YOUR FUTURE STARTS WITH HOPE External Examiner Event April 2015 A Very Warm Welcome!

YOUR FUTURESTARTS WITH HOPE

External Examiner Event April 2015

A Very Warm Welcome!

http://www.hope.ac.uk/aboutus/governance/academicquality/externalexaminers/

Agenda• Welcome and Introduction

Professor Kenneth Newport, Pro Vice- Chancellor (Academic)

• Undergraduate and Postgraduate Programmes at Liverpool Hope

– Dr Katherine Birch, Senior Academic Quality Advisor

• Overview of Examining Procedures at Liverpool Hope

– Mr Neil McLaughlin-Cook, University Registrar

• Coffee Break

UG EXAMINERS• Key Regulations (Undergraduate)

– Neil McLaughlin-Cook

• Mitigating Circumstances, Disabled Students, and Academic Misconduct

– Katherine Birch

PG EXAMINERS• Mitigating Circumstances, Disabled

Students, and Academic Misconduct– Katherine Birch

• Key Regulations (Postgraduate) – Neil McLaughlin-Cook

ALL• Q & A • Lunch followed by Departmental

Visits (prior arrangement)

Liverpool Hope: Update 2014-15

• Some changes to University’s governance structures and academic portfolio

• Embedding of new model for all undergraduate provision • Refreshed Learning Teaching and Assessment Strategy• Refreshed Corporate Plan• New Enhancement Strategy in development (Senate, June 2015)• First year of new Annual Review and Enhancement process• REF Outcomes• Changes in the entry criteria for postgraduate programmes• Student Voice and institution-wide enhancement ongoing focus• Preparation for QAA HER Review w/c 30.11.2015

All students at Liverpool Hope University will experience

(as reflected within the LT&A Strategy)

1. Learning in small groups which allows the development of academic potential and fosters relationships with members of staff 2. A coherent curriculum supported by well-designed assessments and appropriate feedback 3. Signposting of a clear route for personal development and employability 4. A curriculum informed and influenced by current research 5. Well organised learning opportunities underpinned by a network of pastoral and academic support

Cont.6. Developments and changes to Learning and Teaching made after listening to the student body 7. Teaching delivered by staff using good and innovative practice informed by a range of development opportunities 8. Learning opportunities developed through regular reflection by subject and support teams 9. Learning opportunities developed with recognition of diversity within the student body 10. Learning opportunities delivered in a high quality physical, virtual and social learning environment

YOUR FUTURESTARTS WTH HOPE

The Framework for Hope’s UG and PG Programmes

Dr Katherine BirchSenior Academic Quality Advisor

Our Journey

• Significant programme of work over several years to review and redesign Hope’s UG portfolio of programmes

Resulting in:• 2012-13 academic year = common framework approved

at Senate for ALL UG programmes. Most programmes subject to formal (re)approval via due process.

• 2013-14 first year of operation*• Brief Overview of Hope’s framework for UG / update on

PG and any other wider EE related matters

* except in the case/s of approved legacy exceptions

Recap: Principles for UG provision

• To move beyond fragmentation of learning (often associated with a modular curriculum structure) to having a rounded formation of the graduate in the discipline.

• To support student progression and enhancement• To ensure that staff and students have improved engagement

(recognising that the design and delivery of the curriculum is a key factor in shaping engagement)

• To ensure that academic staff/teams are central to learning and teaching in the discipline and that teaching is research informed.

• To ensure that all our students have, as a minimum, an underpinning common experience / pattern of provision

Hope’s UG Curriculum

Described as:• Centred upon an ‘essential disciplinary core’, which ALL students study

(those taking subject as a major AND single subject)• Not broken up into self-contained units (modules)• Coherent and learning/experience = scaffolded • Reflected some common norms • 50% of the formal delivery of a programme should be research informed

teaching (lectures) and 50% geared towards self-directed learning (seminars/tutors)

• Contact time must be at least 12 hours at Level C and 10 hours at both I and H (Levels 4,5,and 6 of the FHEQ).

• All UG provision went through formal approval/major modification during 2012-13 academic year

Also….

Within the undergraduate curriculum, it should be noted that• provision (and linked assessment regime) is described at

the Level • combined honours students take the core curriculum

(described as the subject major) in each of their chosen subjects.

• where choice is offered (seminar ‘options’) this is normally located within the Level H provision.

• First Year = Foundations; Second Year = Explorations; Third Year = Advanced Studies

UG provision Disciplinary Core 180 credits(reflecting notion of graduate in the

discipline)

Plus…..

