Assessment and Feedback Policy (updated June 2016)
- Assessment Design
- Assessment, Moderation and Marking
- Management of Assessment
- Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body Exemptions
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Introduction and purposes of assessment and feedback
Assessment and feedback are fundamental parts of the student learning experience, whether on-campus, by distance or blended learning. The UEL Assessment and Feedback Policy seeks to:
- actively promote student success and academic achievement
- provide clear, accurate, accessible information and guidelines to all staff and students on assessment and feedback
- maximise the potential for consistency and fairness in assessment
- locate assessment and feedback as an integral part of learning and teaching processes.
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:
- knowledge acquired
- skills gained, both generic and specific
- general understanding developed.
Assessment, for both staff and students, can be used to determine whether a student:
- has achieved the learning outcomes
- is ready to progress to a higher level
- has the capacity to demonstrate competence
- is able to qualify for an award.
Assessment, from a staff perspective:
- enables evaluation of the success of their input into the student learning experience
- provides an external measure of recognition for the public, the student, the employer and other stakeholders of a student’s achievement (as determined by the award of credit or a qualification).
Assessment may be diagnostic, formative or summative - all assessment will contain one or more of these elements (see Glossary and Supporting Information, (Appendix 1).
The roles and responsibilities of Subject Area, Programme and Module leaders, Schools and Students with regard to the Assessment and Feedback Policy are summarised within Appendix 4 of this document.
1.2 Principles of assessment
In order to serve the above purposes, assessment will be treated in accordance with the following principles and be:
- based on learning outcomes and assessment criteria
- integral to programme design
- fair and free from bias
- valid, transparent and reliable
- timely and incremental
- demanding yet manageable and efficient.
All documentation regarding assessment tasks, assessment criteria, submission deadlines and any accompanying guidance, including information relating to the return of work, will be:
- clearly worded
- presented to students at the beginning of each module
- published together in the relevant document
- easily available in the relevant module guide which will be accessible to students via the module’s virtual learning environment
2. Assessment Design
2.1 Introduction to Assessment Design
Within programmes, a variety of assessment tasks will be used to provide flexibility for students and to assess students’ skills, knowledge and understanding. This may include innovative assessment tasks such as those embraced within e-assessment.
Effective assessment design, within all modules, ensures that:
- assessment tasks enable students to demonstrate the learning outcomes detailed in the module specification
- where possible alternative types of assessment should be provided for assessing learning outcomes (unless otherwise mandated by professional bodies)
- all learning outcomes are assessed through summative assessment tasks
- assessment tasks are efficient in terms of student and staff time and over-assessment is avoided
- assessment is both formative and summative
- each assessment task is accompanied by, and mapped to, a set of assessment criteria which:
- ensures assessment of the learning outcomes
- is appropriate to the demands of the level of the assessment undertaken
- support the development of employability skills.
- student effort and the amount of work involved is consistent across modules at each level and aligns with the UEL Assessment Tariff and Equivalences (see Appendix 5)
- students experience a range of assessment types within their programme of study
- the likelihood of academic misconduct is reduced
- all students have an equal chance of understanding the assessment task and of demonstrating their achievement of the learning outcomes
Reassessment offers students fresh opportunities to demonstrate achievement of module learning outcomes. Repetition of coursework and examination questions will therefore be avoided (unless Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body requirements indicate a need to repeat assessment), particularly since repetition increases the likelihood of plagiarism and/or importation into examinations.
2.2 Relation of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
All assessment tasks will be clearly mapped to identified learning outcomes.
Learning outcomes will be devised at programme and module level.
- Programme level outcomes enable students to gain an overall understanding of their learning across the programme.
- Module learning outcomes enable students to gain an appreciation of what will be learned by the end of the module.
Learning outcomes will be monitored to ensure that they:
- are each described as specifically as possible in terms of what the student will be able to do, and /or know
- are devised according to the appropriate subject benchmark statement
- are set at the appropriate level for the module /programme.
2.3 Assessment Criteria
A student’s performance will be marked and graded according to pre-specified and clear assessment criteria. These will normally be presented in a single document combining marking and grading criteria (see example at Appendix 3). Assessment criteria will:
- be given to students with the assessment task (plus any guidance on what the markers expect the student to address when undertaking the assessment task)
- examine whether learning outcomes have been met by the student, and whether this has been addressed by the markers
- be set at the required standard and level for the module
- reflect the published aims and learning outcomes
- be of a comparable standard to equivalent awards elsewhere in the UK and in keeping with appropriate subject benchmark statements
- be available within the module guide, which will be accessible to students via the module’s virtual learning environment
- where they exist; penalties for exceeding word limits should be clearly communicated to students in the module guide.
