Examination Boards and assessment regulations Spring/Summer 2017 Academic Services – Quality and Standards Paul Cecil – Quality & Standards Manager

Introduction Changes and new requirements Reference points and basics Assessment regulations Modules Late rules / mitigation / misconduct Courses and CEB Progression Referrals / Fails / Repeats / Repeat w/out attendance Compensation Awards and borderlines Academic Misconduct Appeals Exam Board specifics External examiners Moderation

Changes and new requirements Reconvening Boards – must be notified to Academic Services (but decision rests with Exam Board Chair) Extraordinary Boards – new defined membership drawn from principal board. Must be notified to AS, but does not need further approval if conditions met. Suspension of regulations – force majeure procedures External examiners – use of Skype/technology now subject to EB Chair approval only (but must be minuted) – ASC approved TRCMs amended to require boards to consider statistical data of modules – ASC approved Procedures re-endorsed for managing boards in the absence of external examiners (see External Examiner Handbook) IYMR

Reference points Background / contextual information Centrally produced decision guides will be made available for all Boards in 2017. Reference points GEAR Applies to all taught courses leading to a University of Brighton award Available to all staff, students and external examiners Decisions Guides Area Examination Boards Progressing students at Course Examination Boards Final year students at Course Examination Boards GEAR https://staff.brighton.ac.uk/reg/acs/docs/GEAR2015-2016.pdf

Typical structure Award point Progression point Progression point Semester 1 Semester 2 Module 1 20 credits Module 2 20 credits Module 3 20 credits Module 4 20 credits Module 5 20 credits Module 6 20 credits Stage 3 Year 3 Total for stage: 120 credits (Cumulative total: 360 credits) Progression point Semester 1 Semester 2 Module 1 20 credits Module 2 20 credits Module 3 20 credits Module 4 20 credits Module 5 20 credits Module 6 20 credits Stage 2 Year 2 Total for stage: 120 credits (Cumulative total: 240 credits) Progression point Semester 1 Semester 2 Module 1 20 credits Module 2 20 credits Module 3 20 credits Module 4 20 credits Module 5 20 credits Module 6 20 credits Stage 1 Year 1 Total for stage: 120 credits

Examination boards Module Stage of study Award Area Examination Boards: Make decisions about students registered on individual modules (without reference to their performance on other modules) Considers statistical data on module Stage of study Course Examination Boards: Consider overall profile of each student enrolled on course Consider mitigating circumstances claims Applies misconduct penalties Consider eligibility to progress from one stage of study to the next Consider eligibility for final and interim awards Some courses have Joint Area and Course Boards Award

Examination boards Module Stage of study Award Single Tier Boards: Make decisions about students registered on individual modules (without reference to their performance on other modules) Considers statistical data on module Stage of study And then… Consider overall profile of each student enrolled on course Consider mitigating circumstances claims Applies misconduct penalties Consider eligibility to progress from one stage of study to the next Consider eligibility for final and interim awards Award

Assessment regulations General Examination and Assessment Regulations for taught courses (GEAR) Modules multiples of 10 credits mandatory, compulsory, optional (Mandatory for award/Mandatory for progress) 0-100% marking scale pass mark 40% ug module – threshold mark 30% 50% pg module – threshold mark 40%

Assessment regulations Late regs apply to the piece of work – not the whole module Assessment regulations Late submission within 2 weeks of deadline  capped mark for work (or fail mark) Non-submission – 0% Extension to deadline - with appropriate evidence Mitigating circumstances – deferral, mark for module not capped Maximum number of attempts to pass module = 3 repeat module once

Module marks Most modules are marked on a percentage basis Pass mark: Module / Area Examination Board regulations Threshold marks apply to modules with multiple assessments. The threshold mark does not apply to decisions made about referrals or compensation Module marks Most modules are marked on a percentage basis Pass mark: Undergraduate (levels 4 - 6) = 40% Postgraduate (M level / level 7) = 50% Threshold mark: Undergraduate (levels 4 - 6) = 30% Postgraduate (M level / level 7) = 40% NB - only applicable when there are multiple assessment tasks in the module. Assessment feedback and the recommended mark can be returned to students upon completion of marking and moderation Marks are ratified by AEB

