assessment regulations 13-14

UNIVERSITY ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS

October 2013

Approved by Senate 11 October 2002 - Amended September 2003, October 2004, November 2005, October 2006, October 2007, October 2008, October 2009,

October 2010, October 2011, October 2012. This version amended October 2013 PW-Governance and Quality Enhancement

http://www.gcal.ac.uk/student/exams/

1

Page Number

Contents 1

Overview of Main Amendments 3

SECTION ONE: UNIVERSITY ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS 4

Introduction 5

Philosophy of Assessment and Academic Judgement 5

Progression through Programmes and Completion of Taught Postgraduate

Programmes 6

Compensation 6

Failure at first diet 8

Maximum Number of Attempts at a Module 8

Failure at the re-assessment diet 8

Accumulated Credit and Repetition of Modules 9

Assessments Leading to a Named Award and Distinction 9

Honours Awards 11

Postgraduate Awards 13

Nullification of the Results of Assessment of a Single Module at H and M level 13

Conferment of University Awards 14

Additional Assessments 14

Valid Reasons for Poor Performance at any Level and Aegrotat Awards 14

Withdrawal 15

Students notified by the Finance Office as Debtors 16

Replacement Modules – School Based Generic Awards 16

SECTION TWO: APPENDICES TO THE REGULATIONS 18

1. Assessment Boards and Minuting of Assessment Boards and Notification of

Results to Students (including Confirmation of Module Marks and External 19

Examiner Endorsement of Assessment Board Outcomes Pro Formae)

2. External Examiners 25

3. Marking, the Reporting of Marks (including Normalisation of Module Marks) 33

4. Examples of Automatic Compensation, Distinction and Profiling 37

5. Conditions of Entry to Assessments and Assessment Scheme 40

6. Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances 43

7. University Regulations regarding Plagiarism and Cheating 61

SECTION THREE: ASSESSMENT AND GRADUATION PROCESSES 69

1. Scheme of Invigilation 70

2. Regulations for the Conduct of Examinations 75

3. Special Examination Arrangements for Disabled Students 78

4. Special Examination Arrangements for International Students 80

5. Resit Examinations at Other Institutions 81

6. Notes of Guidance to Academic Staff on the Information to be 83

Provided to Students to Assist Their Preparation for Unseen

Assessments (Including Assessments Containing an Unseen Component)

7. Guidance Note on Assessment Loading 86

8. Procedures for the Security, Approval and Retention of Examination

Papers 88

9. Procedure for the Submission of Examination Papers and the 89




2

Collection of Worked Examination Scripts

10. Policy on the Retention of Students' Work 90

11. Academic Appeals 91

12. Graduation and Awards Regulations 99

13. Procedures for Project and Dissertation Supervision 102

14. Procedure for Anonymous Marking 105

15. Policy on Student Performance Feedback 106




3

OVERVIEW OF THE MAIN AMENDMENTS

Terms and Conditions

A statement on the University‟s the right to make reasonable changes to the Assessment Regulations

during an academic session has been included on page 4.

Appendix 2 - External Examiners

This replaces the previous External Examiners appendix and includes the following amendments:

The term of appointment is changed from 5 years to 4years with the opportunity of a 1 year extension

at the end of this period (paragraph 2.3).

An External Examiner has the right to raise any matter of serious concern directly with the Head of

Governance and Quality Enhancement, if necessary by means of a separate confidential written

report (paragraph 2.12g, bullet point 4).

An External Examiner may invoke the QAA‟s concerns scheme or inform the relevant professional,

statutory or regulatory body where they have a serious concern relating to systemic failings with the

academic standards of a module, programme or programmes and has exhausted all published applicable

internal procedures, including the submission of a confidential report (paragraph 2.12g, bullet point 5).

Appendix 6 - Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances

This appendix replaces the previous Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances procedures (page 42).

Academic Appeals

The provision for Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances in appendix 6 removes the retrospective

submission of mitigating circumstances (previously “Special Factors”) as a potential ground for academic

appeal.

Student Attendance Monitoring Policy

This section has been removed. Information regarding student attendance monitoring is available for

students and staff on the University website http://www.gcu.ac.uk/staff/saem/.

http://www.gcu.ac.uk/staff/saem/




4

UNIVERSITY ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS

The University reserves the right to make reasonable changes to the Assessment Regulations where in the

opinion of the University those changes will assist in the proper delivery of education.

The University will normally maintain the Assessment Regulations for students within an academic

session. However, the University reserves the right to introduce changes during the academic session

when it reasonably considers those changes are:

(a) for the maintenance of academic standards; or

(b) required to secure the University‟s good operation and legal or regulatory compliance.

Appropriate prior notice of changes will be given.


October 2010, October 2011, October 2012. This version amended October 2013 PW-Governance and Quality Enhancement http://www.gcal.ac.uk/student/exams/

5

INTRODUCTION

1. All Programme and Assessment Boards must follow the general Assessment Regulations of Glasgow

Caledonian University (GCU). Programme Boards must state in their programme

specification/programme documentation, either:

i. that there are no deviations from the University‟s standard assessment regulations

or

ii. that there are deviations from the University's standard assessment regulations; these are found in

sections……..

All deviations from the standard Assessment Regulations must receive formal approval by the

University1. The date and reference of each approved deviation from the general assessment

regulations shall be included in the programme documentation.

Students must ensure that they are aware of and understand all regulations that are specific to

their programme.

PHILOSOPHY OF ASSESSMENT AND ACADEMIC JUDGEMENT

2. The purpose of assessment is to enable students to demonstrate that they have fulfilled the objectives of

the programmes of study and have achieved the standard required for the award they seek. The Senate

requires all programmes of study to be subject to programme regulations which relate the assessment

requirements of the programme to its objectives2. It is within these programme assessment regulations

that assessors make their judgement on student performance.

3. However, assessment is a matter of judgement, not simply of computation. Marks, grades and

percentages are symbols used by assessors to communicate their judgements of different aspects of a

student‟s work and provide information on which the final decision on a student‟s fulfillment of

programme objectives may be based. They are not and should never be considered as absolute values or

exact measurements.

4. Within the constraints imposed by the Senate requirements of paragraph 2 above, assessors have wide

academic discretion in reaching decisions on the awards to be recommended for individual students.

The assessors are responsible for interpreting sensibly the assessment regulations for a programme if any

difficulties arise. Regulations cannot be expected to legislate for every eventuality. Experience,

knowledge of the student and his/her overall performance together with awareness of best practice in

higher education should all combine to allow the assessors to reach an academic judgement.