- inform the use of any rubrics utilised within e-Submission 2 (see Appendix 6 Guidelines: e-Submission, marking and feedback of coursework).
2.4 Levels of Assessment: Qualification descriptors
Qualification descriptors are used to ensure consistency and equity. These have been presented by The Quality Assurance Agency within the UK Quality Code for Higher Education – Chapter A1: The national level and identify the characteristics and context of learning expected at each level, against which specific learning outcomes and assessment criteria are derived.
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 Assessment Processes
Schools will 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. Monitoring and review processes might be undertaken by a separate School panel or within Subject Area meetings. The following will be considered when reviewing assessment processes:
- assessment tasks are appropriate and enable students to demonstrate the learning outcomes of a module
- submission deadlines are scheduled to be spread throughout the period of study wherever possible
- student effort and the amount of work involved is consistent across modules at each level and aligns with UEL Assessment Tariff and Equivalences (see Appendix 5)
- full use is made of e-Submission for appropriate coursework submission, marking and feedback
All information relating to assessment tasks, assessment criteria, submission deadlines and feedback processes will be clearly provided within module guides, which will be accessible to students via the relevant module’s virtual learning environment.
Programme (re)approval panels need to:
- be satisfied that a proposed programme requires students to achieve appropriate standards of work at each level of the award
- ensure assessment within a programme incorporates a varied and appropriate diet of assessment tasks
- consider the overall coherence of the programme of study and progression through the programme.
Periodically, programme teams will review the spread and variety of assessments undertaken across modules that comprise the programme of study. This will acknowledge changes that may have been undertaken within individual modules since the previous approval/review and will ensure that a varied and appropriate diet continues to be offered across the programme.
3. Assessment, Moderation and Marking
3.1 ASSESSMENT PREPARATION: Internal Moderation of Assessment Tasks
Each school will have effective systems and procedures in place for the internal moderation of all methods of assessment for all modules.
Draft assessment and reassessment tasks for each module will be produced simultaneously by module teams. This process will be co-ordinated by the module leader to ensure that assessment at each opportunity is equitable.
All assessment task(s) for each module will 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) will:
- meet module specifications
- assess the learning outcomes
- be set at the correct level
- conform with expectations of External Examiners (as laid out in the External Examiners’ Manual)
- be designed to limit academic misconduct
Following this scrutiny, assessment task(s) may need to be modified.
3.2 ASSESSMENT PREPARATION: External Moderation of Assessment Tasks
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 higher education institutions.
Once finalised, assessment tasks will be forwarded to the relevant External Examiner for comment, prior to being published to students. Any changes required by an External Examiner must be approved by them prior to release to students.
All first and second opportunity assessment and reassessment tasks for each academic year will be submitted to the relevant External Examiner using secure means in the term prior to their required use. Coursework will be submitted and confirmed by external examiners before the academic year starts to enable the assessment information to be within the module guide. For exams (including TCAs), any exam and/or TCA taking place within Term 1 will be submitted and confirmed by external examiners before the academic year starts. For assessments taking place at the end of Term 2 they will be submitted by January (beginning of Term 2). As a minimum external examiners must be able to confirm moderation 12 weeks before an assessment takes place. All assessment tasks sent to External Examiners will be accompanied by:
- a copy of the relevant module specification
- the published assessment criteria
- clear guidance notes i.e. expectations of the assessment task(s)
All information received by External Examiners will duplicate that which the programme team intends to provide to the students (except indicative answers which will only be sent to External Examiners).
External Examiners will 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. They are also asked to comment upon the clarity of the task, and on the guidance provided.
3.3 Preparing to Mark
For each module, relevant teaching teams agree a marking plan at the beginning of each academic year. This plan will identify:
- first and second (and third, if subsequently needed) markers, and timetables
- indicative content of answers to coursework and/or examination questions/tasks
- provision in relation to e-Submission
- assessment (marking and grading) criteria, which will ensure appropriate use of the full spread of marks
Consideration will be given to ensure the full range of marks is used. The full range of marks is defined as 0-100%. In order for the marker to apply the full range of marks the marking scheme should cover the whole range in sufficient detail to allow the marker and the student to understand the rationale for the mark wherever it falls.