Retrieval of failure Referral no minimum mark Module / Area Examination Board regulations Threshold marks apply to modules with multiple assessments. The threshold mark does not apply to decisions made about referrals or compensation Risks of repeat without attendance Risks of trailing Retrieval of failure Referral no minimum mark where only one assessment task in module, student must normally have attempted this maximum of half total credit studied in the stage can be referred referred module capped at pass mark Repeat not progress (p/t) or trailing (20 credits) Repeat without attendance repeat module capped at pass mark A subtle difference A referral is often resubmission of the same piece of work. A repeat (by assessment only) is a new piece of work.

Retrieval of refer or fail Module / Area Examination Board regulations Some boards offer ‘repeat by assessment only’ to avoid slowing students down – these remove the opportunity for further tuition so must be used with care Retrieval of refer or fail Maximum three attempts at module Refer Fail 1 First attempt 2 Referral attempt 3 Repeat attempt NB - A referral attempt cannot follow a referral attempt Fail OR Module failed, no more attempts Fail Refer 1 First attempt 2 Repeat attempt 3 Referral attempt NB - A repeat attempt cannot follow a repeat attempt Fail Fail Module failed, no more attempts

In-Year Module Retrieval (IYMR) IYMR is new this year Only applies to selected level 4 modules. Leads to a capped mark at the first attempt. Face value marks retained in case the initial attempt has mitigation (in which case the IYMR becomes an uncapped first attempt). Mitigation of the IYMR retrieval attempt leads to a first referral/capped mark No penalties for failing IYMR (if two fail marks exist, use highest)

Outcomes of module assessment Normal AEB decision Mark of 40% (L4-6) or 50% (M/7) or more Pass! Work submitted, mark of 39% (L4-6) or 49% (M/7) or less Normally Refer (occasionally Fail) Non-submission by published deadline or non-attendance at formal examination Fail (normally repeat module in full) Late submission of work (within two weeks of agreed deadline) Capped Mark (40% or 50%) for the individual piece of work. Extension to deadline Held Academic misconduct suspected Held Mitigating circumstances flagged Two decisions (see later…) If referral / repeat attempt and a pass mark Pass – but mark capped at 40% (L4-6) or 50% (M/7)

Threshold Mark – Multiple assessment tasks Levels 4 - 6 To pass modules comprised of more than one task: All tasks need to have at least met the threshold mark (30%), and the module overall should have a mark of at least 40% Task 1 (Weighted 60%) Task 2 (Weighted 40%) Overall mark Mark = 60 Mark = 45 54 Pass + Mark = 32 Mark = 65 45 Pass + Mark = 52 Mark = 25 41Q Refer (39) + Mark = 75 Mark = 0 (non-submission) 45Q Refer (39) + Mark = 44 Mark = 31 39 Refer or moderate to 40 (Pass) +

Multiple assessment tasks M level / level 7 To pass modules comprised of more than one task: All tasks need to have at least met the threshold mark (40%), and the module overall should have a mark of at least 50% Task 1 (Weighted 60%) Task 2 (Weighted 40%) Overall mark Mark = 60 Mark = 45 54 Pass + Mark = 42 Mark = 65 51 Pass + Mark = 62 Mark = 35 51Q Refer (49) + Mark = 90 Mark = 0 (non-submission) 54Q Refer (49) + Mark = 54 Mark = 41 49 Refer or moderate to 50 (Pass) +