5. Academic judgements, which are properly and fully minuted, may override strict regulatory

interpretation and it should be noted that academic judgements cannot in themselves be questioned or

overturned. However academic judgement should be applied, in all cases, in the best interests of the

student and cannot be used as a justification to downgrade any credit, mark or degree classification

achieved by all normal regulatory calculations.

6. Assessment Boards may obtain guidance on the interpretation of the regulations from the SAS

Operations Manager (Assessment & Exams) and the Department of Governance and Quality

Enhancement.

1 Any proposed deviations are first submitted to Governance and Quality Enhancement for consideration and advice.

Thereafter they may be submitted to the University Exceptions Committee for consideration. 2 This requirement will be described explicitly in the Programme Specification.



6

PROGRESSION THROUGH PROGRAMME AND COMPLETION OF TAUGHT POSTGRADUATE

PROGRAMMES

7. Candidates who satisfy the Assessors in all modules shall proceed, within the terms outlined in the

University Qualifications Framework, to the next stage of the programme. Candidates will be

credited with the approved credit points accumulated from those modules.

i. To progress from:

Level 1 to Level 2 a student must have been awarded 80 credits in total at SHE1.

Level 2 to Level 3 a student must have been awarded 200 credits in total of which at least 80

are at SHE2.

Level 3 to Level H a student must have been awarded 320 credits in total of which at least 90

are at SHE3 or exceptionally awarded 360 credits in total, of which at least 60 are at SHE3.

Subject to meeting professional body requirements (where applicable) and achieving at least 90

credits at SHE levels 1 and 2 respectively, and 60 at SHE3 for an unclassified degree or 90 credits at

SHE levels 1,2,3 and H respectively for an honours degree, students may take the remaining required

credit at any level, including level M modules for honours level students.3

ii. Where a student has failed to satisfactorily complete module requirements at M level and has 30 or

more credits outstanding at the PgD exit point, the Assessment Board may exercise its discretion to

require the student to complete any or all outstanding credit prior to undertaking the Masters

Dissertation (or equivalent module). The Board may advise students who are not making satisfactory

academic progress not to continue with the final component of the programme.

iii. At any level, credit at a higher level may substitute for the minimum credit required at that level to

progress.

8. In order to satisfy the assessors in any module, candidates must normally obtain the pass mark. For

undergraduate programmes the pass mark is normally 40%. For postgraduate programmes, the module

pass mark shall be as specified in the module handbook. For modules assessed by coursework and

examination, the overall pass mark for the module will be subject to the attainment of a mark of no more

than 5% below the overall aggregate pass mark in each of the coursework and examination components

of the module assessment. In cases where certain elements of coursework are deemed essential,

normally due to Statutory/Professional body requirements, the module descriptor shall specify these

elements and the minimum mark required for each element. Where the coursework or examination is

compiled from two or more separate elements, the 5% rule applies to the aggregated mark of that

component. The Module Leader must ensure that all students are informed of any such specific

requirements via the module handbook. All such cases must be approved by the Exceptions Committee.4

9. When a specific programme requires a total amount of assessed student learning which is greater than

the norm at any level of study, for example to satisfy the requirements of a professional body, an

appropriate amount of additional credit points will be awarded.

10. Individual Programme Regulations shall specify any particular requirements attached to the choice of

modules at subsequent levels.

COMPENSATION (Examples of compensation are shown in Appendix 4)

11. In considering compensation, Assessment Boards should be aware that under the terms of the

Qualifications Framework, any reference to level refers to the level of the award. This is because an

3 Section 4.10 of the University‟s Qualifications Framework.

4 See also Appendix 3 and appendix 5.12



7

award may be achieved by accumulating credit from modules at different levels e.g. a University

Certificate may be awarded through the achievement of 90 level 1 credits and 30 credits at a higher level.

12. i. Having due regard to the standard of the award, the programme objectives, and the programme

assessment regulations, the Assessment Board may allow the overall performance of a student to

compensate for failure in up to 20 credit points of module(s) at that level.5

ii. When making the decision regarding compensation the Assessment Board will be expected to take

into account such factors as the overall profile of the student, the weighting and level of the module

and its contribution to other levels of the programme.

iii. Compensation normally may only be awarded following delivery and assessment of all of the

modules which contribute to the eligibility for an award at any given level and can only be applied

where no more than 20 credit points of module(s) have been failed at any given level.6

iv. For postgraduate programmes, automatic compensation will be applicable when students have

reached the point of potential eligibility for a PgD exit award (i.e. prior to the dissertation phase)

13. i. Assessment Boards will automatically apply compensation when a student obtains an overall mark of

between 1% and 5% less than the pass mark for the module and has achieved an overall aggregate

mark across all modules at that level of at least 5% greater than the pass mark for the module being

compensated.

ii In modules where there is more than one component contributing to the overall mark, this is subject

to the attainment of a minimum mark of at most 10% less than the normal pass mark for the module

in each of the aggregated components which make up the overall mark for the module assessment.

iii. In modules where there is only one assessment component (e.g. Coursework only) and where

minimum pass mark(s) for individual assessment elements have been defined and approved by the

Exceptions Committee (e.g. coursework 1, coursework 2 etc.) this is again subject to the attainment of

a minimum mark of at most 10% less than the normal pass mark for the module in the elements (or,

where appropriate, the aggregated elements).

iv. Where Mitigating Circumstances apply, Assessment Boards must act in accordance with Appendix 6

(Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances).

14. Assessment Boards may apply the following adjustment to assessments where the other conditions

for compensation specified in paragraph 13 have been met:

i. Where marks do not fall within the parameters of automatic compensation, the Assessment Board

can apply discretionary compensation, but only where this involves raising any mark by no more

than 1 percentage point. However in modules where there is more than one component

contributing to the mark, marks which are less than the normal pass mark for the module by 11%

for an individual component may be raised by 1% to allow discretionary compensation.

ii In single component modules with specifically defined minimum pass marks, marks which are

less than the module pass mark by 11% for an individual element (e.g. coursework 1), or where

appropriate, aggregated elements, may be raised by 1% to allow discretionary compensation.

15. To assist the decision making with regard to compensation, the actual marks attained by the student will

be used in all calculations for compensation. The purpose of this regulation is to emphasise the need to

use the most recently attained resit mark for the module which is to be compensated, together with the

actual marks attained for all other modules passed at the same level, to determine eligibility for

automatic compensation.