When e-Submission has been used for the submission of coursework, marking and second marking will be conducted within e-Submission or other formats appropriate to the module e.g. Audio file or Video file.
In order for marking to be equitable between all markers:
- questions, assessment criteria and a copy of guidance provided to students regarding expectations for the specific piece of assessment will be provided to all markers
- less experienced or probationary colleagues new to the institution
or sector will be supported, and guidance and personal development in
marking skills provided. Their marking will normally be second marked by
experienced members of staff, and will be monitored to ensure:
- the development of necessary skills
- that students are receiving equitable marks
3.5 Anonymous Marking
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 will be masked from markers and work only identified by student number.
Where the method of assessment does not allow anonymous marking (e.g. dissertations, oral presentations, oral examinations, practical examinations, laboratory tests, performance etc.) all work will be second marked (see Appendix 2, Second Marking).
For some types of assessment it may be impractical either to second mark or to mark anonymously. On rare occasions where neither anonymous, nor second marking is practicable (normally this would only occur in settings such as the workplace), methods by which students may be protected from unfair or biased assessments in these situations, will be made explicit by the programme leader. These could include for example, bringing in a visiting tutor from UEL to the workplace.
3.6 Second Marking
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, Second Marking) the preferred method at UEL is moderation of a sample across the full range of marks for both written and practical assessments. Where other methods are preferable, such as in the case of Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body exemption, a justification will be provided to the Dean of School.
Every component of summative assessment that contributes towards an award, at all levels, will be subject to moderation in order to ensure the maintenance of standards.
A sample of at least 10% or 10 individual pieces of each assessment task (whichever is the greater) will be moderated. The sample should be taken from the full range of student performance, having sight of the full range of marks.
Where the first marking of any module is undertaken by more than one marker, the sample will include a minimum of 10% of the work marked by each individual marker, again relating to a range of performance.
Where e-Submission has been used for first marking, it will be used for second marking.
Resolving differences between markers within modular assessment tasks:
NB Significant differences are defined as where the difference is 10 marks or more; and/or where marks spread across critical boundaries (even if fewer than 10 marks) i.e. pass/fail or grade boundaries:
- if there are NO significant differences revealed by the second marking process, the first mark stands as the agreed mark
- if there ARE significant differences revealed in the sample that has been second marked, the second marker will mark ALL remaining work marked by the first marker that falls within the same grade band, and possibly other bands if warranted.
- after work has been marked by both first and second markers, a revised mark will be agreed by discussion and negotiation. This will ensure moderation to an agreed and consistent standard. Where agreement cannot be reached, resort to a third internal marker will take place.
- where agreement cannot be reached, resort to a third internal marker will take place.
- should the second marking process reveal consistent significant differences in more than one first marker’s marking, the process described above will apply to ALL first markers’ marking
- Students should not be made aware that their work has been sampled. Sampled work for second marking, whether via Turnitin or hard copy, should not evidence the second marker’s comments nor any indication of a series of marks. Rather a second marking marksheet should be completed that is sent to the external examiner that clearly indicates: first mark, second mark, agreed mark and rationale that allows the external to see how that final mark was arrived at.
Significant Differences Flowchart
Where e-Submission is used, should a second marker disagree with the first mark, this must not be changed within the e-Submission tool before discussion and negotiation between the markers (see Appendix 6 Guidelines: e-Submission, marking and feedback of coursework).
Marking conducted in all forms of assessment including e-Submission, will ensure that students are only presented with one final (agreed) mark, although comments from all markers will be available.
In order to eliminate arithmetic errors, for any component of assessment that requires aggregation of marks, all calculations undertaken by hand will always be checked by a second marker in order to correct, if necessary.
Second markers will provide a short report to the module leader, following the second marking process.
3.7 External Moderation of Marking
For each module, External Examiners will be provided with the following materials and information:
- Module specification
- Details of assessment task(s)
- Assessment criteria
- Any assessment guidance
- Sample of assessed work
- The record of marks and comments from 1st and 2nd (and 3rd) markers
- Schedule of all marks agreed for all candidates assessed in the module following internal moderation
Brief report from the Module Leader providing general comments on the outcomes of the assessment process (e.g. trends in questions answered by candidates, common errors, questions generally answered well/poorly, Second marker’s report etc). For guidance on the use of e-Submission in this regard, please refer to Appendix 6 Guidelines: e- Submission, marking and feedback of coursework) A minimum of 10% or 10 individual pieces of each assessment task (whichever is the greater) will also be made available to the External Examiner for moderation.