Late and non-submission Levels 4 - 6 University Regulation: all work submitted within 2 weeks of the hand-in date is accepted and marked. The mark is capped at 40% (unless mitigated). Where there are multiple components to a ‘task’ all components must be on time. Where there are two tasks, each task is treated separately for late submission purposes. Work cannot be accepted after the two week period (it becomes a ‘fail’) Late work does not ‘use up’ an additional attempt as previously. There is no late period for referrals. They must be in on time. Module outcome Normal AEB decision Single assessment task, submitted 3 days late Face value mark = 65 Pass at 40% (1st attempt) Single assessment task, submitted 3 days late Face value mark = 31 Normally Refer. Complete referral task (NB – there are no specific consequences of the late submission in these circumstances) Single assessment task, 6 weeks late Submission not accepted – i.e. non-submission Fail. Normally repeat in full (exceptionally, repeat by assessment only) Two assessment tasks: task A submitted on time (FVM = 60), task B submitted 4 days late (FVM = 55) Accept both pieces. Assessment A marked and receives 60%. Task B is marked and capped at 40%. Module mark is derived from (60+40)/2=50 (if equally weighted)

Late and non-submission M level / level 7 University Regulation: all work submitted within 2 weeks of the hand-in date is accepted and marked. The mark is capped at 50% (unless mitigated). Where there are multiple components to a ‘task’ all components must be on time. Where there are two tasks, each task is treated separately for late submission purposes. Work cannot be accepted after the two week period (unless there is an extension) Late work does not ‘use up’ an attempt. There is no late period for referrals. They must be in on time. Module outcome Normal AEB decision Single assessment task, submitted 3 days late Face value mark = 65 Pass, capped at 50% Single assessment task, submitted 3 days late Face value mark = 42 Refer. Complete referral task (NB – there are no specific consequences of the late submission in these circumstances) Single assessment task, 6 weeks late Submission not accepted – i.e. non-submission Fail. Repeat in full or repeat by assessment only Two assessment tasks: one task submitted on time (FVM = 60), second task submitted 4 days late (FVM = 55) Task 2 capped at 50%, and result calculated from 60+50=55% (if equally weighted)

Mitigating circumstances Module / Area Examination Board regulations New Mit Circs panels operate this year All mit circs cases must be minuted in CEB and include rationale for decision taken Mit circs cannot lead to marks being changed Mit circs can lead to pass modules being deferred (CEB) Mit circs can lead to module being excluded from algorithm (CEB) Mitigating circumstances Mitigating circumstances may be claimed for: Poor (unrepresentative) performance Late submission Non-submission (including absence from an examination) To submit a claim for mitigating circumstances, a student should submit form ARGEAR3, accompanied by documentary evidence The newly constituted Mitigating Circumstances Panels operate at school level for all boards within the school. Note: mit circs must be considered by a panel and cannot be decided by Chair’s action. Where mitigating circumstances are flagged, an AEB should make two decisions (one for if the mit circs are accepted and one for if the mit circs are rejected)

Mitigating circumstances Reason Module outcome Normal decision of CEB Poor performance Pass: 40%+ (L4-6) or 50%+ (M/7) No specific action, but consider if student in borderline at final stage Poor performance Refer / fail: <39% (L4-6) or <49%+ (M/7) Defer: allow student to resubmit (or repeat) as if for the first time Late submission FVM: 40%+ (L4-6) or 50%+ (M/7) Pass: student receives face value mark Late submission FVM: <39% (L4-6) or <49%+ (M/7) Normally Refer: student allowed to resubmit (or repeat) as if for the second time Late submission + poor performance Note: the guidance may advantage non-submission/fail over a marginal pass (first option). CEBs should therefore take seriously the possibility of raising students should a mark close to the student’s mean be sufficient to change the classification. FVM: <39% (L4-6) or <49%+ (M/7) Defer: allow student to resubmit (or repeat) as if for the first time Non-submission Fail: 0% Defer: allow student to submit as if for the first time

Part 2: Course examination board regulations Award / Stage / Course Examination Board regulations Part 2: Course examination board regulations