Level H/6 (60 credits) Curriculum articulated by Level3 hours of Lectures / 2 hours of seminars / 1 hour of Tutorials

A student will follow

EITHER additional 180 credits in subject if single

honours (60x3)

OR 2nd subject disciplinary core if combined honours

Level I/5 (60 credits)Curriculum articulated by Level3 hours of Lectures / 2 hours of seminars / 1 hour of Tutorials

Level C/4 (60 credits)Curriculum articulated by Level3 hours of Lectures / 2 hours of seminars / 1 hour of Tutorials

Disciplinary Core 180 creditsAssessment by Level

2nd subject core / or additional provision for SH students

Assessment by Level

Level H/6 60 credits assessed 25% examination

50% seminar related assessment/s25% (notional 15 credits) – see below

60 credits assessed via25% examination

50% seminar related assessment/s25% (notional 15 credits) – see below

SH STUDENTSAdditional assessment - (30 credit) Dissertation

COMBINED HONOURS STUDENTS OPTION 1: integrative dissertation (30 credits spanning both subjects )

OPTION 2: 2x smaller (notional) 15 credit projects one in each subject area)

Level I/5 60 credits assessed via25% examination

50% seminar related assessment/s25% tutorial related assessment/s



Level C/4 60 credits assessed via33% examination




Core Curriculum Additional Provision For Single Hons StudentsThird Year – Level H/6 – 60 creditsAdvanced Studies in X (Core) Standard teaching pattern every week: Minimum2 lectures 2-plus seminars (max 4)1 tutorialTotal = 5 hours

Third Year – level H – 60 creditsAdvanced Studies in X (Additional) Standard teaching pattern every week: Minimum2 lectures 2-plus seminars (max 4)1 tutorialTotal = 5 hours

25% exam (on lecture material)

50% seminar related assessment

25% research project or dissertation



25% research project

Second Year – Level I/5 – 60 creditsExplorations in X (Core)Standard teaching pattern every week: Minimum2 lectures 2 seminars 1 tutorialTotal = 5 hours

Second Year – level I – 60 creditsExplorations in X (Additional)Standard teaching pattern every week: Minimum2 lectures 2 seminars 1 tutorialTotal = 5 hours



25% synthesis written work (tutorial related)



25% synthesis written work (tutorial related)

First Year – Level C/4 – 60 creditsFoundations in X (Core) Standard teaching pattern every week: Minimum3 lectures 2 seminars 1 tutorialTotal = 6 hours

First Year – level C – 60 creditsFoundations in X (Additional) Standard teaching pattern every week: Minimum3 lectures 2 seminars 1 tutorialTotal = 6 hours



33% synthesis written work (on lecture and seminar material)



33% synthesis written work (on lecture and seminar material)

Coherency &Vertical

scaffolding

Linkages & coherency across the

whole level for SH students

PG Taught Provision

• Modular structure• PGC (60) /PGD (120) /Masters (180)• MA – includes research project• MEd – entirely taught

• Some of the principles associated with UG provision (such as disciplinary ‘core’ reflected in discussion/design of PGT programmes)

Also ….. a quick update on MMAP & Study Abroad

• EE have key role within – our process for making modifications to approved provision (MMAP)– our process for approving provision for Incoming Study Abroad

students

• All major modifications (changes to LOs, assessments etc.) which do not trigger a (re)approval process require academic teams to seek opinion from their current EE as part of the Faculty approvals process (FQLT & FB).

• Hope’s UG provision is described at the Level (60 credits). Incoming Study Abroad students require provision to be at 15 or 30 credits.

• Therefore, our process = for already approved provision (i) look at what is on offer within time period, (ii) articulate LOs, content and assessment at 15/30 credits for Study Abroad (specific template) (iii) EE and Faculty Sign Off.


Examining Procedures: An overview

Neil McLaughlin Cook, Registrar

External Examiner Annual Event 2015

Contents1. Publication of results…

2. Arriving at the results…in a nutshell.

3. Agreeing Grades & Module/Block Results: a) roles of the Panel / APAB;b) roles of the External Examiners.

4. Agreeing Progression/Award Outcomes: a) roles of the APAB & External Examiners;b) role of a Board in the 2 stage system.

5. Faculty External Examiners.

1. Publication of results… (a)• Electronically:

– summary via email;– full details via the website;– all read from data approved by Panels & Boards.

• Email Summary – Progression / Award Status. E.g.

Pass Level C; Progress to Level I1st class honoursRetake Level I with AttendanceDeferred Assessment Granted [over 100 other possibilities…..]

– Explanation of what the status means and what action is needed or advised.

• Full Details– Progression / Award Status & explanation.– Overall Grade & Mark for each undergraduate block or postgraduate

module.A+, A, B+, B, C+, C, D, E [undergraduate pass grades]PD, PM, P [postgraduate pass grades]FQ, F+, F, F-, U etc. [fail grades]M, MP etc. [mitigating circumstances grades]

– Overall Result for each undergraduate block or postgraduate module.Pass “Not Yet Passed”

[for fail grades: reassessment opportunity; for “M” grades: deferred initial assessment opportunity]

Fail [no reassessment opportunity].

1. Publication of results… (b)

⁻ Explanation of what Pass / Not Yet Passed / Fail mean, and what action is needed or advised.

⁻ Grade and mark for every assessment component. • Key Themes Exam M 0• Major Authors Essay C 54• Practical Portfolio B+ 67• Placement Learning P 100

⁻ [Re]submission date for every component for which the student has an M or F grade, and a further assessment opportunity has been granted.

