2.5 Following the Panel meeting the Director of the Information Services

shall prepare a written report, to include factual supporting evidence, and the Panel’s recommendation which will be submitted to the Chair of the relevant Assessment Board.

3. Assessment Board Hearing 3.1 The Assessment Board will determine the appropriate course of action or

outcome which may be to:

3.1.1 dismiss the case as unproven and destroy all records of the allegation;

3.1.2 issue a formal warning (for a first offence only); 3.1.3 fail the student in the assessment, but allow the student to retrieve,

but capped at a minimum pass; 3.1.4 fail the student in the assessment, and exclude the student from the

College. 3.2 In the case of decisions 3.1.2 to 3.1.4, a record will be kept on the student's

personal file for the duration of their registration. 3.3 The student will normally notified of the decision of the Assessment Board

within five working days of the meeting. 3.4 If the student has not provided a defence or refuted the allegation, there is

no right of appeal against the decision of the Assessment Board, 3.5 A student who provided a defence or refuted the allegation has the right of

appeal against the decision of the Assessment Board [see Student Appeals Policy & Procedure, Annex G].


- 23 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

3.6 The outcome will be reported to the validating partner.


- 24 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

ANNEX G STUDENT APPEALS

POLICY AND PROCEDURE (extract from City University London Senate Regulations)

REGULATION 20b

STUDENT APPEALS – TAUGHT PROGRAMMES AT VALIDATED INSTITUTIONS2 The University validates programmes offered at other institutions as leading to awards of the University. Assessment Boards for validated programmes are subcommittees of the University Senate and so appeals fall under Senate. The University defines an appeal as a request from a student for a review of a decision made by an Assessment Board regarding his/her assessment, progression, or award. These internal regulations of the University will be operated in accordance with its Equal Opportunities and Equality and Diversity Policies. The Equal Opportunities and Equality and Diversity Policies of the Validated Institution will also be followed. A. Stage 1: Validated Institution-level appeal 1. Grounds for appeal a) An appeal may only be made on one or both of the following grounds:

That there was a material error, either in the conduct of the assessment itself, or in the proceedings of the Assessment Board, which materially affected the Assessment Board’s decision; AND/OR

That the student was subject to extenuating circumstances at the time of the assessment which:

o meet the definition of extenuating circumstances as set out in the Assessment Regulations, and

o were unknown to the Assessment Board, and o were not made known to the Assessment Board via the Extenuating

Circumstances Regulations for a demonstrated, valid and over-riding reason3.

Dissatisfaction with the decision or academic judgment of the Assessment Board is not alone a valid ground for an appeal.

b) An appeal, with appropriate evidence, should be submitted to the University

Officer nominated by Senate or his/her nominee within 28 days of the release of results following the Assessment Board.

2. Initial scrutiny

2 Students on research programmes at Validated Institutions should refer to Regulation 21b. City University students should refer to Regulation 20 (taught programmes) or Regulation 21 (research programmes).


3 The following will not normally be considered as acceptable reasons for delay: that the student says that s/he was unaware of the extenuating circumstances regulations at the time; or that the student made an assumption at the time of the assessment that his/her performance would not be affected by an event which s/he has since decided has resulted in extenuating circumstances.

- 25 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

a) The receipt of an appeal will normally be acknowledged within 7 days. b) The appeal will be scrutinised by two members of University staff, who will have

been nominated by the University Officer. c) The purposes of the initial scrutiny are:

To ensure that the appeal documentation has been fully completed and that all relevant evidence has been enclosed; AND

To reach an initial view on whether sufficient evidence has been provided to merit consideration of a claim on one or both of the grounds for appeal.

An appeal may be rejected if the documentation is not complete and/or insufficient evidence has been provided.

d) If there is sufficient evidence to merit consideration of the appeal on the

ground of a material error (as defined in section A1a of these Regulations), immediate rectifying action by the Chair of the Assessment Board can be taken if the material error was an administrative error associated with the calculation of marks and/or award. Otherwise, the University will advise the Validated Institution that an appeal panel should be convened.

e) If there is sufficient evidence to merit consideration of the appeal on the

ground of extenuating circumstances (as defined in section A1a of these Regulations), the appeal will be referred to the next Extenuating Circumstances Panel for consideration in accordance with section 12 of the Assessment Regulations.

f) If there is insufficient evidence to merit consideration of the appeal on either of

the grounds set out in section A1a the appeal will be rejected. g) The outcome of the initial scrutiny will be reported to the Chair of the Course

Board or his/her nominee, who will either approve the recommendation on behalf of Senate or refer the appeal to a Validated Institution appeal panel for consideration in line with section A2d or A2e of these Regulations.

h) The student will be informed of the outcome of the initial scrutiny, normally

within 21 days of the acknowledgement being sent. Where an appeal is rejected reasons will be provided. A student whose appeal has been rejected may be entitled to request a review of that decision under section B of these Regulations.

i) The process and outcomes of the initial scrutiny will be documented and a

record retained. 3. Validated Institution appeal panel a) A Validated Institution appeal panel will normally be convened within 28 days

of the outcome of the initial scrutiny. It will comprise three members of academic staff. The Principal of the Institution or his/her nominee will be the Chair.