5 Modules which are worth more than 20 credit points are not, therefore, compensatable.

6 For example, where a student has passed 100 credit points of the 120 required at level 1.



8

16. Where Mitigating Circumstances apply the Assessment Board shall act in accordance with Appendix 6

(Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances).

17. The decision as to whether a student who has been compensated can proceed to the next level of a

module in the same subject area should be determined by the programme regulations. Where

appropriate, the Programme Board may offer the Assessment Board advice in this respect.

18. Programme specific regulations, approved at approval or review, may specify that compensation may

not be exercised in respect of specified modules, for example a core module(s) which underpin a final

Honours module, or where Professional and Statutory Bodies insist on a pass in a named module(s).

19. Compensation will not normally be allowed in respect of a final level undergraduate or postgraduate

project or dissertation.

FAILURE AT FIRST DIET

20. Candidates who fail to satisfy the Assessment Board at a first diet, including those who did not sit the

written papers and/or complete other required work assessed continuously, will normally be required to

re-enter the relevant modules at the next available assessment diet. The Assessment Board may,

however, require a candidate to undertake a further formal programme of study, which may include

repeating an individual module or an entire level of the programme.

MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ATTEMPTS AT A MODULE 7

21. At the discretion of the Assessment Board a candidate will be permitted the following maximum

number of attempts at a module:

Levels SHE1, SHE2 & SHE3 - up to four attempts

Level SHEH/Level M - up to two attempts

22. Where a candidate fails to satisfy the Assessment Board in any assessable element of a module, the

Assessors may amend the form of assessment to be re-entered, provided adequate notice is given to the

candidate of the amended form of assessment to be set.

23. Where a candidate was unable to enter an assessment for good cause the Assessment Board may act in

accordance with Appendix 6 (Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances).

FAILURE AT THE RE-ASSESSMENT DIET

24. i Candidates who fail assessment in one module only (the equivalent of 20 credit points)8 at the re-

assessment diet will normally be allowed to carry that module to the next level with the condition that

attendance will be required at defined elements of the module(s) delivery, as defined by the

Assessment Board.

ii Candidates who fail assessment in up to 40 credit points may, at the discretion of the Assessment

Board, be permitted to carry the credits to the next level, with the condition that attendance will be

required at elements of the module(s) delivery, as determined by the Assessment Board. Such

discretion will only be permitted in cases where the student concerned may undertake the equivalent

of one 20 credit module of carried credits in Trimester A and 20 credit points in Trimester B and

where the Board believes that the student would be able to succeed in the carried module(s) and

7 Except where a different maximum number of attempts is detailed in a programme‟s specific regulations.

8 20 credit points may be equivalent to one full module or two half modules.



9

that in carrying the module(s) the student could reasonably be expected to successfully complete

the work of the next level.

iii Students who are permitted to carry module(s) will be required to pursue such a programme of study

in that module as the Assessment Board considers necessary and will be required to re-enter the

assessment in that module on the next normal occasion, or when agreed by the Board. It will be the

responsibility of the Programme Board to advise on appropriate levels of support to be provided to

students carrying modules and the responsibility of the Executive Dean of School to ensure this

support is provided.

iv Candidates who fail assessment in more than 20 credit points, and who are not permitted to proceed

under the terms of paragraph 24ii will normally be required either to repeat the outstanding modules

with attendance or to withdraw from the programme and be given guidance, advice and support as to

their future options. The counselling will normally be carried out by the student‟s academic advisor

or, where this is not possible, another appropriate member of academic staff.

25. The provisions of any other section of these Assessment Regulations notwithstanding, an undergraduate

student who has failed to satisfy the Assessors after the second diet, may exceptionally be permitted to

re-enter the assessments without further attendance at the University.

26. The Assessment Board may allow a student to drop failed module(s) and take replacement module(s)

at the appropriate level, provided the replacement module(s) ensure the delivery of the learning

outcomes of the programme. The combined number of attempts that the student will be allowed for the

original and the replacement modules shall not exceed that which would have been allowed for the

original module.

27. In postgraduate programmes, students who fail at the second diet will normally be asked to withdraw

from the programme and be given guidance, advice and support as to their future options. Such

counselling will normally be carried out by the student‟s academic advisor or, where this is not possible,

another appropriate member of academic staff.

ACCUMULATED CREDIT AND REPETITION OF MODULES

28. A student cannot re-enter a module that has already been passed in order to improve his/her marks for

that module. Where a student has gained credits points for a module these may not be taken away

from the student (except in cases of cheating and plagiarism). Consequently, a student who has been

required to repeat a level will only be required to re-enter those modules for which they have failed to

record a pass mark. The Assessment Board shall have the discretion to determine the components of

each module which should be re-assessed.

29. Where it is deemed in their best interests, a registered student may attend classes in order to improve

their knowledge of a module that has already been passed. Such attendance will not involve any

assessment or extra payment over and above that which has already been paid.

30. In certain circumstances, for example where a student has taken a significant amount of time out

from their programme and there have been significant changes to the content of a module or

programme, an Assessment Board may require a student (or a student may request) to re-take a

module and/or its assessment prior to progression to a higher level.

ASSESSMENTS LEADING TO A NAMED AWARD AND DISTINCTION

31. The Programme Regulations for each award will specify assessment elements in which a candidate must

normally satisfy the Assessors in order to be recommended for that award.



10

32. When the Assessment Board is satisfied that a candidate has shown special merit in assessment at the

first diet, it may recommend that the award be granted 'with Distinction'. The Assessment Board shall

normally recommend that an award be granted 'with Distinction' to a candidate who has passed all

elements and achieved an overall average of 70% or more and no mark below 55% in any module

included in the calculation for distinction. Additionally, in the case of postgraduate awards which

have a project/dissertation component, a minimum mark of 70% will be required in the

project/dissertation module for the award “with Distinction”9.

Distinction can only be awarded where a candidate has passed all modules, included in the

calculation for distinction, at the first attempt. In addition, candidates must achieve passes at

first attempt in all modules at the level where distinction is being considered.

Where in the judgement of an Assessment Board the mark of an individual module has the potential

to unjustly skew the overall outcome in terms of the award of distinction, the provisions set out in

Appendix 3 in relation to the normalisation of marks should be applied. This will most commonly

occur in professional and clinical modules governed by PSB requirements.