Progression: Pass / Fail ‘Fail’ often used to indicate ‘fail-repeat’ rather than ‘refer’. Both technically fail marks, but with different solutions. Pass marks are defined in GEAR (40% ug or 50% pg). Exemptions must be approved centrally and registered against GEAR. Restricted to PSRB requirements. Progression: Pass / Fail Students progress from one stage of study to the next when they have completed and passed the modules comprising that stage Students can be referred in up to half the credits comprising the stage of study Students cannot be referred in more than half the credits comprising the stage of study Students can be failed in up to half the credits comprising the stage of study. ‘Fail/repeat’ used where no attempt has been made or where likelihood of success at referral is small

Conditional Progression A Course Examination Board will determine whether or not a student is permitted to take repeat module(s) in addition to the standard diet for the next stage of study or whether the repeat module(s) should replace certain module(s) during the next stage of study (trailing). If the course is insufficiently flexible to accommodate the trailing module(s), this will mean that the student's programme of study is extended beyond the normal length associated with his/her mode of study. In making this decision, the Course Examination Board will be mindful of the student’s overall profile and the requirement not to overburden students, while aiming to facilitate continued study where this is appropriate. Conditional Progression Students may progress trailing up to 20 credits. Use with care. Essential that students understand risk, especially if third attempt Failure of 3rd attempt by trailing may lead to exclusion even where next stage is successful as progress requirements not met (but can compensate) Trailing (and conditional progression) useful to prevent students ‘slowing down’ to repeat a single module Can be useful for international students (visa issues) Cannot apply if failed module is pre-requisite for next level, but can apply to mandatory modules Works better with stronger students who have an aberrant result If third attempt essential student understands that a third failure may lead to exclusion irrespective of performance on their substantive stage/year

Compensation Compensation - individual consideration Must secure learning outcomes in course Cannot be duplicated across years in same area/topic Can be very useful Consider for: Marginal fails Referral boards After 2nd attempt for progress After 1st attempt for finalists Compensation may now be awarded for the purposes of progression where the student has failed the module on their third assessment attempt Compensation discretion of board maximum 20 credits for every 120 credits studied no minimum mark or stage average – student should have attempted all assessments credit awarded for stage but mark not changed Not available for mandatory modules Board must ensure course outcomes can be secured Must not be applied successively to same domain/topic Can be applied to 3rd attempts for progress or award, and to trailed modules Rule change saved 20 students last year

Progression: ‘Non-standard’ courses Care needed for part-time students. Can they succeed? Risk that board may allow more referrals than for standard progress (eg 40 credits in year one and 40 in year 2 of split stage). Single stage courses (e.g. Masters degrees) or stages of study which span more than one academic year (GEAR) The academic performance of students registered for an award will be considered at least once each academic year by a CEB, which will decide whether the students may Receive an award; Progress to the next stage; Continue studying at the same stage; Be excluded from the course due to failure. The CEB may consider the number of recommended referrals or fails accumulated by the student prior to the end of a stage of study. For example, if a student has accumulated 40 credits of failed modules partway through a Master’s degree ... It may decide to slow the student’s progress through the course by requiring them to repeat the modules prior to completing the remaining modules which comprise the stage of study.

Awards and borderlines – CEB Alternative algorithm in Art/Media Award Marks and Classification Borderline BA (Hons) BSc(Hons) Level 5 and Level 6 marks (ratio 25:75 unless otherwise specified in the Programme Specification) Classification:1/2i/2ii/3 yes One year top-ups Level 6 marks FdA/FdSc Level 5 marks Classification: pass/merit/distinction Merit – weighted mean mark 60.00-69.99 Distinction – weighted mean mark 70.00+ MA/MSc Marks for the award credit Merit – weighted mean mark of at least 60.00 and at least 60 in final element Distinction – weighted mean mark of at least 70.00 and at least 70 in final element (final element is normally 60 credits level 7) no * Integrated Masters Subject-specific: Level 6 and 7 marks (50:50) - 1/2i/2ii/3 Level 7 marks - pass/merit/distinction