1. Publication of results… (c)

2. Arriving at the results…in a nutshell (a)

For all postgraduates and as many undergraduates as possible:

• A subject-based Assessment, Progression & Award Board [“APAB”], attended by the External Examiner, will agree, for each student:– marks, grades & results for u/g blocks or p/g modules;– overall Progression / Award outcomes.

In other cases, we use a 2-stage procedure:

• Panels of Examiners [attended by the External Examiner] – agree marks, grades & results for u/g blocks or p/g modules;

• Boards of Examiners [attended by a Faculty Examiner]– agree overall Progression / Award outcomes.

• For Single Honours, we typically use APABsBUT at Level C we use the two-stage procedure to deal withstudents who take a second subject examined by a different team.

• For Combined Honours & QTS, we typically use the 2-stage procedure BUT we use APABs for– students following a Single Major at Level H;– students taking 2 Majors examined by the same examiners [eg History &

Politics].

• A single meeting may serve more than one purposeThe undergraduate Music meeting in June will be:– an APAB, agreeing block results & progression/award outcomes for BA

Music.– a Panel, agreeing block results for students taking Music as a “Major” within

Combined Honours or a “Specialist Subject” within BA QTS.

2. Arriving at the results…in a nutshell (b)

• In order to achieve consistency in a devolved system….

– All Board members will receive a “Guide to Making Decisions About Students”, focussing on the cohorts to be discussed [currently in preparation].

– Before the meeting, the Registrar [or nominee] will liaise with the Chair of the Board to discuss regulatory implications of potentially awkward cases, and to identify any relevant precedents set by previous Boards.

– Where a Board sets a regulatory precedent, the Registrar will arrange for the Chairs of all subsequent Boards to be informed of that precedent.

2. Arriving at the results…in a nutshell (3)

3. Agreeing Marks, Grades & Results for U/G Blocks and P/G Modules:a) roles of the Panel / APAB (1)

• Membership includes internal examiners PLUS External Examiner[s] PLUS Registrar or nominee; chaired by HoD or nominee.

• Receive profile for each student generated from SITS, indicating proposed marks, grades and results [previously scrutinised by Internal Examiners Committee].

• Agree confirmed marks, grades & results [and form of any reassessments].– Remember to confirm Pass/Not Yet Passed/Fail status, as well as

grades.

3. Agreeing Marks, Grades & Results for U/G Blocks and P/G Modules:

a) roles of the Panel / APAB (2)

• Receive summary statistics generated from SITS.

• Receive oral comments from External Examiner[s] about: overall standards, examples of good practice, how the curriculum and/or its assessment procedures might be enhanced.

• Identify and consider any generic issues that should be drawn to the attention of the appropriate Board of Examiners or the Standing Sub-Committee on Assessment.

• [Summer 2015 dates should now have been agreed]

• [In May/June, agree attendance requirements for the reassessment meetings.]

3. Agreeing Marks, Grades & Results for U/G Subjects and P/G Modules:

b) roles of the External Examiners (1)

• Four General Roles

– ensure that assessment processes and standards are applied appropriately, consistently and fairly;

– judge whether or not the learning outcomes of each U/G block or P/G module have been met;

– ensure that the learning outcomes are appropriate in the light of national standards and benchmarks;

– measure the outcomes against the appropriate pathway/programme specifications.



• Focus on Moderation

– “It is not the role of the external examiner to act as a … third marker, where there is a disagreement between two internal markers. It is the responsibility of the internal markers to seek to come to an agreed grading and for the external examiner to confirm, or otherwise, the validity of that decision.”

– “Although an External Examiner is entitled, on the basis of his/her scrutiny of a sample of work, to propose that, overall, the marks awarded on a module should be raised or lowered, she/he should not normally adjust the marks awarded to individual candidates whose work was included in the sample.”



• “An External Examiner may reach the conclusion that the standards applied to the sample reviewed have been over-generous or too harsh and, as a consequence, may propose a change to the grades awarded. In such circumstances, you should normally reconsider the marks awarded by internal examiners to the whole cohort, not just to those students whose work was included in the sample.”

• Please focus on whether broad standards are appropriate.

E.g.• At Level M[7] are assessments marked at 70+ consistent with the

award of a Distinction?• At Level H[6] are marks of 60-64 indicative of low 2i work?

• Any adjustments agreed following external moderation must be applied to individual assessment components, NOT direct to overall aggregates.



• Samples of Work & Approval of Proposed Assessments

– You should be asked to comment on draft coursework assessments as well as draft exam papers, before they were issued to students. Please scrutinise carefully.

– You must have the opportunity to examine students’ work for a range of assessments for each PG module / UG block in your remit. [“All assessments must be undertaken in a way that enables external moderation”.]

– Negotiate samples with your Departments. You can request further work if you cannot reach a judgement about standards.

