external examiner induction academic regulations for taught programmes 2015/16 annette cooke/alison...

12
External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015 1

Upload: luke-boone

Post on 08-Jan-2018

216 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

DESCRIPTION

Assessment Modules normally have one or two components of assessment A student is normally allowed: a) one initial attempt to take a module (with attendance) and b) one opportunity to be reassessed in components of failed module(s) and c) one final opportunity to retake a module (with attendance) Assessments are verified and then set at specified times (e.g. exams in examinations period) Modules are normally capped at pass mark if reassessed or retaken UG modules at one level must normally be passed before progression to next level 3

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

External Examiner InductionAcademic Regulations for

Taught Programmes 2015/16

Annette Cooke/Alison JonesQuality and Enhancement Office4 November 2015

1

Page 2: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Academic Regulations

• The regulations apply to all programmes (some programme specific requirements)

• Supplementary policies and procedures support the regulations, providing more detailed information (e.g. Assessment and Feedback, Personal Mitigating Circumstances, Boards of Examiners, External Examining)

• Key documents are provided for External Examiners on the External Examiner webpage

2

Page 3: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Assessment• Modules normally have one or two components of

assessment • A student is normally allowed:

a) one initial attempt to take a module (with attendance) andb) one opportunity to be reassessed in components of failed

module(s) andc) one final opportunity to retake a module (with attendance)

• Assessments are verified and then set at specified times (e.g. exams in examinations period)

• Modules are normally capped at pass mark if reassessed or retaken

• UG modules at one level must normally be passed before progression to next level

3

Page 4: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Assessed Work• All written examinations at Levels 5, 6 and 7 levels

are marked anonymously • All the above are subject to moderation however if

any Level 4 assessments contribute to classification (e.g. FD), moderation is also required

• As part of the moderation process, external examiners cannot negotiate individual marks

• There is currently no requirement for coursework to be marked anonymously

4

Page 5: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

All elements of assessment are mark out of 100 and recorded as a % mark, unless graded Pass/Fail

Level 7 (pass = 50%) Levels 3-6 (pass = 40%)outstanding 90% – 100% outstandingexcellent 80% – 89% excellentvery good 70% – 79% very goodGood 60% – 69% goodsatisfactory 50% – 59% fairunsatisfactory40% – 49% adequateInadequate 30% – 39% unsatisfactoryPoor 20% – 29% poorvery poor 10% – 19% very poorextremely poor 0% – 9% extremely poor

Assessment Marking Scales

5

Page 6: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Late Submission Penalties• Late submission penalties are:

Up to 1 working day late - penalty of 5 marks (not %)Up to 2 working days late - penalty of 10 marksUp to 3 working days late - penalty of 15 marksUp to 4 working days late - penalty of 20 marks

• More than 4 working days late, assessment becomes a non-submission (and cannot be submitted/marked)

• In the case of late submission, if the original mark awarded was a pass, the penalised mark cannot go below pass mark

• If original mark awarded was a fail, no further penalty is applied for late submission

6

Page 7: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Personal Mitigating Circumstances

There are three categories of PMC request that can be considered:1. Absence2. Non submission3. Late submission

PMCs must be submitted within 10 working days of the assessment and are usually considered within 3 working days of submission. The Board of Examiners must decide on the action to implement in the case of an accepted PMC:

1. Absence – offer replacement attempt2. Non submission - offer replacement attempt3. Late submission – remove late submission penalties

By sitting/submitting an assessment, students are deemed to be fit to sit

7

Page 8: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Automatic Compensation

• Automatic compensation for a ‘narrow failure’ can be awarded in some circumstances for failure in up to 20 credits (Levels 3 to 6) or 30 credits (L7)

• Automatic compensation gives credit for the module in question, it does not change the module mark

8

Page 9: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Degree ClassificationStandard Honours degree programme mark is derived from:

25% of weighted mean mark for best 100 credits at level 5 + 75% of weighted mean mark for best 100 credits at level 6

Class of degree thresholds:

68.50% First59.00% Upper second49.50% Lower second40.00% Third

No discretion for students close to the next classification boundary.Non-standard degree programme mark (including top-up degrees) derived from all available credits at levels 5 and 6, i.e. no credits excluded from the calculation.

9

Page 10: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Awards with Merit and DistinctionFoundation Degrees

•Programme mark derived from best 100 credits at each of Levels 4 and 5, weighted 25:75•Mark of at least 68.50% = FD with Distinction•Mark of at least 59.00% = FD with Merit

Postgraduate Diploma•Programme mark derived from best 120 credits at Level 7•Programme mark of at least 70.00% = PgDip with Distinction•Programme mark of at least 60.00% = PgDip with Merit

Masters Degree•Programme mark derived from 180 credits at Level 7•Programme mark AND Project Stage mark of at least 70.00% = Masters with Distinction•Programme mark AND Project Stage mark of at least 60.00% = Masters with Merit

10

Page 11: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Academic MisconductCases are considered by a School Academic Misconduct Panel or, in the most serious cases, the Disciplinary Panel.

All suspected cases will be investigated and, if proven, one of the following penalties will be applied:•A mark of 0 (or grade of fail) is awarded for the component of assessment•A mark of 0 (or grade of fail) is awarded for the module•A mark of 0 (or grade of fail) is awarded for the module and marks for all other modules at that level are kept at minimum pass mark/grade

11

Page 12: External Examiner Induction Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2015/16 Annette Cooke/Alison Jones Quality and Enhancement Office 4 November 2015

Academic AppealsAn appeal can only be considered valid on one or more of thefollowing grounds:

•personal mitigating circumstances were not notified to the Board of Examiners and there was good reason for this

•there has been a procedural irregularity in the assessment process

•that the Board of Examiners has acted in a way which is manifestly unreasonable

12