EAS Procedures and Guidance for Assessment Undergraduate and Taught Postgraduate Programmes 2011/12 1

1.1

Modules
Attendance requirements

Where module attendance or participation is required to obtain marks for an assessment or is a condition for the module to be passed, the requirement must be communicated clearly to students and an adequate monitoring procedure instituted. The existence of such modules must be identified in the programme specification and the detailed requirements stated in the module specification.

1.2

Module codes

Where groups of students attend a module that is in every aspect identical for them all, the module should carry a single identifier. Where the content, assessments or learning outcomes differ between the groups of students they must be considered as taking different modules, which must have different identifiers.

1.3

Exceptional circumstances and mark penalties

When submitting marks for entry to SITS, module tutors must identify any marks that have been subject to penalty. The size of and reason for penalties must be made available to exam boards so that marks can be adjusted in the light of exceptional circumstances.

2
2.1
1

Coursework
Setting
At the start of the academic year, the programme director or year tutor should provide students with details of the assessments (nature and percentage weight) for each module in their programme stage. Dates for assessments other than formal exams (eg coursework submission deadlines and dates for return of marked work) must be notified to students as near to the start of each module as possible. These details must appear on the Assignments page of the Blackboard site for the module. Setting of work should occur well in advance of submission dates. Where appropriate, large pieces of work should be broken down into smaller components with staged submission dates. Within a programme, staggered dates for submission of work should be adopted; normally the deadlines for work for no more than 2x10-credit modules should fall in any single week, although the operation of options may make this impossible in some cases. Individual module tutors must not modify deadlines; this power is reserved to programme directors, but extenuating circumstance cases may be delegated to year tutors, where these exist. All coursework requirements must be specified in writing. As a general principle, when coursework is set, students should also be informed in writing of the marking criteria to be used; this is particularly important for major exercises (projects, lab reports, literature reviews, case studies, essays, etc) but less so in the case of (say) short calculations. Where a marking form is used for feedback, this can simply be provided to the students in advance as an indication of the marking criteria (see 2.4.3).

EAS, Aston University

1 of 5

26/02/13

For stages 1 and 2, submission dates in teaching period 2 can be set up to the end of week 25. In the case of modules not assessed by formal exam the deadline may be later, with the approval of the relevant programme director, provided the work is specified early enough for students to complete and submit it by the end of week 25, should they so choose. For stages 3 and 4, deadlines for coursework should not occur in the same week as those for major project reports carrying 10 or more credits. The default position is that any piece of coursework is to be undertaken by the student without any assistance. Where collaboration is acceptable, or indeed required, students must be informed in writing about the extent and nature of the permitted collaboration.

2.2

Submission

All coursework should be submitted through the School Office or online, with a paper or electronic receipt issued (respectively). Copies of receipts for coursework that contributes to the degree class should be kept until a student has graduated.

2.3

Late submission

Extensions to deadlines due to exceptional circumstances can only be granted by the relevant programme director or a year tutor with delegated authority. Extensions will not normally be allowed when the request is made after the original deadline or where granting of the request will delay timely feedback to other students. Penalties for late submission should be automatically applied and made clear to the student. Submissions should not normally be allowed less than one week prior to the board meeting at which the performance is to be considered. In cases where an extension to a deadline has not been granted but where exceptional circumstances are claimed, the student should communicate the details in writing using the EAS Exceptional Circumstances form. The students programme-stage exam board will determine the relevance of the evidence. In such cases a penalty for late submission will be applied by the marker but may be waived or reduced by the board. 2.3.1 Major components (project reports, literature surveys, etc)

These are substantial pieces of work worth at least 10 credits. Penalty: 5% of the maximum possible mark for the first working day late (or part thereof) and 1% for each subsequent working day. Working days are Monday to Friday other than bank holidays and university holidays, irrespective of whether teaching is taking place. 2.3.2 All other components

Penalty: 10% of the maximum possible mark for each working day late (or part thereof).

2.4
1

Marking and feedback

Principles established by this document and the University Policy on Feedback must be observed. All taught modules must have an explicit feedback strategy published on Blackboard. Other than in unforseeable circumstances, marked coursework should be returned within 4 term-time weeks, and exams should be marked in time for students to receive provisional marks on SITS within 6 weeks of sitting the exam. Formative feedback should be given with all marked coursework. Feedback is encouraged in connection with other forms of assessment, eg commentary on class performance in a formal exam.

EAS, Aston University

2 of 5

26/02/13

Feedback forms are recommended for the assessment of more substantial exercises. Typically these will consist of a list of marking criteria along with the maximum mark for each criterion with room for comment (though such comment is not meant to replace specific feedback written on the submission or elsewhere). Students may see immediately how well they have performed against each criterion. By helping to make the marking criteria explicit, feedback forms encourage consistency of assessment where different students are assessed by different staff (eg project reports). Every effort should be made to mark coursework in good time to allow students to gain educational benefit from feedback; module structure should be planned with this in mind. If unforeseen circumstances (eg illness) prevent coursework return within 4 term-time weeks, a revised schedule should be agreed with the relevant programme director(s) and students notified at the earliest opportunity. Where practical, copies of coursework and associated feedback should be retained in line with University policy and staff are encouraged to make use of electronic submission and commenting to facilitate this. Where feedback is provided in handwriting, staff may photocopy commented work prior to return or provide feedback on a separate form which can be easily copied. However, provision of high quality and timely feedback is of paramount importance and where necessary this should take priority over the need to retain copies of coursework.