– Samples are expected to include: • work within the first class band [for undergraduates] or the distinction band [for

postgraduates]; • fails [particularly fails close to key boundaries]; • a representative sample of other work [including, for undergraduates, a sample

of work within each of the mark ranges corresponding to particular degree classifications];

• work from all Levels of Study [but Level C(4) can be less extensive].

4. Agreeing Progression / Award Outcomes: a) roles of the APAB & External Examiners (1)

• External Examiners have a specific role to:– ensure that the procedures for determining students’ entitlement

to progress….or to receive an award, are applied appropriately, consistently, fairly and in line with the University’s regulations and conventions.

• The Board receives, from SITS, student profiles comprising:– recommended marks, grades & results, and – proposed progression decisions, award decisions and degree

classifications.

4. Agreeing Progression / Award Outcomes : a) roles of the APAB & External Examiners(2)

• The Board will note any changes to the profiles, and agree confirmed progression / award / classification / outcomes.– SITS will usually propose generous interpretation of regulations;

Board can over-ride.– Consider classifications for all students for whom the Board can

exercise discretion.– Specifically agree outcomes for all students with Fail results for U/G

subjects and P/G modules.– If necessary, reconsider Not Yet Passed results in light of overall

decisions.

4. Agreeing Progression / Award Outcomes: b) role of a Board in the 2 stage system (1)

Very similar to APABs, except that:

• the student profiles will reflect any changes agreed at the Panel;

• the Board will consider any general issues raised by Panels;

• the Board will be attended by a Faculty External Examiner, not a subject-based examiner;

• the Board will receive progression recommendations from Panels, and will focus on those students for whom at least one Panel did not recommend progression!

• Each Faculty has, in addition to their subject external examiners, one 'Faculty Examiner' who is chosen from the ranks of experienced subject external examiners.

• For a small additional fee, Faculty Examiners are asked to: – consider all external examiner reports within the Faculty; – attend at least one meeting of a Faculty Progression and Award Board

and any meetings of University-wide Boards agreed by the Registrar; – submit a written report in September of each year based on these two

activities, reporting to the University issues, concerns and good practice in relation to assessment and examination board procedures and practices;

– attend the annual External Examiners' event and be available for new external examiners.

– where appropriate, act as mentors for new or lesser experienced external examiners.

5. Faculty External Examiners

Coffee Break

YOUR FUTURESTARTS WITH HOPE


An overview of the Regulations for

Undergraduates



Contents1. Overview of Current Undergraduate Provision.

2. Curriculum Structure.

3. Progression & Completion Rules.

4. Degree Classification & Calculation.

5. Redeeming Fails.

6. What will Board Transcripts Look like?

1. Overview of 2014/5 Undergraduate Provision

BA/BSc Combined Honours– Taken by over 1/3 of undergraduates.– Non-modular curriculum.

BA/BSc/BDes Single Honours– Much teaching typically shared with Combined Honours.– Non-modular curriculum.

BA QTS– Primary Teaching with a Specialist Subject.– Much Specialist Subject teaching shared with Combined Honours.– Non-modular curriculum.– Major changes to curriculum structure over several years.

Implications for Externals:

• Combined Honours & BA QTS students will take your subject for only part of their degree, so you might not see their overall profile.– E.g. if a student is taking BA Dance and Sport Studies, you will see

EITHER their Dance profile OR their Sport profile.– E.g. if a student is taking BA QTS, you will normally see EITHER their

Primary Teaching profile OR their Specialist Subject profile.

• Single Honours undergraduates will typically only study your single subject, so you will see their overall profile.– E.g. if a student is taking BSc Sport Studies, you will see all the marks

contributing to their degree.

1. Overview of 2014/5 Undergraduate Provision (2)

2. Curriculum Structure [a]

The curriculum comprises credit-rated blocks• These are typically much larger than “modules”.• MOST students do:

– TWO 60-credit blocks in Level C[4];– TWO 60-credit blocks in Level I[5];– THREE blocks in Level H[6]

• TWO 45-credit taught blocks, and• ONE 30-credit research block

o Single Honours - 1 Dissertationo Double Major - EITHER 2 Research Projects OR 1 “integrated”

Dissertation.• QTS students do:

– TWO 60-credit Level C[4] blocks in Year 1;– TWO 60-credit Level I[5] blocks in Year 2;– TWO 60-credit Level H[6] blocks in Year 3;– TWO 60-credit blocks in Year 4 – 1 at Level H[6] & 1 at Level M[7].

2. Curriculum Structure [b]

There are some non-standard structures• “Legacy provision” – eg might have “Key Honours Assessments” in a taught

block, instead of a Research Block.• Several variations for QTS!• Psychology ALWAYS has a Research Block comprising a 30-credit

Dissertation, even for Double Majors.• BA Creative & Performing Arts has 120-credit blocks.• A very small number of Combined Honours students do all Level H blocks in

one subject [Single Subject Exit].

• BUT NO SUBJECT HAS MODULES!

All assessments are attached to the block• Academics can set assessments that transcend parts of the block.