33. For the purposes for calculating an award with distinction, all calculations shall be based on a

candidate's performance in their first attempt at all modules.

i. Distinction in the Certificate of Higher Education

A student can be awarded a Certificate of Higher Education with 120 credit points of which a

minimum of 90 must be at SHE1. The award “with Distinction” will be granted on the basis of

all 120-credit points.

ii. Distinction in the Diploma of Higher Education

A student can be awarded a Diploma of Higher Education with 240 credit points of which a

minimum of 90 must be at SHE2. The award “with Distinction” will be granted on the basis of

the 90 SHE2-credit points and the best 30 credit points of the remainder.

In the case of a student who has passed five twenty credit SHE2 modules, distinction will be

granted on the basis of the 100 SHE2-credit points and the best 20 credit points of the remainder.

iii. Distinction in the Bachelors Degree

A student can be awarded a Bachelors degree with 360 credit points of which a minimum of 60

must be at SHE3. The award “with Distinction” will be granted on the basis of the best 90

SHE3-credit points and the remaining best 30 credit points at SHE2 or above.

A student cannot be awarded the Bachelors degree with distinction unless they have passed at

least 90 credit points at level SHE3.

iv. Distinction in the Graduate Certificate

A student can be awarded a Graduate Certificate with 60 credits at a minimum of SHE3. The

award “with Distinction” will be granted on the basis of all 60-credit points.

v. Distinction in the Graduate Diploma

A student can be awarded a Graduate Diploma with 120 credits at a minimum of SHE3. The

award “with Distinction” will be granted on the basis of all 120-credit points

9 Examples of distinction are shown in appendix 4.



11

vi. Distinction in the Postgraduate Certificate

A student can be awarded a Postgraduate Certificate with 60 credits of which 40 are at a

minimum of SHEM. The award “with distinction” will be granted on the basis of all 60-credit

points.

vii. Distinction in the Postgraduate Diploma

A student can be awarded a Postgraduate Diploma with 120 credits of which 90 are at a

minimum of SHEM. The award “with distinction” will be granted on the basis of all 120-credit

points.

viii. Distinction in the Masters Degree

A student can be awarded a Masters Degree with 180 credits of which 150 are at a minimum of

SHEM. The award “with distinction” will be granted on the basis of all 180-credit points.

ix. Distinction in a Masters Degree (following an integrated programme from undergraduate to

masters level study)

A student can be awarded such a degree with 600 credits of which a minimum of 120-credit

points must be at SHEM. The award with distinction will be on the basis of the 120-SHEM

credit points.

x. Distinction in CPD awards

The award with distinction will be granted on the basis of the 20 credits points awarded.

HONOURS AWARDS

The following Honours classification scheme should be applied to all programmes except where

another scheme has been approved at Programme approval/review or by the Exceptions Committee.

34. A student can be awarded a Bachelors degree with Honours with 480 credit points of which a minimum

of 90 are at SHEH. The award "with Honours" will be granted on the basis of the best 180 SHEH and

SHE3 credits, of which a minimum of 90 must be at SHEH. A Dissertation/Project must be included.10

35. For direct entrants to level 4 only, the award "with Honours" will be granted on the basis of the best 90

SHEH level credits plus the next best 30 level credits at SHE3 or above.

36. At any level, credit at a higher level may substitute for the minimum credit required at that level.11

37. A 40% pass mark for the module will be used in the calculation for Honours Classification where the

module has been passed at a second or subsequent attempt. Where a mark for a module achieved at a

second or subsequent attempt must be used in the calculation for Honours classification, a classification

no higher than a lower second class will be awarded, subject to the discretion of the Assessment Board

(see also appendix 4).

38. The Programme Regulations will specify the criteria to be achieved for a candidate to qualify for any

particular Honours classification using the following overall average marks as a guide in the first

instance:

First Class Honours > = 70%

Second Class (upper division) Honours 60-69%

Second Class (lower division) Honours 50-59%

Third Class Honours 40-49%

10

School-based generic degrees may award a degree with Honours without the inclusion of a dissertation/project. 11

Refer to the Glasgow Caledonian University Qualifications Framework (page 4)



12

Where in the judgement of an Assessment Board the mark of an individual module has the potential

to unjustly skew the overall outcome in terms of Honours Classification, the provisions set out in

Appendix 3 in relation to the normalisation of marks should be applied. This will most commonly

occur in professional and clinical modules governed by PSB requirements.

39. Classification of Honours will be recommended on the basis of the overall average mark. In no

circumstance can the classification produced by the overall average mark be downgraded.

40. Profiling12

The overall average mark will always take precedence in determining an Honours

classification. However where the overall average is within 3% of attaining the 50%, 60% and

70% boundaries (i.e. 47-49%, 57-59%, 67-69%), the Assessment Board must also take into

account how a candidate’s 180 credit points profiles at Honours (or Honours profile at level 4,

where appropriate) to establish if they are eligible for a raised classification.

41. Classification of an Honours award in terms of the profile of an individual's performance can be

determined with each module being marked in accordance with the following scheme:

s

First class 70-100%

Second class (upper division) 60-69%

Second class (lower division) 50-59%

Third class 40-49%

Failure below 40%

Honours Classification profiling based on best 180 credit points at levels SHEH and SHE3

Assuming the assessment of an Honours candidate is based on the equivalent of nine modules, to attain a

particular class of degree (first, upper second (2i), lower second (2ii), third) a candidate should normally:

i. have reached that standard or higher in 120 of the 180 credit points

ii. have a performance in no more than 30 credit points which is more than one division below that

standard

iii. have attained a pass mark in all modules.

Honours Classification profiling for programmes considering performance in Level 4 modules

only

Assuming the assessment of an Honours candidate is based on the best 90 SHEH credits and the next

best 30 credits at SHE3 or above, to attain a particular class of degree (first, upper second (2i), lower

second (2ii), third) a candidate should normally:

i have reached that standard or higher in a minimum of four modules

ii have a performance in no more than 20 credit points which is more than one division below that

standard

iii have attained a pass mark in all modules. Students who have been compensated cannot obtain a

first class honours degree on the basis of profile.

42. In addition to the average marks and profile it may be necessary, in the case of a student whose

performance is close to a particular band, to view that student's performance in any or all of the

following before reaching a final decision:

i. each element of the final assessments

12

Examples of profiling are shown in Appendix 4



13

ii. the student‟s complete undergraduate performance

iii. an oral assessment

43. On the above basis an individual student may be recommended for inclusion in a higher band but may

not be downgraded to a lower band than has been recommended on the basis of their overall assessment

results.