2.5

Referred coursework

Undergraduate referred coursework shall have standard submission deadline agreed amongst programme directors, eg 12:00 on the first day of referred exams. This deadline may only be modified by the programme director of the group owning a module, who will advise other relevant programme directors of the change.

3
3.1
1

Examinations
Setting and marking
During the setting process, all end-of-module exam papers should be reviewed in a manner approved by the relevant associate dean; either by a module advisor (where appointed) or by members of the relevant module board. Where the module is taken as part of a final stage, the review must include consideration of model solutions with marking schemes. In other cases this practice is recommended, but not required. Marks for each question on an exam paper should normally be broken down to aid the student in managing their time and effort. All papers should carry 100 marks, to simplify matters for students and reduce the risk of data entry errors. During the marking process each page must be annotated by the marker to indicate it has been viewed. The annotation can be a mark, a tick or written comments. It should be made clear how the marks for a particular question have been arrived at; in particular it is not acceptable to simply give an overall mark for a long question, without further justification. Justification for a final mark can take the form of: marks for individual components in accordance with the mark scheme; ticks or comments associated with points made by the student; a short written justification covering the strengths and weaknesses of the answer. Staff should be mindful that students can insist on seeing the examiners comments from the marked paper.

EAS, Aston University

3 of 5

26/02/13

For all final-stage exam papers, the addition of contributory marks must be checked in a fashion approved by the relevant associate dean and the script annotated to confirm this has taken place. A minimum of 20% of final-stage written exam scripts, and coursework contributing 30% or more to the module mark, must be checked by a second marker. It must be made clear that this has taken place, eg the second marker might use a different coloured ink to show that each page of a script has been viewed. A formal record should be kept of any mark changes recommended/implemented. All final year projects worth 20 or more credits must be independently double marked.

3.2

Calculators

Students are not allowed to take their own calculators into exams. When permission to use calculators is specified on the exam paper, calculators will be provided by the exams office. Students should be given access to exam-style calculators during the teaching year for familiarisation.

3.3
3.3.1

Conduct of exam boards

SITS Data

Each substantial element of assessment within a module should have a separate entry in SITS. All SITS data entry should be checked with a formal record made of the check and any amendments required. 3.3.2 Minutes and exceptional circumstances

Minutes of exam boards must record explicitly where any evidence of exceptional circumstances has been considered. DANU recommendations must be taken into account whether or not the student explicitly draws them to the attention of the board. 3.3.3 Rounding

The university specifies a minimum pass mark for a module as either 40% or 50%. Module boards should automatically round up marks of 39% or 49% (respectively) as being within experimental uncertainty of the pass mark. 3.3.4 Modification of marks

Except where the student concerned has valid exceptional circumstances or to correct an error, programme boards should not modify marks confirmed by a module board. 3.3.5 1 Condonement and referral

Exam boards have discretion to condone failure in some modules on the basis of adequate overall performance. Modules for which this is not permitted must be stated in the programme specification. Exam Boards must adhere to General Regulations, which limit the number of credits that may be condoned and state that marks more than 10% below the normal pass mark may not normally be condoned. EAS has been advised that any condonement at a mark more than 10% below the pass mark must be approved by a formal waiver of regulations, and that such waivers will not be entertained without a compelling case.

EAS, Aston University

4 of 5

26/02/13

Exam boards considering referrable attempts (eg non-final UG June/July boards and nonaward PG boards) are recommended to limit condonement to forgiving a maximum of 10 marks worth of failure spread over normally not more than 20 credits. Reasons for this policy include ensuring that students meet prerequisites for future study and providing students with an opportunity to improve their transcript. Final boards considering awards and referred boards are recommended to use the full scope of General Regulations to allow award or progression wherever academically tenable. Where relevant, trailing of up to 20 credits should be considered as a means to avoid low mark condonement, transfer to Ordinary or a repeat year. Where a student is referred in modules some of which could be condoned but where such treatment will not allow the student to progress, boards should normally hold back at least 10 credits of condonement until the referred results are available. When there are exceptional circumstances, UG final boards can make a degree award outside the scope of the condonement regulations, eg with a zero module mark where an exam has been missed for an acceptable reason. Credit given for a module in these circumstances should NOT be denoted as condonement on the transcript. No module mark should be recorded or included in the classification calculation. General Regulations require that students must always be informed of the format of their referred assessment, and the way in which the referred mark will be calculated, as this can be different from the original format. Referral in more than 60 credits

3.3.6

Waivers of General Regulations to allow more than 60 credits of referral on UG programmes will not normally be sought. This should be overridden only with the agreement of the relevant associate dean, who will support such a request only in very unusual cases. Credits being taken as of the first time are not counted in the limiting figure, but can be taken in addition to whatever referrals are specified. 3.3.7 Classification decisions

In addition to the relevant General Regulations, exam boards should have regard to the EAS guidance on Borderline Classification Decisions. When borderline candidates are identified, the internal board should always make a clear classification recommendation for discussion with the external examiner.

3.4
1

Representations
The University Academic Appeals Procedure (REG/07/261) must be adhered to. In particular, appeals against academic judgement are excluded. Representations against possible withdrawal (signalled by a jeopardy letter) or demotion from MSc to Diploma or Certificate should be considered by a formal board meeting either a reconvening of the meeting making the original decision, or a subsequent scheduled meeting. Chairmans action may be taken in exceptional circumstances only, with the support of the relevant associate dean.

Engineering and Applied Science Learning & Teaching Committee

EAS, Aston University

5 of 5

26/02/13