– If a block in BA History covered Medieval and Modern History, the block might be assessed in part by an exam requiring students to pull together themes from the medieval and modern periods.

• All credits are attached to the block, so passing a block is all-or-nothing.– If students fail a block following resits, and need to retake with

attendance, they retake the whole block.

2. Curriculum Structure [c]


• You will be asked to confirm:– marks & grades for individual assessments, and– aggregate marks & grades for blocks.

• You will neither see, nor be expected to confirm:– aggregate marks & grades for modules within a block.

• You might be asked to look at an “integrated” dissertation [eg in Education & Music].

• Find out from your colleagues whether your provision follows the standard structure.

2. Curriculum Structure [d]

Scope of the Rules

• Progression from C to I

• Progression from I to H

• Completion of Level H [and M for QTS]

Broadly similar rules apply in each case, as follows.

3. Progression & Completion Rules (a)

To progress/complete, students must normally meet 4 criteria, as follows:

Get an aggregate mark of 40 or higher for their current Level.

– Where there are two or more blocks, students normally need separate aggregates of 40 or higher for each block.

– An aggregate mark of 39 in one block could be condoned, but only if the examiners judge that the student has met all learning outcomes.

3. Progression & Completion Rules (b)

Pass any assessments designated as “Qualifying Components”, or groups of assessments designated as “Qualifying Sets”.

• At Level H, Dissertations, Research Projects and Key Honours Assessments are Qualifying Components for a degree with Honours.

• Otherwise few [except for QTS, Social Work, Biology, Accounting & Law].

Pass assessments weighted at over 50% towards the aggregate mark.

• Assume that a student is given 6 assessments: 2 essays [20% each], 2 presentations [10% each] and 2 exams [20% each]. Students cannot progress if they only pass one exam and one essay because their combined weighting is only 40%.

• If there are 2 blocks, students are normally expected to meet this criterion separately for each block.

3. Progression & Completion Rules (c)

Obtain 35+ for all formal assessments.

• Unlimited compensation of work marked at 35-39, but NO compensation of marks awarded 34 or less.

• As a consequence, non-submission will prevent progression/completion.

• The ONLY exception is a single early assessment for each block at Level C[4] – the “low stakes” assessment.

• Level H[6] students with coursework marks of 1-34 are allowed to re-present before the Board, to try to increase their mark to 35.

• Descriptor: 35-39 Marginal Fail• The student has marginally failed to reach the standard required to

Pass……However…….the work has sufficient strengths to allow the failure to be compensated if the student passed the subject overall.

• Descriptor: 25-34 Clear Fail• The work is well below the standard required to Pass and so the

failure cannot be compensated…..

3. Progression & Completion Rules (d)

Implications for Externals:• You need to be satisfied with the standards used to assess each assessment.

– If Level I History Core is assessed by a Nazi Germany essay, a Slave Trade essay, a Roman Britain presentation and a Nazi Germany exam , you need to see samples for all 4 components.

• Make sure you are confident about the Pass/Fail boundary for any “qualifying components”.– If students can only progress if they pass the Nazi Germany essay, you

need to pay particular attention to this assessment.• Make sure you are confident about the 34/35 boundary for all other

assessments.– Awarding 35 instead of 36 will make little difference; awarding 34 instead

of 35 could be crucial.• Consider requesting a sample of work that includes all work submitted for a

block by selected students.– This will enable you to judge whether, overall, the students have met

block-wide learning outcomes.

3. Progression & Completion Rules (e)

4. Degree Classification & Calculation (a)

All Degrees EXCEPT QTS [1]

Classifications are based on the following 3 degree marks.1. The overall aggregate from Levels C[10%], I[30%] & H[60%].2. The aggregate from Level H.3. The aggregate mark from the Research Block [&/or the “Key Honours

Assessments”].

If all 3 marks are in the same class:• that is normally what the student will get.

If the 3 marks are not all the same class:• the Examiners will consider the student’s profile.


EXAMPLE ONE.Overall aggregate mark from Levels C I & H = 72.Aggregate mark from Level H = 78Aggregate mark from Research Block = 85.Degree: 1st class

EXAMPLE TWO.Overall aggregate mark from Levels C I & H = 69.Aggregate mark from Level H = 68Aggregate mark from Research Block = 68.Degree: 2i

EXAMPLE THREE.Overall aggregate mark from Levels C I & H = 69.Aggregate mark from Level H = 68Aggregate mark from Research Block = 75.Degree: [Examiners to decide between 1st or 2i].

4. Degree Classification & Calculation (b)


4. Degree Classification & Calculation (c)

Where the marks span 2 or more classes, the Examiners can exercise discretion in reaching their decision, but will normally follow 6 principles and Board transcripts will include a recommended classification, based on the principles….…..

1. They will base their decisions ONLY on the quality of work. They will NOT take into account any mitigating circumstances.

