1.1 Introduction and purposes of assessment
Assessment is a fundamental part of the student learning experience, and
is the general description for a set of processes which measures the success
of a student’s education and learning. UEL's Assessment Policy
seeks to:
1.1.1 Assessment, from a student perspective, is the vehicle for obtaining feedback on progress in their learning, enabling them to improve. This is indicated in terms of:
1.1.2 Assessment, for both staff and students, can be used to determine whether a student:
1.1.3 Assessment, from a staff perspective:
1.1.4 Assessment may be diagnostic, formative or summative - all assessment will contain one or more of these elements (See Glossary, Appendix 1).
Note: The roles and responsibilities of Field, Programme and Module leaders, Schools and Students with regard to the Assessment Policy are summarised within Appendix 6 of this document.
¹The Assessment Policy is appropriate for all UEL programmes within the Academic Framework. Programmes with permission from Academic Board to function outside the framework (e.g. credit ratings for modules; use of terms rather than semesters; other Professional Body requirements) may have alternative arrangements approved by Academic Board.
1.2.1 In order to serve the above purposes, assessment should be treated in accordance with the following principles and be:
1.2.2 All documentation regarding assessment tasks, assessment criteria, submission deadlines, and any accompanying guidance, including information relating to the return of work, should be:
2.1 Introduction to Assessment Design
2.1.1 Within programmes, a variety of assessment tasks are used to provide flexibility for students and to assess students’ skills, knowledge and understanding.
2.1.2 Effective assessment design ensures that:
2.2 Relation of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
All assessment tasks must be clearly mapped to identified learning outcomes.
2.2.1 Learning outcomes are devised at programme and module level.
2.2.2 Learning outcomes should be monitored to ensure that they:
2.3 Assessment Criteria
2.3.1 A student’s performance should be marked and graded according to pre-specified and clear assessment criteria. These may be devised as separate marking and grading criteria, or as one combined set of assessment criteria (see Appendix 3). Assessment criteria should:
2.4 Levels of Assessment: Qualification descriptors
2.4.1 Qualification descriptors are used to ensure consistency and equity. These have been presented by The Quality Assurance Agency within ‘The framework for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland – January 2001’ and identify the characteristics and context of learning expected at each level, against which specific learning outcomes and assessment criteria are derived (see Appendix 4).
2.4.2 Learning outcomes and assessment criteria reflect the appropriate level specified by the qualification descriptors, and reflect increasing levels of demand, complexity and depth of study.
2.5 Review of Assessment Tasks
2.5.1 Schools should have effective mechanisms in place for reviewing and monitoring assessment processes. These will ensure that activities are appropriate, and are not excessive for students or staff. The monitoring and review processes might be undertaken by a separate School panel, or within Field or Programme meetings. The following should be considered to ensure that:
2.5.2 Programme Approval Panels need to:
3.1 Internal Moderation of Assessment Tasks
3.1.1 Each school must have effective systems and procedures in place for the internal moderation of all methods of assessment for all modules.
3.1.2 Draft assessment and reassessment tasks for each module should be produced simultaneously by module teams. This process is co-ordinated by the module leader to ensure that assessment at each opportunity is equitable.
3.1.3 All assessment task(s) for each module should be proof-read and checked for fairness and consistency prior to being sent to external examiners. It is preferable for this process to include academic colleagues from outside the module team, in order to improve objectivity. The assessment task(s) should:
Following this scrutiny, assessment task(s) may need to be modified prior to being seen by External Examiners, and subsequently published to students.
3.2 Marking
3.2.1 For each module, relevant teaching teams agree a marking plan at the beginning of each academic year. This plan should identify first and second markers, and timetables.
3.2.2 In order for marking to be equitable between all markers:
3.2.3 Feedback from markers must be clear, legible and constructive. It must also be linked to the learning outcomes and the assessment task.
3.3 Anonymous Marking
3.3.1 Anonymous marking is a process undertaken to avoid the possibility of unconscious bias entering the marking process. To this end, wherever possible, the identity of students should be masked from markers, and work only identified by student number.