This sample will be taken from the full range of marks and will include some work that has been second marked.
External Examiners will not be requested to act as a second or third marker or to adjudicate on disagreements between internal markers.
A record of agreed marks for all candidates, evidence of second and/or anonymous marking from all internal examiners, and comments from second markers, will be kept and will be made available for scrutiny by External Examiners. This information will also contribute to the module report.
External Examiners may, based on their moderation process, recommend to the Subject Area Progression Board that:
- all marks for a particular assessment task are raised or lowered
- request that all candidates’ work be reconsidered if significant discrepancies and/or inconsistencies are revealed
External Examiners are expected to attend all Subject Area Progression and Award Board meetings, including resit Boards. (Further information is available from Quality Assurance and Enhancement).
All marks for summatively assessed work (both examinations and coursework) are subject to Subject Area Progression or Award Board approval.
4. Management of Assessment
4.1 Timing of assessment
Appropriate advance notice of the timing and form of assessments, examination arrangements and the timing of notification of results will be clearly provided to students at the start of each module in the module guide, which will be accessible via the module’s virtual learning environment.
Formative and summative assessment
Each module should contain a mix of formative and summative assessment (Appendix 7).
Formative assessments should be designed to reflect the types of summative assessment which the students will experience on the module and timed appropriately so that students receive feedback on the formative assignment in adequate time to use the feedback to improve their performance on the summative assignment. Use of formative assessment at an early stage of the module can provide an indication of how well students are engaging and enable early identification of students in need of additional support. Given the value of early feedback to student success, it is important to emphasise to students that formative assessment is a significant measure of student engagement with the module.
Assessment release dates
The dates by which details of specific coursework assignments (as opposed to exam questions) will be released to students will be specified in the module guide, which will be accessible to students via the module’s virtual learning environment. Details of specific summative assessment tasks should be released to students either at the start of the module or at least 8 weeks prior to the submission deadline so as to allow sufficient time for the student to adequately prepare. All reasonable adjustments are therefore built into this process for all students.
Submission dates and times must correspond with days/ times when the University is open and technical support is available in case of problems with submission. Specifically this means that all Turnitin assessment links should be set up during the times of Monday –Thursday 9:30-4:00, and not during an national holidays or university closures (Appendix 6). This is to ensure that if there is a service disruption that the situation can be communicated to the students. This also ensure that there is support available to student to allow them to make submissions using Turnitin.
Arrangements for the publication of results for both Subject Area Progression and Award Boards should be clearly stated in programme handbooks. Results will normally be released to students through their programme leaders or through UELdirect within 8 working days of the Board. Students will be entitled to a transcript each academic year identifying their progress.
4.2 Integrity of Examinations
All examinations will be conducted in a fair, consistent and secure manner. This requires the identification of at least one identified member of staff within the School with responsibility for:
- the maintenance of examination papers throughout the development process
- the coordination of the invigilation process, in association with Timetabling (the team responsible for managing that process)
Students will be instructed to familiarise themselves with the guidelines on conduct for examinations and conduct themselves in the appropriate manner.
The invigilation process is managed by the Timetabling Team who produce Good Practice Guidelines for Invigilation and train invigilators
Invigilation will be led by module leaders (or their nominee(s)) and supported by trained external invigilators where appropriate.
Invigilation arrangements for students with disabilities/specific learning difficulties are set out below in Section 7. Where relevant, Schools make the agreed arrangements for students with disabilities/ specific learning difficulties, when these have been notified to the School (normally at least 3 weeks in advance).
Question papers may not be removed from the examination room after completion of the examination, although questions may be made available for students through the virtual learning environment at the time of the release of marks (with the exception of Multiple Choice Question papers, which are not released to students).