2. If the Level C[4] marks have lowered the Overall Aggregate, thereby lowering a classification, the I/H aggregate is used instead, IF.

the student had begun before September 2009;the Level C[4] work had not been externally moderated.

All Degrees EXCEPT QTS [4]3. They will look at whether the student has passed the Research Block [etc]

If not, they will probably say that the student will need to redeem the fail before becoming eligible to graduate with Honours.

4. They will look at whether the marks fall into the “high” or “low” part of each classification band, as follows:

High 1st class 86-100 A+Low 1st class 70-85 A

High 2i 65-69 B+Low 2i 60-64 B

High 2ii 55-59 C+Low 2ii 50-54 C

High 3rd 45-49 DLow 3rd 40-44 E

4. Degree Classification & Calculation (d)

4. Degree Classification & Calculation (e)

ALL DEGREES EXCEPT QTS [5]

5. If the Overall Aggregate from C, I & H is in the “high” part of a band, they will: either award that classification, or move the student up to the next classification.

They will typically consider: the closeness of the Overall Aggregate to the next class, and whether the student reached the next class for work weighted at least 50% to the

aggregate Level H mark [including the aggregate from the Research Block, etc].

For example:STUDENT A– Overall Aggregate = 69 [top of the “high 2i” band; very close to a 1st]

would probably get a 1st if she just scraped into the “low 1st” band for “50%” of Level H work.

STUDENT B– Overall Aggregate = 66 [just in the “high 2i” band; further from a 1st]

would probably only get a 1st if she got “high 1st class marks” for “50%” of Level H work.

4. Degree Classification & Calculation (f)

6. If the Overall Aggregate from C I & H is in the “low” part of a band, they will: normally award that classification, but might move the student down one classification.

They will typically only move a student down if the Level H performance hasunambiguously fallen to the lower classification, both in terms of theoverall profile AND the aggregate mark from the Research Block [&/or KHAs].

For example:STUDENT C– Overall Aggregate = 60;– 2ii marks or lower for 55% of work at Level H; AND– Research Block aggregate = 58;

would probably get a 2ii.STUDENT D– Overall Aggregate = 60;– 2ii marks or lower for 55% of work at Level H; BUT– Research Block aggregate = 65;

would probably get a 2i.


BA QTS Degrees

Will basically follow similar rules to others, except that the 3 degree marks are:1. The overall aggregate from Levels C[5%], I [25%] & H [70%].2. The aggregate from Level H across Years 3 & 4.3. The aggregate mark from Level H in Year 4.

Level M[7] doesn’t count towards the classification, but:• students are not eligible for BA QTS until they get at least a Level H pass on this block;• Level M credits can be used towards an MA in Education.

Quality of Professional Placement Learning doesn’t count towards the classification, • students are not eligible for BA QTS until they pass PPL;• high quality PPL can enable the award to be conferred with either Merit or Distinction

in Teaching Practice.

4. Degree Classification & Calculation (g)

Implications for externals:

o Pay particular attention to Dissertations, Research Projects and Key Honours Assessments.

o Make sure you are confident that work is suitably placed into the “high” or “low” part of each band.

Raising 58 to 59 or 74 to 75 will probably make no difference. Raising 59 to 60 or 85 to 86 could be crucial.

o Remember that the highest category starts at 86! If you think markers use a notional maximum of 75, say so!

o Level C[4] counts, so you will need to see a sample of work. This can be smaller than the samples for other Levels.

4. Degree Classification & Calculation (h)

5. Redeeming Fails (a)

Failure of Individual Assessments

Normally, fails of 35-39 only need to be redeemed if the student has failed the relevant block overall.

Failure of a Qualifying Component cannot be condoned, irrespective of the overall aggregate.

Fails of <35 [except “low stakes”] cannot be condoned, irrespective of the overall aggregate.

Failure of Blocks

At all levels, students normally have up to three redemption opportunities:

• reassessment of failed components at the next assessment period [typically late August],

then • a single opportunity to retake the entire block, with attendance

then• reassessment of failed components.

BUT

5. Redeeming Fails (b)

The right to reassessment is normally forfeited if……..

EITHER the aggregate mark for the block is 24 or lower;

OR the failed assessment[s] were based on practical work which the student had not undertaken [unless it would be practicable for the work to be undertaken in the reassessment period].

If reassessment is not available, the only way to redeem is to retake the whole block with attendance [only available if the fail was a 1st attempt].

AND

5. Redeeming Fails (c)

The right to retake with attendance is normally forfeited if:

EITHER the student had not undertaken a reassessment opportunity without either providing evidence of a good reason or indicating that they wished to do a retake instead;

OR {at Level I[5] onwards} the outcome of an academic misconduct investigation was that the student’s studies were to be terminated;

OR it would not be possible for the student to retake without violating the maximum duration for the Programme.

AND If a QTS / Social Work student fails professional practice…..

the Examiners are entitled to forfeit a reassessment [or retake] opportunity irrespective of the aggregate mark gained on the subject.

5. Redeeming Fails (d)

Are Marks Capped on Reassessment /Retake?