3.3.3 For some types of assessment it may be impractical either to second mark or to mark anonymously. Visiting tutors from UEL or another identified person in the workplace may act in a moderating role in individual cases if this is deemed to be necessary (e.g. assessment of work based placements in which the mark is based on continuous assessment over a number of weeks). Methods by which students may be protected from unfair or biased assessments in these situations will be made explicit by the programme leader.
3.4 Second Marking
3.4.1 Second (also known as double) marking is a process undertaken to ensure that the marking scheme has been applied fairly and uniformly. Although several types of second marking have been identified across the sector (see Appendix 2), the preferred method at UEL is “second marking as sampling or moderation” for both written and practical assessments. Where other methods are preferable, such as in the case of Professional Body exemption, a justification should be provided to the Head of School.
3.4.2 Every component of summative assessment that contributes towards an award, at all levels, should be subject to second marking in order to ensure the maintenance of standards.
3.4.3 At least 15% or 10 individual pieces of each assessment task (which ever is the greater) should be second marked. The sample should be taken from the full range of student performance. Where the first marking of any module is undertaken by more than one marker, the sample should include a minimum of 20% of the work marked by each individual marker again relating to a range of performance.
3.4.4 In assessment tasks in which anonymity cannot be maintained such as when students are observed and/or questioned by examiners (e.g. laboratory tests, oral presentations, performance, practical examination etc.), “second marking as sampling or moderation (practical)” should take place (see 3.4.1). If second marking cannot be conducted at the time, tasks should be recorded for second marking at a later date.
3.4.5 Resolving differences between markers within modular assessment tasks:
Note: The external examiner will not be required to adjudicate or give advice on individual marks.
3.4.6 In order to eliminate arithmetic errors, for any component of assessment that requires aggregation of marks, calculations should always be checked by a second marker.
3.4.7 Second markers should provide a short report to the module leader, following the second marking process.
3.5 External Moderation of Assessment Tasks
3.5.1 Every component of assessment that contributes to an award, at all levels, is subject to external examiner moderation. This ensures the maintenance of standards both internally and in comparison with similar programmes delivered at other institutions.
3.5.2 All first and second opportunity assessment and reassessment tasks for each academic year should be submitted to the relevant external examiner at least four working weeks prior to the first opportunity assessment. These should not be transmitted via e-mail unless encrypted. All assessment tasks sent to external examiners are accompanied by:
All information received by externals will duplicate that which the programme team intend to provide to the students.
3.5.3 The external examiner should be asked to comment on the suitability of the assessment tasks with regard to the module specification, level of work expected and in particular, in relation to the standards of the tasks in comparison with similar programmes at other institutions. S/he is also asked to comment upon the clarity of the task, and on the guidance provided.
3.5.4 Each Field should agree with each external examiner their preferred method for moderation (see External Examiners’ Manual for details).
3.5.5 For each module, external examiners should be provided with the following materials and information:
3.5.6 A minimum of 10% or 10 individual pieces of each assessment task (which ever is the greater) should be made available to the external examiner for moderation. This sample should be taken from the full range of performance and will include some work that has been second marked.
3.5.7 External examiners should be presented with agreed marks for all candidates. External examiners must not be requested to act as a second or third marker or to adjudicate on disagreements between internal markers.
3.5.8 External examiners may recommend to the Field Assessment Board that all marks for a particular assessment task are raised or lowered, based on moderation of the sample provided. If significant and inconsistent discrepancies are highlighted by the external examiner moderation process, the external examiner can request that all work produced by all candidates be remarked. External examiners may not request amendments to marks allocated to individual assessment tasks unless all work produced by all candidates has been moderated by the external examiner.
3.5.9 All marks for summatively assessed work (both examinations and coursework) are subject to Assessment Board approval.
4.1 Timing of assessment
4.1.1 Appropriate advance notice of the timing and form of assessments of modules, examination arrangements, and the timing of notification of results should be provided and made clear to students at the start of the module. There should be at least 5 weeks notice of examinations and 3 weeks notice of course work.
4.1.2 Students should not normally be expected to discuss in their coursework any material that has been taught as recently as 2 weeks prior to the coursework submission date.