44. Where appropriate, oral assessments for Honours candidates shall be arranged under the aegis of the

Assessment Board. In such circumstances it is recommended that an informal meeting of the relevant

Module Leaders prepare a list of borderline and other students to be assessed orally by the External

Examiners, who must be consulted before the final list is agreed. Oral assessments must be arranged in

sufficient time to allow the External Examiners to provide a considered assessment at the formal

meeting of the Assessment Board.

45. Oral assessments of Honours students may be beneficial to External Examiners in assisting them to

confirm:

i. the overall standard of the students is comparable to that of other institutions

ii. the classification awarded to individual students

46. An Assessment Board and the External Examiners must be satisfied that the overall performance of the

student justifies the category of award given.

47. A candidate allowed to re-enter an Honours assessment may, where appropriate, be offered an

unclassified degree; the candidate may choose not to accept the unclassified degree but, if the degree

is accepted, the candidate will not thereafter be eligible to re-enter the assessment for the Honours

degree as part of a continuous programme.

POSTGRADUATE AWARDS

48. Postgraduate Assessment Boards will meet after the Trimester B examinations to review student

performance to that point.

49. Oral assessments13

for postgraduate awards may be arranged with the approval of the Assessment

Board. In such circumstances it is recommended that an informal meeting of the relevant internal

assessors prepare a list of borderline and other students to be assessed orally by the External

Examiners, who must be consulted before the final list is agreed. Oral assessments must be arranged

in sufficient time to allow the External Examiners to provide a considered assessment at the formal

meeting of the Assessment Board.

Oral assessments for postgraduate awards may be beneficial to External Examiners in assisting them to

confirm:

i. the overall standard of the students is comparable to that of other institutions

ii. the award of distinction to individual students

NULLIFICATION OF THE RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT OF A SINGLE MODULE AT H AND M

LEVEL

13

On the basis of an oral assessment an individual student may be recommended for an award or an award with distinction.

The oral may not be used to downgrade the performance which the student has attained in other elements of assessment except

in cases of suspected academic irregularity (see appendix 7).



14

50. In exceptional circumstances at Honours Degree and Masters level, with the exception of modules

specified as in paragraph 18 above in relation to Professional and Statutory Body requirements, where

in the view of the Assessment Board, (fully supported by the External Examiners), circumstances

prevail whereby the overall performance of a majority of candidates in one module is clearly and

obviously out of line with the overall performance of the students throughout the Programme, the

Assessment Board, at its discretion, may nullify the results of that module for the purposes of

calculating the final outcome of the students‟ assessments. In such circumstances, a final pass will be

recorded on the student record and the students will be credited with the credit points to be accrued

from that module for final award purposes. Such actions MUST be fully minuted, with a clear

rationale for the action included within the minute. The Chair of the Assessment Board and the

External Examiners will also be required to sign an assent form which clearly indicates that they fully

concur with this action. The minute and the assent form will be drawn to the attention of the next

meeting of the Learning and Teaching Subcommittee which will require to satisfy itself as to the

circumstances underlying this action, to take such follow up action as is deemed appropriate and

report the matter to Senate accordingly through the Academic Policy Committee. For the purposes of

the determination of distinction (or honours classification based on level 4 modules only), the

average mark of the remaining modules should be substituted for the mark of the nulled module in all

calculations. In the case of an Honours classification based on the best 180 credits at SHEH and

SHE3, the average mark will determined by the best remaining 160 credits (assuming the nulled

module to be worth 20 credits).

CONFERMENT OF UNIVERSITY AWARDS

51. University awards will only be conferred on students who are exiting the University with an appropriate

number of credit points or who have successfully completed their programme of study. Once an award

has been conferred and the student graduated, the student may not re-enter that programme for any

further award as a part of a continuous programme of study. A student may, however, re-enter the

University using their Exit Award as an entry qualification for a programme of study leading to a higher

award. Such re-entry will be deemed to be as entry to a separate and distinct programme of study and

cannot be considered as the continuation of a previous programme of study. For academic purposes,

such re-entry can be construed as building upon a previous programme of study. The issuing of

University awards shall be subject to such procedures as the Senate may approve from time to time and

to the payment of such fees as the University Court may from time to time determine.

ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENTS

52. In special circumstances or where a candidate is unable to satisfy the relevant Assessment Board in

course work, laboratory work, formal exams or other work assessed during a module, the Assessment

Board may require a student to present him/herself for oral, practical or other additional assessments at

any stage of the programme. In situations where a formal examination has been declared invalid, for

whatever reason, an Assessment Board may require a candidate or candidates to present themselves for

an alternative assessment. The results of such assessments may be used by Assessment Boards to

supplement assessed course work and other formal assessments.

VALID REASONS FOR POOR PERFORMANCE AT ANY LEVEL AND AEGROTAT AWARDS

53. If it is established to the satisfaction of the Assessment Board that a student's absence, failure to submit

work or poor performance in all or part of the assessment was due to illness/personal difficulties or other

cause found valid on presentation of acceptable evidence, the Assessment Board shall act in accordance

with the provisions set out in paragraphs 56, 57, 58 and Appendix 6 (Consideration of Mitigating

Circumstances).

Where the assessment forms part of the final stage assessment for an award, the Assessment Board will

allow a student to take the whole or part of the assessment, whichever is appropriate, as a first attempt.



15

This assessment shall be within two years of the original assessment. If an assessment affected by

illness/personal difficulties was itself a second attempt, the student will be allowed to resit as a second

attempt and so on.

However, where the Assessment Board is satisfied that there is sufficient evidence of the student's

achievement or this evidence is subsequently obtained, a student may be recommended for the award for

which they are a candidate with or without honours classification or distinction, as appropriate. In order

to reach a decision, the Assessment Board may assess the candidate by whatever means it considers

appropriate. It is important that the academic judgement for any decision is clearly recorded in the

minutes of the Assessment Board and this regulation would only be expected to be used by

Assessment Boards in exceptional circumstances.

In situations where the Assessment Board decision takes cognisance of Mitigating Circumstances and

a pass is awarded in a particular module, no mark should be recorded but a symbol i.e. "P"

representing a pass from the Assessment Board based on the Mitigating Circumstances, will be

recorded in the student's record and transcript. Once again it is important that the academic

judgement for any decision is clearly recorded in the minutes of the Assessment Board.