Following reassessment: marks for individual assessments uncapped; aggregate block mark either capped at 40 or frozen if already >40.

Following a retake with attendance [or alternative]: marks for individual assessments uncapped; aggregate marks normally uncapped [but capped at 40 if initial fail due

to academic misconduct or non-submission].

Implications for Externals [redeeming fails]:o Make sure you are confident about overall Block Aggregates around the 24/25

boundary. This probably means you need to get an overview of some students’ work.

o Make sure you are confident about assessment marks around the 34/35 boundary.

5. Redeeming Fails (e)


Issued electronically; best displayed via laptop or iPad.

You may get a paper copy….

Key Honours Assessments will have a “K” grade:

Psychology Dissertation AK 72Drama Performance FK 38

Example on next slide.


An overview of the Regulations for

Postgraduates



Contents

1. Progression, Completion & Awards.

2. Redeeming Fails.

3. What will Board Transcripts Look Like?

1. Progression, Completion & Awards (a)

MA/MSc/Med/PG Diplomas/PG Certificates (named awards)

CURRENTLY• Modular, credit-based system [60 credits PG Cert; 120 credits PG Dip;

180 credits Masters].• Merit and Distinction awards available based on the number of credits

passed with a ‘Distinction’ grade (70+), ’Merit’ grade (60-69) or a Pass grade (40-59).

• Some discretion to Boards in awarding Merits and Distinctions, but Conventions cover most cases.

• Normally, no formal progression from taught modules to dissertation.

FROM 2015/6• Review currently underway, reporting to Senate in June.• MAY lead to changes to Pass mark and rules governing eligibility for

awarding with Merit or Distinction.

PGCE

• Academic award based on 60-credit academic module.

• QTS recommendation based on 0-credit professional module

• Postgraduate award [possibly with Merit/Distinction] if academic assessments satisfy level M[7] criteria; graduate award if academic assessments reach Level H[6] criteria.

• Some discretion to Boards, but Conventions cover most cases.

• Possible outcomes:• Postgraduate Certificate with Distinction (with QTS)• Postgraduate Certificate with Distinction (without QTS)• Postgraduate Certificate with Merit (with QTS)• Postgraduate Certificate with Merit (without QTS)• Postgraduate Certificate (with QTS)• Postgraduate Certificate (without QTS)• Professional Graduate Certificate (with QTS)

1. Progression, Completion & Awards (b)


PGCE• Make sure you are confident about the level of a student’s achievement

{M[7] or H[6]}.• Make sure you are confident about the Pass/Merit/Distinction category

awarded for each assessment.

MA/MSc/Med/named PG Diplomas and PG Certificates• Make sure you are confident about the Pass/Merit/Distinction category

awarded for each module (e.g. awarding a module 69 instead of 70 might have a significant effect on the student’s eligibility for a Distinction).

• Make sure you know the proposed module aggregates [not just marks from individual assessments].

1. Progression, Completion & Awards (d)

2. Redeeming Fails (a)

Failure of Individual Assessments

CURRENTLY

Normally, fails only need to be redeemed if the student has failed the relevant module overall.

However, failure of a Qualifying Component, cannot be condoned, irrespective of the module aggregate.

FROM 2015/6

Review is likely to recommend a University-wide “qualifying mark” [??35??] below which a fail cannot be condoned.

Failure of Modules

Students normally have up to three redemption opportunities:• reassessment of failed components at the next assessment period

[normally August], then

• a single opportunity to retake the entire module, with attendancethen

• reassessment of failed components.

BUT

2. Redeeming Fails (b)

The right to reassessment is normally forfeited if……..

EITHER the aggregate mark for the module is 24 or lower;

OR the failed assessment[s] were based on practical work which the student had not undertaken [unless it would be practicable for the work to be undertaken in the reassessment period].

If reassessment is not available, the only way toredeem is a retake of the module with attendance [only available ifthe fail was a 1st attempt].

AND

2. Redeeming Fails (c)

The right to retake with attendance is normally forfeited if:

EITHER the student had not undertaken a reassessment opportunity without either providing evidence of a good reason or indicating that they wished to do a retake instead;

OR the outcome of an academic misconduct investigation was that the student’s studies were to be terminated;

OR it would not be possible for the student to retake without violating the maximum duration for the Programme.

AND If a PGCE / Social Work student fails professional practice…..

the Examiners are entitled to forfeit a reassessment [or retake] opportunity irrespective of the aggregate mark gained on the subject.


Are Marks Capped on Reassessment /Retake?

Following reassessment: marks for individual assessments uncapped; aggregate module mark either capped at 40 or frozen if it was already

>40.

Following a retake with attendance [or alternative]: marks for individual assessments uncapped; aggregate marks normally uncapped [but capped at 40 if initial fail due

to academic misconduct or nonsubmission].



o Make sure you are confident about Module Aggregates around the 24/25 boundary.

o Make sure you know which assessments, if any, are “Qualifying Components”.