4.1.3 All time-frames set for coursework submission should have reasonable adjustments embedded within the assessment process. This ensures that students with disabilities/ specific learning difficulties do not require specific additional time to complete the assignment since extra time (normally 25%) is already built-in. E.g. coursework that would normally be given 4 weeks in advance of submission date will be given 5 weeks for all students, therefore achieving an inclusive approach to the assessment of all students (see Section 7).
4.1.4 Module specifications containing details of the number, weighting and type of assessment(s) should be published in the relevant handbook.
4.1.5 Published results for both Field and Award Boards will normally be produced within 8 working days of the Award Board. Students will be entitled to a draft transcript each academic year identifying their progress.
4.2 Integrity of Examinations
4.2.1 All examinations must be conducted in a fair, proper and secure manner. This requires specification of at least one identified member of staff within the School with responsibility for:
4.3 Invigilation
4.3.1 Guidelines for good practice in invigilation are produced by the Assessment
Unit.
4.3.2 The invigilation process is managed by the Timetabling Unit.
4.3.3 Invigilation arrangements for students with disabilities/ specific learning difficulties, are set out in section 7 below. Where relevant, Schools make the agreed arrangements for students with disabilities/ specific learning difficulties, where these have been notified to the School (normally at least 3 weeks in advance).
4.4 Submission of Other Forms of Assessed Work
4.4.1 Students are expected to submit other forms of assessed work (other than examination) by the scheduled time. This should include an appropriate assessment proforma (for an example, see Appendix 5) and should conform to the minimum UEL requirements, without which, work is not accepted. Where electronic submission is permitted or required, such work will be accompanied by an appropriate assessment proforma.
4.4.2 A published mechanism must exist within each school for logging the receipt of work submitted, and providing students with access to recorded evidence of submission.
4.4.3 A secure method for the return of marked coursework should be identified and clearly explained to students.
4.5 Responsibilities for registration for assessment
4.5.1 Students are only eligible for assessment on a module if registered on the module. Schools should ensure that students have ready access to their module registration data and that students are aware of the means of access. (It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that the record of registration is accurate and notify Schools of any inaccuracies).
Note: Students are required to familiarise themselves with the guidelines on conduct for examinations and conduct themselves in the appropriate manner.
4.6 Assessment Offences
Assessment tasks are designed to reduce, as far as is practicable, the possibility
of plagiarism and collusion and other forms of assessment offence. Where
an assessment offence is believed to have occurred, procedures detailed in
Part 8 of Manual of General Regulations (Assessment Offences) and the Academic
Integrity Policy will be invoked.
4.7 Maintenance of scripts and archive
Scripts and/or assessed work are stored for academic reviews, appeals, and
other purposes. These are stored and disposed of in line with the Data
Protection Act and the Freedom of Information Act.
5.1 Feedback is given to students in order to help promote learning and facilitate improvement.
5.1.1 Feedback may be:
5.1.2 All feedback should be:
5.1.3 The nature and extent of feedback the student may expect should be indicated for each assessment task at the time it is set.
5.2 Feedback on Coursework
5.2.1 Feedback must be provided as soon as possible after the student has completed the assessment task:
5.2.2 Clear guidance must be given regarding the point in the module where it is no longer appropriate for staff to provide formative feedback e.g when a student is undertaking final dissertation drafts. This should be communicated to students at the time the assessment task is set.
5.2.3 Students should be made aware of whether their work will be returned at the time feedback is provided.
5.3 Feedback on Examinations
5.3.1 Feedback on examinations should be given within five weeks of the conclusion of the examination period.
5.3.2 Clear guidance should be given regarding the type of feedback that will be given following examination i.e. individual or generic.
5.3.3 Guidance should be given on whether feedback will include the return of examination scripts and/or work, or not.
6.1 The process of Accreditation of Experiential Learning refers to the consideration of learning that occurs prior to entry to programmes. It also refers to additional learning that occurs during a student’s period of registration, over and above that deriving from modules on the student’s programme. Credit awarded by another UK Higher education institution may be recognised, and certificated qualifications and experiential learning may be accredited (i.e. granted credit).
6.2 Schools are responsible for maintaining a sound process to accredit experiential and certificated learning and to recognise credit awarded by other UK Higher Education Institutions. This requires an AEL panel; details of the constitution and terms of reference may be found in the AEL Policy and accompanying guidance documentation.