4.4 Submission of Coursework
Students will be instructed that all coursework should be submitted by the required submission date, and in accordance with module guidelines (e.g. using student number, word count, word-processed). Work which is submitted late, but within 24 hours of the deadline, will be assessed but subjected to a fixed penalty of 5% of the total marks available (as opposed to marks obtained). This applies to both UG and PG coursework.4.4.1 E-submission of Coursework
e-Submission, marking and feedback must be used wherever possible for all single pieces of text-based coursework Tutors must seek agreement from their Subject Head if they would like an exception to this for any of their text-based coursework. (Please see Appendix 6 for guidelines on E-submission and on the set up of assessments). For e-submissions UEL uses Turnitin which is an internet-based text matching service that has been developed by a commercial company. It is used, under license, by most UK Universities. Work that is submitted to Turnitin generates a Turnitin Originality report, showing which parts of it have been reproduced from which sources. This policy sets out how we use the service in connection with student work. Turnitin recognises the following file formats: Word; PDF and PPT. For other types of files, e-submission should be made using the Moodle Assignment Dropbox.
- All postgraduate research students will be required to submit their dissertations to Turnitin.
- Students can submit their work up to 7 days after the original submission date and this would be marked as normal.
- For submissions up to 24 hours late, 5% of the possible total mark is deducted from their grade. This applies to both undergraduate and postgraduate coursework.
- For submissions after the 24 hour late period, provided the student also submitted a successful claim for extenuation, they would bethe full mark through due process.
- If students submit twice – once before the deadline, and once during the 24 hour late period – then the latter work will be marked and 5% deducted.
- Extenuation will not be granted where work is submitted within the 24 hour late period, any application would be a ‘technical reject’, but students must also be allowed to submit work beyond the 24hr lateness period where extenuating circumstances apply.
- Feedback and students’ marks should be provided within 20 working days of the due date
- Students should not be expected to submit a print copy for any e-submissions.
4.4.2 Physical Coursework Submissions
Where coursework is not suitable for e-Submission:
- Published and secure mechanisms will exist within each school, and will be clearly explained to students within their module guides, accessible via the module’s virtual learning environment (See appendix 6).
- the receipt of work submitted will be logged and students will be provided with access to recorded evidence of submission (See Appendix 6))
- feedback on submitted work will be provided in word-processed format unless the nature of the work prevents this e.g. mathematical formula (see Section 5, Feedback to Students)
- a secure method for the return of marked coursework will be in place
4.5 Assessment Registration Responsibilities
Students are only eligible for assessment on a module if registered on the module. Schools will ensure that students have ready access to their module registration data via UEL Direct and will ensure that students are aware that this information is available in UEL Direct. (Students should be informed that it is their responsibility to ensure that the record of registration is accurate and must notify their School of any inaccuracies).
4.6 Breaches of Academic Misconduct Regulations
Assessment tasks are designed to reduce, as far as is practicable, the possibility of plagiarism and collusion and other instances of academic misconduct. Where an instance of academic misconduct is suspected, procedures detailed in Part 8 of Manual of General Regulations (Academic Misconduct Regulations) will be invoked.
Students should be made aware of the Academic Integrity Policy to assist in the avoidance of plagiarism.
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 accordance with the Data Protection Act and the Freedom of Information Act.
5.1 Feedback to Students
Feedback is central to learning and is provided to students to develop their knowledge, understanding, skills and to help promote learning and facilitate improvement.
All feedback will be:
- timely (provided within 20 working days 3)
- given in relation to the learning outcomes and assessment criteria
- provided on both coursework and examinations
- clear, relevant, motivating, and constructive
- developmental, enabling students to both consolidate learning and achievement
- word-processed where e-submission is not used (unless the nature of the work prevents this e.g. mathematical formula)
- offered in a range of formats appropriate to the module e.g. electronically via Turnitin GradeMark or other e-Submission tools where used, Audio file, Video file, or Screencast.
The nature and extent of feedback the student may expect will be indicated for each assessment task at the time it is set.
When feedback (including marks) is provided to a student before an Award or Progression Board, all marks will be clearly identified as:
- being provisional
- available for External Examiner scrutiny
- subject to change and approval by the Assessment Board
- all students will be actively encouraged to collect feedback, review and consider its recommendations and implications, and seek further advice and guidance from academic staff when required.
5.2 Modes of Feedback
Feedback may be:
- Individual – identifying specific issues relating to one student’s work
- Generic – referring to general points about the assessment as a whole, arising from an overview of the work produced by the student group
5.3 Feedback on Coursework
Feedback will be provided as soon as possible after the student has completed the assessment task:
- feedback on formative assessment will be given in time for students to make use of it prior to summative assessment
- feedback on summative assessment will be given within 20 working days of the submission date of the work.