Borderlines (new rules) New rules for UG in 2016/17 Less discretion, but better outcomes for students Greater emphasis on L6 No borderline for Postgrad – further work being undertaken Mitigation: If mitigation already applied (eg through deferrals) then no further consideration given in borderline cases. If unused mitigation consider recalculating near-miss students to see if meet crtieria Borderlines (new rules) Student considered by board for higher classification if average mark for award is within 2% of boundary UG (Hons) 50% or more credit in higher class = raise at least 120 credits higher class across L5 and L6 (with min 40 credits in L6) = raise Any exceptional discretionary decisions for students must be recorded and reported to Registrar & Secretary FdA/FdSc 50% or more credit in level 5 in higher class

Academic misconduct (new) New process for 2015/16 Academic misconduct (new) New procedures in place for 2015/16 (GEAR F) Key change is that the Academic Misconduct panel determines the penalty (previously it ‘recommended a penalty) Student able to appeal penalty within 10 working days of hearing Role of Examination Board is to apply penalty (not change it) If penalty leads to aberrant outcome consult with Academic Services (identify pre-Board)

Appeals (new) New process for 2015/16 No longer routed through School New process for 2015/16 (GEAR H) All appeals handled centrally with central email addresses: Stage 1  academic-appeals-stage1@brighton.ac.uk Considered by adjudicator: That the appeal is upheld and the matter referred back to the Examination Board for consideration afresh; ii. That there is insufficient evidence and the Stage 1 Appeal is not upheld. Stage 2  academic-appeals-stage2@brighton.ac.uk Student requests review of appeal outcome Stage 3  Academic Appeals Committee (full hearing) Note: upheld outcomes usually require referral back to Examination Board which will be reconvened to reconsider the student.

Exam Boards: Attendance and membership All constitutions and members must be approved by Sub-Committee for Assessment (SCA) Substitutions must be approved by Chair of SCA (refer to Academic Services) Non-listed staff cannot attend/participate. Observers allowed with permission of Chair (but cannot participate) No quorum – all members expected to attend Absences to be notified to Chair of Academic Board Chair of Examination Board determines whether Board can proceed

Chair’s action / delegated / sub-boards Boards can delegate actions to the Chair (e.g where a mark is late or some other uncertainty applies) Delegation must be explicit and set out parameters for Chair’s action (eg if pass, then progress; if fail then refer) and may include requirement to consult (eg with external examiner) Chair’s cannot act independently to make progress/award/pass/fail decisions outside formal delegated actions If Board is required to convene a sub-group, formal SCA approval must be obtained for membership/constitution (refer Academic Services)

See GEAR section I and the External Examiner Handbook External examiners External examiners should attend main session examination boards, including Area Examination Boards and Course Examination Boards that make decisions about students’ performance on modules and recommendations for awards. If non-attendance unavoidable, arrangements must be made to ensure communication on the day and a report should be available. Chair must confirm the formal engagement of the external in the consideration of student work. External examiners cannot change individual marks External examiners are not ‘third markers’ where marks are disputed

Moderation Double Marking and sampling University policy Implemented locally at School level Must be recorded Refer to chair of exam board in case of marker disputes External is not a ‘third marker’ Moderation Double Marking and sampling Moderation policy on-line Sampling formula (10% or square root) for most modules/assessments If sampling, cannot change marks without reviewing all scripts (mainly judging consistency/pitch) Dissertation/Project – blind double marked (mark to be agreed) All moderation processes must be recorded and made available to external examiner (they do comment on this) Sample should cover full mark range and be selected by someone other than first marker Similar process for external’s sample (see guidance)

Further information Further information is available at: https://staff.brighton.ac.uk/reg/acs/Pages/Assessment- and-regulations.aspx Or click ‘GEAR’ from the Staff Central home page (lower left ‘tag cloud’) Or contact the Academic Standards & Assessment team: Paul Cecil, Frank Melmoe, Anna McCall and Polly Bramhall