7.1 Assessment needs are supported
The assessment needs of students with disabilities, including specific learning
difficulties e.g. dyslexia, are supported in compliance with the Disability
Discrimination Act 2005 (DDA 2005) and our UEL Disability Equality Scheme (2006).
The UEL Assessment Policy also complies with the QAA Code of Practice on Students
with Disabilities which states: ‘’Assessment and examination policies,
practice and procedures should provide disabled students with the same opportunity
as their peers to demonstrate the achievement of learning outcomes’’.
7.2 Inclusive approach
We practise an inclusive approach in supporting our students with disabilities/
specific learning difficulties (SpLD). The inclusive approach focuses on
the capacity of our University to understand and respond to the requirements
of individual learners and not to locate the difficulty or deficit within
the student. In this way we move away from ‘labelling’ students
and towards creating an appropriate learning environment. By inclusive
learning, therefore, we try to match the requirements of an individual learner
and the provision that is made for them (Centre for the Study of Inclusive
Education 1999).
7.3 Coursework
With regard to coursework, reasonable adjustments should be embedded into the
coursework process. Academic staff should set any coursework at the
beginning of the Semester in which the assessment is due to be handed in,
and ensure that all time-frames have a reasonable adjustment built-in (see
Section 4.1.3).
7.4 Examinations
With regard to examinations, the Disability, Dyslexia and Access Centre (DDAC)
will assess a student’s needs. Following this assessment, and
in negotiation with the student, reasonable adjustments will be recommended. In
line with best practice, the provision of reasonable adjustments must ensure
that academic standards within the assessment process are maintained. All
reasonable adjustments must be endorsed by the DDAC, and supported by evidence
from an appropriate professional.
7.5 Shared responsibility between Schools and DDAC
Schools and the DDAC will share joint responsibility for ensuring that reasonable
adjustments are put into place in an efficient and timely manner and for
ensuring that students are kept appropriately informed. (See Appendix
6 for further details of responsibilities).
7.6 Eligibility for reasonable adjustments
In order for students to be eligible for reasonable adjustments in examinations, they must apply via the DDAC and provide valid professional evidence by the specified deadline date.
7.7 Deadline dates
Deadline dates, by which students must apply to the DDAC in order to have reasonable
adjustments in examinations, will be:
7.8 Extenuation
If a student with a
disability/ SpLD is unable to complete a piece of coursework on time due to
the impact of an unpredictable or unavoidable event, then the student must
appeal via the extenuation process in the usual way.
8.1 Engagement and Attendance
8.1.1 It is important for the learning experience and consequent success in
assessment that students engage freely with their programme of study. Engagement
may minimally require face to face attendance and participation in the chosen
mode of delivery e.g. lectures, seminars, field trips, laboratory work etc. If
the module includes blended learning, or is delivered wholly online (or print
supported by online) through a virtual learning environment, then engagement
may minimally require ‘electronic attendance’ (electronic access
to materials, e-interaction with tutors, e-conference groups with other students
etc). In all cases the appropriate type of engagement, including punctuality
and appropriate, considerate behaviour by the student is expected.
8.1.2
8.2 Attendance and Assessment
8.2.1 Attendance at all scheduled activities for each module on which a student has registered e.g. lectures, workshops and seminars, is fundamental to achieving academic success. Students should attend regularly, and inform the School office of any occasional non-attendance. Persistent non-attendance will cause a student to be deregistered from the module, and may result in their withdrawal from a programme.
8.2.2 Satisfactory attendance (electronic or face to face) shall not be a condition for passing an assessment, nor shall it contribute towards the overall mark for the module.
© 2007
Skills Curriculum
Extenuation
Procedures
Student
Appeals
Student
Complaints
Student Satisfaction Survey
External Examiner
System
Learning, Teaching & Assessment at UEL
ESDS
Home
For a general description of these pages and an explanation of how they should work with screenreading equipment please follow this link: Link to general description
For further information on this web site's accessibility features please follow this link: Link to accessibility information
The following message does not apply to screenreader users:
You will still be able to access all the essential content of this web site, but it will not look, or function, exactly as intended.
