Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Stewart House, 32 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DN United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (20) 7862 8211 Fax: +44 (20) 7862 8290 Web: www.londoninternational.ac.uk
Page 1 of 2
6
th November 2012
Mr Moshe Admon 4610E 32
nd St, Tulsa, Oklahoma
[email protected] Dear Mr Admon LLB Examinations SRN = 090389029 Your case has been referred to me by Professor Jenny Hamilton as I deal with appeals and complaints on behalf of the Dean, University of London International Programmes under stage two of the complaints procedure available at: http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/sites/default/files/complaints_procedure.pdf The background to your complaint is that you are an LLB Graduate entry, route B, student and have now taken, and passed, six examination papers. You wrote to Professor Hamilton after an email from Mrs Lindsay Rawlings explaining that your examination papers had been re-checked and that the correct grades had been awarded. As you had studied hard and produced long and detailed answers to the examination questions you felt strongly that the marks awarded were not representative. You are particularly concerned about the low mark of 45% given for the Law of Trusts paper. You have undertaken your own research by replicating your answers and asking US-based professors to grade your answer and additionally by requesting further comment from fellow students. Following this process you disagree with the marks you have been awarded and raise a series of issues which I will attempt to address:
1. You request samples of first class answers to supplement the examiners commentaries which you find lacking. The Undergraduate Laws Programme (ULP) has decided that illustrative extracts from examination answers will feature in the examiners commentaries in future. In academic year 2010-11 the ULP conducted a small trial where chief examiners were asked to incorporate extracts from papers. This has been successful and is now being extended to include other subject areas.
2. You believe that you are entitled to have your examination scripts returned to benefit from any comments by the examiners. You also request the return of your 2012 examination papers. Students do not have the right to the return of examinations scripts which are exempt under the freedom of information legislation. However, a subject access request is possible and details are set out at: http://www.london.ac.uk/fileadmin/documents/foi/Dealing_with_requests_for_personal_information.pdf I am also copying the Data Protection Officer, University of London into this response.
3. You suggest that an “academic review” of examination papers should be available to students who have achieved a specified grade point average and believe that grades awarded are unjustified. You will already be aware that the regulations do not permit an appeal against academic judgment. The quality processes which govern examination marking require that each paper is marked independently by two markers who agree the mark. Where such agreement is not possible the paper is reviewed by a third marker, normally the Chief Examiner.
Page 2 of 2
The External Examiner is provided with samples of scripts and is able to request any script at will. The final mark awarded is confirmed by the Examination Board in the presence of the External Examiner, who is a subject expert from another university and appointed to confirm standards.
4. You identify a series of concerns that other students have shared with you including: the apparent lack of consistency in paper grading; the poor design of examination papers; and the degree of subjectivity in marking. I have already explained the steps taken by the University of London International Programmes to assure consistency as far as are reasonably possible within a mass examination system. Subject areas also use moderation and standardization meetings to address differences in marking and to reduce some of the subjectivity that may influence marking. An additional important feature of the University of London International Programmes examinations is that a preponderance of markers are employed by Colleges of the University of London and routinely grade papers taken by on-campus students. This is central to securing the standard of the University of London award. The Undergraduate Laws Programme is constantly seeking to improve the assessment system and I am confident that Professor Hamilton will take into account your ideas and concerns.
5. You believe that students studying independently are treated unjustly as they have do not have access to visiting University of London professors who attend teaching institutions. All students have access to the VLE and a range of materials and the Undergraduate Laws Programme is currently exploring the filming, and streaming to the VLE, of some of the content of the London weekend study courses. Regional revision courses are also available for independent students studying in specific locations and the trial streaming to the VLE may be extended to include some of the international revision courses.
6. You point out that only a small number of first class degrees are awarded.
The University of London International Programmes is concerned that only a small number of students reach the standard required for the award of a first class degree and we are constantly seeking ways of providing more support for students. However, the International Programmes has an important access mission thus we keep fees low and permit students with minimal entry qualifications the opportunity to access our degrees. Maintaining low fees limits the amount of support we can offer and low entry qualifications also means that we do not see the kinds of results evident on campus where Colleges can be selective in offering places to the most accomplished students.
Finally your script for the Law of Trusts has been looked at by the Chair of the Examination Board who has confirmed the mark awarded. Please accept my best wishes for your future studies. Yours sincerely,
Dr Stephanie Wilson Director, Corporate Performance & Quality [email protected] cc. Vice-Chancellor, University of London;
Dean, University of London International Programmes; Data Protection Officer, University of London