54. Where a student has had first and/or second diet attempts discounted by an Assessment Board due to

Mitigating Circumstances at its resit board meeting, the Assessment Board should consider one of the

following procedures in order of sequence (i.e. iv should only be used after options i), ii) and iii)

have been thoroughly considered):

i) a pass after considering the evidence (see also Appendix 6, paragraphs 6.6 and 6.7)

ii) the use of compensation (paragraphs 11-19);

iii) the use of carrying (paragraph 24);

iv) the use of a special diet of examination in the session in which the first and/or second diet

attempts were discounted (see Appendix 6). This option should only be considered where

progression or award is dependent upon performance in one module or two half modules only,

i.e. 20 credit points.

55. Where there is insufficient evidence to determine the recommendation for an award under paragraph 53

but the Assessment Board is nevertheless satisfied that the student would have qualified for the award

for which they were a candidate had it not been for illness/personal difficulties or other cause, the

aegrotat award may be recommended, e.g.:

- Aegrotat Certificate of Higher Education

- Aegrotat Diploma of Higher Education

- Aegrotat Degree

- Aegrotat Honours Degree

- Aegrotat Postgraduate Certificate

- Aegrotat Postgraduate Diploma

- Aegrotat Masters Degree

Such an award should be recommended only exceptionally and normally in circumstances where

reassessment within an acceptable timescale would not be possible for the candidate concerned.

56. Before a recommendation of the Assessment Board is confirmed under paragraph 53 or 55, the student

must have signified that he/she is willing to accept the award (53) or the aegrotat award (55).



16

WITHDRAWAL

57. A postgraduate student who has failed to satisfy the Assessors after second diet results have been

determined will normally be required to withdraw from the programme.

58. An Assessment Board may require an undergraduate student to withdraw from the programme provided

that:

i) either the candidate has, on a previous occasion, failed to progress normally

ii) and/or the Board is fully satisfied, both on the basis of assessment evidence and of tutors' reports,

that the student concerned would be unable to benefit from the programme

*(Note: Assessment Board minutes must show whether (i) or (ii) or both have been applied - see

also Appendix 3)

59. An Assessment Board may, exceptionally, require a candidate to withdraw from a programme after a

first diet. The reasons for this must be clearly minuted.

60. In all instances where a candidate has been withdrawn from a programme, the student must be offered

guidance, advice and support as to their future options. Such guidance, advice and support will normally

be provided by the student‟s Academic Advisor or, where this is not possible, by another appropriate

member of academic staff who is an officer of the programme concerned.

STUDENTS NOTIFED BY THE FINANCE OFFICE AS DEBTORS

61. In cases where a School has received notification that a student owes outstanding debt to the

University, marks and results will be withheld from the student concerned until the debt has been

paid. All staff who have access to the results of assessment boards are asked to note that while marks

are being withheld, no information of any kind pertaining to the decisions of the Board shall be

provided to students either formally or informally.14

REPLACEMENT MODULES – SCHOOL BASED GENERIC AWARDS

62. Students, with the exception of international students currently registered at GCU on a Tier 4 visa

(see 63 below), who require up to 40 credits for the completion of an exit award may transfer from

their programme of study to the appropriate school-based generic award.

It shall be a matter for the Assessment Board to decide at which point during any given student‟s

ongoing attempts at completing a module that the student should be advised or required to transfer to

a school-based generic award.

Notwithstanding the provisions elsewhere in these assessment regulations, students who transfer to

school-based generic awards and undertake replacement modules shall have up to four attempts

permitted in that module at the discretion of the Assessment Board. Students who fail to complete a

replacement module within the permitted number of attempts will not be permitted to undertake any

further modules as a replacement for the module not completed and will be required to progress or

exit, as appropriate, with such credit and awards as have been achieved.

The normal regulations governing compensation shall be applied within school-based generic awards

Students undertaking school-based generic awards shall be subject to the same regulations governing

distinction and honours classification as all other students, excepting that replacement modules

14

Refer to the Credit Control and Debt Management Policy

(http://www.gcu.ac.uk/media/gcalwebv2/theuniversity/supportservices/financeoffice/Credit_Control_and_Debt_Management_Policy.pdf)



17

passed as a first attempt shall not be subject to capping and may count towards distinction and

honours classification. In the case of honours classification, the classification scheme to be applied

shall be that applied within the programme from which the student transferred.

63. International students currently registered at GCU on a Tier 4 visa who have failed on their named

programme of study, with a maximum of 40 credits outstanding, and who wish to exit with an

undergraduate or postgraduate award of the University, should be appropriately advised of their options.

These are:

a. Returning to their home country to apply for a non-Tier 4 visa (student visitor visa) that will allow

them entry to the UK for a short period of time to undertake up to a maximum of 40 credits for the

award of an appropriate school-based generic degree;

b. The possibility that they may be able to access a module/s that can be undertaken via a distance

learning mode from their home country.



18

APPENDICES TO THE REGULATIONS



19

ASSESSMENT BOARDS

1.1 Assessment Boards are responsible to the University Senate.

1.2 For each named award within the Institution there will normally exist one Assessment Board.

However, suites of closely related named awards may come within the jurisdiction of the same

Assessment Board.

1.3 Module assessment is the responsibility of Schools.

1.4 Modules will have one member of the teaching staff of the University appointed as a Module

Leader.

1.5 The Module Leader is responsible to the Executive Dean of School for the following:

(a) The compilation of instruments of assessment, marking schedules and to stipulate, where

appropriate, when candidates are permitted to use specified books, instruments including

electronic calculators (specifying the type), notes or other materials or aids. All arrangements

must be clearly documented and available for internal and external quality audits.

Any arrangements made must provide for the following:

i. That all assessment papers have the standard University front cover

ii. That all assessment papers are moderated internally.

iii. That each assessment paper for final stage15

assessments and any other paper requested by the

External Examiners be submitted to the appropriate External Examiner for moderation in

consultation with the internal assessor(s) concerned.

iv. that any disagreement between assessors arising out of moderation be reported to the

Assessment Board for resolution.

v. For each examination paper the Module Leader or appropriate specialist is present in the

examination room at the commencement of the examination and remains present for a

further 10 minutes to answer any legitimate questions from candidates. For those

examinations in which the use of electronic calculators has been permitted, the Module

Leader or the appropriate specialist may, at their discretion, undertake a random check of

candidates‟ electronic calculators.

b) To determine the candidates' marks for modules and to ensure these marks are passed to the

appropriate Assessment Board via the University Management Information System, a calendar

of Assessment Board meetings will be published annually by 31st October. The Module Leader

must ensure that the marks (as specified below) are published at least three working days prior to

the date of the Assessment Board.