Clear guidance will 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 will be communicated to students at the time the assessment task is set.
5.4 Feedback on Examinations
Feedback on examinations will be given within 20 working days of the conclusion of the examination period.
Clear guidance will be provided within the module guide, accessible within the module’s virtual learning environment regarding:
- the type of feedback that will be given following examination i.e. individual or generic
- whether feedback will include the return of examination scripts and/or work, or not, in accordance with agreed procedures within each School.
6.1 Assessment Needs
6.1.1 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 the Equality Act 2010. They are also informed by the Students, within the UK Quality Code for HE - Chapter B4: Student support, learning resources and careers education, information, advice and guidance (until 2013 when it will have been integrated into each chapter of the Quality Code)and UEL’s Equality and Diversity Strategy 2011-15.
6.2 Inclusive Approach
We aim to practice an inclusive approach in supporting our students with disabilities/ specific learning difficulties. This 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 ‘labeling’ students and towards creating an appropriate learning environment for all students. In consultation between the student and DDAC, a Learning Support agreement will be drawn up and shared with Schools.
All information including submission dates and coursework assignments will be released to students at the start of each module in the module guide, accessible to students via the module’s virtual learning environment. Specific wording of assignment questions should be released to students at the start of the module or at least 8 weeks prior to the date of submission. All reasonable adjustments are therefore built into this process for all students, ensuring adequate opportunity to explore taught material prior to assessment.
Any student who discloses a disability to a member of staff will be referred to the Disability, Dyslexia and Access Centre (DDAC).
Students will be informed that they must be registered with the DDAC for any examination adjustments.
Students will need to provide valid professional evidence by the specified deadline date.
Deadline dates, by which students must apply to the DDAC in order to have reasonable adjustments in examinations, will be set by the Head of the DDAC at the start of each academic year:
- a minimum of four working weeks prior to the start of each examination period
- published on all relevant websites and in all appropriate publicity and information material for students, applicants and staff.
6.5 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 4, Roles and Responsibilities for further details).
6.6 Exceptional Circumstances
In exceptional circumstances, where a needs assessment or learning support agreement has been undertaken, alternative forms of assessment may be required as a result of a student’s disability. In such cases, the Head of DDAC will approach the relevant Module and/or Subject Area Leader to discuss. In line with our legal obligations, consideration will be given to any relevant competence standards that apply to the programme to ensure fairness and consistency of practice and the maintenance of professional practice requirements where relevant 4. A final decision will be made by the Chair of the Assessment Board (or Dean if the Chair has been previously involved) in consultation with the Chair of the University Learning and Teaching Committee.
If a student with a disability/specific learning difficulty is unable to complete a piece of coursework on time or attend an examination (or feel their performance may have been seriously impacted during an examination), the only way in which a disability would come within the scope of the extenuation procedures would be if there was a serious, unpredictable, and unpreventable increase in the disability which might be expected to have a serious impact on performance. In this case full independent evidential support for the increase would need to be provided, in addition to evidence of the history of the disability. In these instances, students will be able to apply using UEL’s Extenuation procedures in the usual way.
7. Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body Exemptions
Should any module/programme be unable to comply with any aspect of this Assessment and Feedback Policy as a result of requirements from a Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body, a written request for relevant exemption(s), together with associated evidence from the Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body, will be made to the Director of Academic Practice and Student Experience.
Exemption(s) will only be valid upon receipt of written approval from the Director of Learning and Teaching.
- Glossary and Supporting Information
- Second Marking
- Assessment Criteria
- Roles and Responsibilities
- Assessment Tariff and Equivalences
- e-Submission and Physical Submission Guidelines
- Using assessment to enhance learning
1 The Assessment Policy is appropriate for all UEL programmes within the UEL Academic Framework. Programmes with permission from Academic Board to function outside the Academic Framework (e.g. credit ratings for modules; other Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body requirements) may have alternative arrangements approved by Academic Board.
2 References to e-Submission throughout the Assessment and Feedback Policy refer to Turnitin GradeMark which is the institutional tool utilised for e-Submission. at UEL.
3 Working days refer to ‘normal’ working days i.e. Monday to Friday (excluding public holidays and periods of university closure)
4 Individual programmes may have particular standards and other requirements relating to performance and skills that are set by external organisations, professional bodies etc. it is therefore important to ensure that any alternative forms of assessment do not compromise these requirements.