2. Redeeming Fails (e)


Issued electronically; best displayed via laptop or iPad.

You may get a paper copy….

Example on next slide.

76


Students with Mitigating Circumstances, Disabled Students,

and Academic Misconduct

Dr Katherine Birch, SAQAon behalf of University Registrar


78

ContentsFit to Sit Policy

ConcessionsExtensionsDeferralsInterruptionsSpecial Assessment Arrangements orAlternative Assessments

Academic MisconductScope of RegulationsTypical PenaltiesProcedures

79

Fit to Sit Policy [1]Outline• If students submit work, they are deemed to be

declaring that they are “fit to be assessed”.

• This has been the University’s policy for many years [introduced well before any current student began].

• Requests by students for the policy to be waived are handled by the Mitigating Circumstances Panel or Academic Appeals Committee; these bodies would not adjust marks, but could declare an assessment null and void.

80

Fit to Sit Policy [2]Implications for Externals• Work sent to you should have been marked strictly on

its merits.

• Aggregate marks presented to Boards should have been calculated strictly in accordance with approved weightings.

• Boards will agree award classifications solely on the basis of the profile of marks.

• You will not be expected to form judgements about how much better students might have performed if circumstances had been different.

81

Fit to Sit Policy [3]What should students do if they think they are not“fit to sit”?

• They should apply for a concession.

• Four types:– extensions;– deferrals;– interruptions of study;– special assessment arrangements / alternative assessments.

• All are designed to put the student on a par with other students; once a concession has been granted, the work is assessed as normal.

82

Concessions [1]Extensions• Students are given more time to submit an assessment. Only

rule about the maximum length of an extension is that it must enable work to be marked before the Board of Examiners. There should be no outstanding extensions at Boards.

• Normally handled by the HoD [or nominee] except that extensions requested after the submission deadline are referred to a Faculty Senior Academic Adviser [FSAA]. FSAAs….. are senior academics; are trained by the Registrar to have a detailed grasp of the

regulations and an understanding of handling difficult cases; meet the Registrar fortnightly for training and mutual

support.

• Guidelines, available from the website, indicate circumstances that would normally be accepted [and not accepted] as valid.

83

Concessions [2]Deferrals• Similar to extensions, but students are normally allowed to

defer submission to the reassessment period [August].

• Requests normally handled by FSAAs, but the Student Administration team handles requests only affecting exams.

• Guidelines, available from the website, indicate circumstances that would normally be accepted [and not accepted] as valid. Complex cases are referred to the Mitigating Circumstances Panel.

• Recommended deferrals identified on Board transcripts by “M” grades. Boards normally accept recommendations as long as due

process has been followed.

84

Concessions [3]Interruption of Studies• Students are normally allowed to take time out from

their studies, typically returning the following academic session.

• Requests handled by FSAAs.

• Guidelines, available from the website, indicate circumstances that would normally be accepted [and not accepted] as valid. Complex cases are referred to the Mitigating Circumstances Panel.

• Not normally available after Easter.

85

Concessions [4]Special Assessment Arrangements orAlternative Assessments• Definitions:

SAA = modified forms of approved assessment tasks [eg extra time in an exam];

AA = coursework assessments used instead of approved exams or timed class tests.

• Available to disabled students or those with a short-term injury.

• Requests dealt with by professional Learning Support Advisers BUT: AAs must be approved by HoDs as enabling learning outcomes

to be assessed.

• For disabled students, SAAs and AAs are included in a Learning Support Plan [LSP] that also specifies any support for learning and teaching .

86

Academic Misconduct [1]

Scope of Regulations• Plagiarism.

• Self-plagiarism.

• Collusion.

• Data fabrication.

• Cheating in an exam or class test.

87

Academic Misconduct [2]Typical Penalties• Common scale for all types of misconduct.

• Typically: mark of zero [with normal reassessment opportunities available]

for an initial offence; termination of studies for a repeated offence [irrespective of

whether the 2 offences are of the same type].

• However: Level C[4] penalties are more lenient [plagiarism and collusion

only]; Level M[7] penalties are harsher [for initial offences!]; guidelines outline other factors justifying a harsher or more lenient

penalty.

• Where appropriate, a case can be described as “poor practice” not misconduct.

88

Academic Misconduct [3]Procedures• Suspected misconduct is handled by FSAAs [or the Registrar in the case

of cheating in exams].

• Cases often identified via Turnitin [now almost universal]. However: cases can be treated as “plagiarism” even if the % match identified

by Turnitin is very low.

• Students are invited to interview and given an opportunity to present a case before a recommendation is made.

• Cases identified on Board transcripts by “PL” or “PR” grades. Boards normally accept recommendations as long as due process

has been followed. “PR” means “offer a resubmission even though the normal penalty

would not allow this”.

• If you suspect misconduct that had not been internally identified, notify the Assessment Co-ordinator asap, and ask for the matter to be investigated by due process.

Documents

YOUR FUTURE STARTS WITH HOPE External Examiner Event April 2015 A Very Warm Welcome!