The Module Leader will ensure that:

i. there is uniformity of marking across assessments by academic staff contributing to the

module.

ii. all borderline cases have been carefully considered and the mark given is, as near as possible,

a true reflection of the student‟s performance.

iii. all recommendations are accurate and reflect the marks and the number of attempts.

15

For the purposes of this document final stage assessments are those taken to obtain an exit award at level SHE3 and above.

APPENDIX 1



20

iv. a record is kept of the extent to which the External Examiner has been involved and where

the External Examiner has:

confirmed the appropriateness of the assessment;

confirmed the overall standard of the cohort by sampling appropriate scripts;

scrutinised the assessments of borderline candidates;

moderated all assessed work.

c) Module Leaders will make provisional marks (which may be subject to change by the

Assessment Board) available to students after the Trimester A assessment period.

1.6 The Composition of each Assessment Board16

shall be as follows:

Chair

Programme Organiser

The External Examiners

Module Leaders

Executive Dean of any School (or their nominee) that contributes modules to the programme

Each Board will have a Clerk and Secretary17

associated with it.

Within each School, a pool of Assessment Board Chairs will be created from the Senior Staff of the

School. Normally the pool within each School would consist of the Associate Deans Learning,

Teaching and Quality, Heads of Department and Subject Leads. Subject Leads will only Chair

Boards that are not in their own subject area.

The Chair of Senate (or nominee from the University Executive) has the right to attend all Assessment

Boards.

In the case of the Schools which host the programme, the Chair and the Module Leaders from that

School shall determine annually which Module Leaders shall be members of the Board. For other

Schools, the Executive Dean and the Module Leader will determine who shall be members.

Schools contributing modules to a programme must be represented at Assessment Boards.

The Programme Board will confirm the membership of its associated Assessment Board at its first

meeting of the academic year (such confirmation should be minuted). The confirmed membership

will constitute those able to exercise a vote at the Assessment Board. Nominated substitutes of

members will be able to exercise a vote. Assessment Boards must have at least 70% of the

confirmed members present at the Board.

1.7 Candidates' academic advisors, if not members of the Assessment Board, may, if appropriate, be

invited to attend any meetings of the Board at which assessment results are to be considered. They

may not, however, exercise a vote in their capacity as academic advisor.

1.8 A student counsellor or the Students Association Welfare Advisor may, if appropriate, be invited to

attend any meetings of the Assessment Board at which assessment results of students whom they

have counselled are to be considered. They may advise the Assessment Board but may not exercise

a vote.

16

In the case of collaborative programmes, the composition of Assessment Boards will be defined during the approval process. 17

The Secretary will be either from the Student Administration Services, Governance and Quality or be a Head of School

Administration or an Assistant Head of School Administration who is independent of the assessment process. All secretaries

must have had appropriate training.



21

1.9 The responsibilities and duties of Assessment Boards are as follows:

(a) To ensure that the Glasgow Caledonian University Assessment Regulations are applied,

including any programme specific regulations.

(b) To take into consideration any Mitigating Circumstances properly notified to the Board by a

School Mitigating Circumstances Board (See Appendix 6 - The Consideration of Mitigating

Circumstances)

(c) To determine candidates' assessment results and to decide, when appropriate, if candidates have

satisfied the conditions for progression to the next level of the programme as set out in the

regulations

(d) To determine if candidates have fulfilled the conditions for the attainment of awards (including

the award of distinction and the classification of Honours awards) and to make appropriate

recommendations for the granting of awards, such recommendations being subject to the

approval of External Examiners

(e) To make recommendations as appropriate on the withdrawal of students.

(f) To consider applications for the award of aegrotat degrees

1.10 The proceedings of Assessment Boards are strictly confidential. Boards' discussions of individual

candidates must not be divulged to candidates. Additionally, marks may not be divulged to persons

other than the candidate without the express authority of the Board. The marks will be made available

to each candidate as soon as practicable after the Assessment Board has met. The Assessment Board is

required to provide candidates with an indication of the standard they have achieved. Assessors must

not inform candidates of the decisions of Boards prior to their formal publication.

1.11 Formal minutes of all meetings of Assessment Boards will be recorded and made available to the

appropriate Programme Board and for the purposes of internal and external audit. A general guide to

the format of Assessment Board minutes is outlined on page 21.

1.12 The Assessment Board‟s decision regarding a student‟s overall performance may in certain

circumstances result in a consequential amendment to the mark supplied by the Module Leader. In

such circumstances it is the responsibility of the Chair of the Assessment Board to ensure that any

amendments are properly recorded, that the Management Information System is updated, that the

Module Leader is informed and the decision is properly minuted.

Frequency of meeting of Assessment Boards

1.13 For undergraduate programmes the Assessment Board meets after Trimester B and after the resit diet.

1.14 For postgraduate programmes with a PgD exit award point, the Assessment Board meets after the

Trimester B diet and at the conclusion of the programme.

1.15 Assessment Boards for all programmes should meet after Trimester A (i.e. in January) to identify

failing students and take appropriate action.

1.16 Meetings of Assessment Boards may be arranged at other times as required.

1.17 In order to take into account the 7 calendar day timescale outlined “the Consideration of Mitigating

Circumstances”, Assessment Boards must not meet less than 8 calendar days from the date of the last

day of the examination diet.

1.18 Assessment Boards should ensure that a pre meeting is held before all Assessment Board meetings.



22

Recording of Minutes of Assessment Board Meetings and Notification of Results to Students

1.19 The Clerk to the Assessment Board shall be responsible for ensuring the accurate recording of the

minutes of the meeting of the Board.

Assessment Board meetings

1.20 As a general guide the minutes should include:

i) A record of the title of the Assessment Board plus the date, time and location of the meeting

ii) A record of those present and their role

iii) A record of apologies

iv) Confirmation that, students have taken modules that lead to the qualifications under the

jurisdiction of the Assessment Board

v) Confirmation from the External Examiners that the standard of any awards to be made is

comparable with that of similar awards elsewhere

vi) A record of any comments from Module Leaders

vii) A record of agreed final decisions for each candidate

viii) A record, where appropriate, of the principles or criteria upon which individual decisions were

made

ix) A record, where relevant, of any Mitigating Circumstances reported to the Assessment Board

x) A record of the general comments of the Assessment Board on overall performance

xi) A record of any areas of concern or dispute arising from the general decision making processes

xii) Comments from External Examiners

xiii) Any other competent business

xiv) The proposed date and time of the next meeting

Items viii, ix and x are confidential and their circulation should be restricted to the Chair, the Clerk,

External Examiners, and any other person agreed by the Assessment Board.