- 26 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Senate will nominate a senior member of University administrative staff, who will not be part of the Validated Institution appeal panel, to attend the hearing to ensure that the conduct of the panel is in accordance with the University’s requirements.

b) The student will be invited to attend the Validated Institution appeal panel

hearing and can choose to be accompanied by one other person. If a student chooses not to attend, or fails to attend without submitting written notification of valid reasons for postponement, the panel may meet in the student’s absence.

c) The Validated Institution appeal panel will consider the appeal and make a

recommendation either to: Permit the student to resit some/all failed assessments as a first or

additional attempt, where necessary reinstating him/her on the programme; OR

Refer the case back to the Assessment Board with commentary; OR Reject the appeal, accompanied by clear reasons that will be provided

to the student. The panel may not recommend any alteration to the original marks.

d) The Validated Institution appeal panel’s recommendation will be reported the

Chair of the Course Board, who will either approve the recommendation on behalf of Senate or refer the appeal to the University-level stage for consideration.

e) The outcome of the Validated Institution appeal panel hearing will be provided

to the student in writing by the Validated Institution, normally within 14 days of the hearing.

f) The outcome of the Validated Institution appeal panel hearing will be reported

to the Course Board and then to Senate and a record will be retained. B. Stage 2 University-level review 1. Grounds for review a) A student may request a review of the Validated Institution decision on one or

both of the following grounds: That there was a material error in the proceedings associated with the

Validated Institution decision, which materially affected that decision; AND/OR

That new information has become available, which is material to the original appeal, and which could not have been made known to the Validated Institution for a demonstrated, valid and over-riding reason.

This is not a reopening of the original appeal. Dissatisfaction with the decision of the Validated Institution is not alone a valid ground for a review.


- 27 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

b) This review procedure may also be initiated by the Chair of the Course Board or his/her nominee if s/he has proper cause.

c) A review request, with appropriate evidence, should be submitted to the

University Officer or his/her nominee within 21 days of confirmation of the Validated Institution decision.

2. Initial scrutiny a) The receipt of a review request will normally be acknowledged within 7 days. b) Two members of University staff nominated by the University Officer will

scrutinise the review submission. c) The purpose of the initial scrutiny is:

To ensure that the review documentation has been fully completed and that all relevant evidence has been enclosed; AND

To reach an initial view on whether sufficient evidence has been provided to merit consideration of a claim on one or both of the grounds for review.

A review request may be rejected if the documentation is not complete and/or insufficient evidence has been provided.

d) If there is sufficient evidence to merit consideration of the review request on the

ground of a material error (as defined in section B1a of these Regulations), immediate rectifying action by the Officer responsible for the Validated Institution decision or his/her nominee can be taken if the material error was an administrative error associated with the Validated Institution decision4. Otherwise, a University review panel will be convened.

e) If there is sufficient evidence to merit consideration of the review request on the

ground of new information (as defined in section B1a of these Regulations) evidence supports consideration of a claim based on additional information that is material to the original appeal and that was not made known for a demonstrated, valid and over-riding reason, the case will be referred back to the appropriate Validated Institution body for reconsideration5. Following this reconsideration, a student may then only request a review of the decision on the ground of a material error.

f) If there is insufficient evidence to merit consideration of the review request on

either of the grounds set out in section B1a of these Regulations the request will be rejected.

4 This would be the Chair of the Assessment Board, the Chair of the Course Board or the Chair of the Validated Institution appeal panel depending on the stage at which the School decision was made.


5 This would be the Chair of the Assessment Board, the Chair of the Course Board or the Validated Institution appeal panel, depending on the stage at which the Validated Institution decision was made.

- 28 -

Ravensbourne ___________________________________________________________________________________________________


- 29 -

g) The student will be informed of the outcome of the initial scrutiny, normally within 21 days of the acknowledgement being sent. Where a review request is rejected, reasons will be provided.

h) The process and outcomes of the initial scrutiny will be documented and a

record retained. 3. University review panel a) A University review panel will normally be convened within 28 days of the

outcome of the initial scrutiny. It will comprise three members of academic staff. The University officer or his/her nominee will be the Chair.

b) The student will be invited to attend the University review panel hearing and

may choose to be accompanied by one other person. If a student chooses not to attend, or fails to attend without submitting written notification of valid reasons for postponement, the panel may meet in the student’s absence.

c) The University review panel will consider the case and make a decision on

behalf of Senate either to: Permit the student to resit some/all failed assessments as a first or additional

attempt, reinstating him/her on the programme if necessary; OR Refer the case back to the Assessment Board with commentary; OR Reject the appeal, accompanied by clear reasons that will be provided

to the student. The panel may not recommend any alteration to the original marks.

d) The outcome of a University review panel hearing will be notified to the student

in writing, normally within 14 days of the hearing. e) The outcome of the University review panel hearing will be reported to Senate

and a record retained. C. Office of the Independent Adjudicator When the University’s internal procedures have been concluded, a student will be issued with a Completion of Procedures (CoP) letter. Following this, a student who is dissatisfied with the final decision on his/her case may be able to apply to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) for Higher Education. Information and eligibility rules are available at: www.oiahe.org.uk Reapproved as a regulation: Senate 23.06.2010 for effect from the start of 2010-11

http://www.city.ac.uk/adu/dps/senate_regs/www.oiahe.org.uk

assessment regulations for postgraduate awards...postgraduate certificate (pg cert) 2010/11...

Documents