1.21 A nominated member of the Department‟s administrative staff shall be required to clerk the

meetings of the Assessment Boards within the jurisdiction of a Department. The Programme

Leader will be required to advise on the interpretation of Assessment Regulations and previous

practice. The Clerk is required to record decisions with regard to student achievement. A

nominated member of the staff of Student Administration Services/Governance and Quality shall

normally be present at the meetings of levels 3, H and postgraduate Assessment Boards where

award decisions are being made. The member of staff from Student Administration

Services/Governance and Quality Enhancement will liaise with Department staff on the collation,

dissemination and presentation of marks as appropriate.

1.22 The aim must always be for student results lists to be published on Sharepoint within two working

days of the meeting of the Assessment Board. Results may also be published on local Departmental

notice boards. Full results shall normally be posted out to each student within seven working days

of the meeting of the Assessment Board. The marks for each individual student will be made

available to each candidate as soon as practicable after the Assessment Board has met. Changes to

Assessment Board decisions must be made using a Chair‟s Action pro forma. The pro forma and

guidance are available on the Student Administration Services Sharepoint site: http://itstbank-

3/Intranet/sas/Exams/ISIS%20Assessment%20System%20and%20Sharing%20Good%20Practice/Forms/AllItems.aspx

1.23 Schools will notify all students of their results by post. In all cases Student Administration Services

staff will be responsible for issuing award parchments to students.



23

1.24 The minutes of meetings of Assessment Boards shall normally be sent to the Programme Board in

October of each year. The Programme Board will consider these minutes and any issues arising at a

meeting during Trimester A. Issues arising from the minutes of Assessment Boards will also be

passed to other School Boards or Committees as appropriate.

1.25 Following consideration by the Programme Board, comments by the Assessment Board shall be

considered by the School Board in December of each year.

1.26 The School Board shall, where appropriate, draw to the attention of the Learning and Teaching

Subcommittee any matters arising from consideration of the minutes of meetings of Assessment

Boards which require the attention of the Learning and Teaching Subcommittee.

Data Protection

1.27 Current Data Protection legislation stipulates that any comments made on examination scripts or

(comments made about a student) in the minutes of Assessment Boards may be accessed by the

student.



24

EXTERNAL EXAMINER ENDORSEMENT OF ASSESSMENT BOARD OUTCOMES*

SESSION: DIET: FIRST / SECOND (please delete as appropriate)

I endorse the decisions made at the meeting of the Assessment Board for the following awards:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DATE OF MEETING:

Name: Signature:

Name: Signature:

Name: Signature:

Name: Signature:

Signature of Chair of Assessment Board:

--------------------------------------------------------------------

* Only External Examiners associated with programmes are required to endorse the outcomes of the assessment(s) they have

been appointed to scrutinise.

NB – Once signed, this sheet should be attached to a copy of the Assessment Board minutes and retained by the relevant

School.



25

EXTERNAL EXAMINERS

2.1 Each Assessment Board will normally have two External Examiners, to ensure that the standard of all

awards is comparable to the standard of similar awards conferred by other Universities and Institutions

within the United Kingdom.

2.2 Each School is responsible for nominating External Examiner(s) to be associated with programmes for

which they are administratively responsible. It is recognised that there may be exceptional cases in

which the Assessment Board may wish to appoint more than two Examiners. It is also recognised that

more than two External Examiners may be required for suites of programmes.

2.3 External Examiners should normally be appointed for four academic sessions with the

opportunity for a one year extension at the end of the four year period, starting at the beginning

of the session before the first output and finishing with the re-sit diet of the last session for which

they have responsibility (normally October-September).

2.4 All modules at all levels will have an associated External Examiner. Each module will have one

External Examiner, with the exception of projects/dissertations18. The minimum expectation is that

externals would routinely be involved with modules at level 3 and above. However, Module Leaders

and/or Assessment Boards at all levels may consult External Examiners.

2.5 The External Examiners appointed to a programme will be allocated to modules within the programme

which correspond to their own expertise.

2.6 Schools which contribute modules to a programme (i.e. not the host School) will assign an External

Examiner to these modules. This External Examiner will also normally be responsible for a

programme in the subject area of the School, taking into consideration the overall workload of the

Examiner.

2.7 In addition to appointing External Examiners to programmes, Schools may assign External Examiners

to modules only.19

2.8 External Examiners associated with undergraduate programmes are expected to attend the meeting of

Assessment Boards after Trimester B and, where necessary, after resit assessments. When External

Examiners do not attend resit Assessment Boards they must be consulted (and in the case of final

awards confirm in writing) before any formal decisions are notified to students. External Examiners on

postgraduate programmes must attend all meetings where awards are being considered.

2.9 Duties of an External Examiner associated with programmes.

(a) to ensure that the standard of any award which is recommended by the Assessment Board is

comparable to the standard of similar awards conferred by Universities in the UK.

(b) to be satisfied that the work and decisions of the Assessment Board are consistent with the

policies and regulations of the University and best practice in Higher Education

(c) to ensure that students have been assessed fairly and within the regulations approved by the

University for the programme

18 Where there is more than one External Examiner for a programme, each assessor will have responsibility for a number of

projects/dissertations. Normally each external examiner will consider a separate sample. 19

In this case, the requirements relating to attendance at Assessment Boards do not apply.

APPENDIX 2



26

(d) to comment on the appropriateness and consistency of assessment practices and procedures

across the modules which comprise the award

(e) to inform the University on any matter which, in the External Examiner‟s view, militates

against the maintenance of proper academic standards

(f) to inform the Head of Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement if they decide to

resign over a matter of principle in order that this may be brought to the attention of Senate as a

matter of urgency

(g) to produce an annual report for consideration by the School Board and the Learning and

Teaching Subcommittee, on the standards attained by students on the programme and any other

matters which may seem appropriate to report.

2.10 An External Examiner appointed to a programme or suite of programmes has the right to take any

action which is necessary for the fulfillment of their duties. These rights include the following:

(a) to attend any meeting the Assessment Board to which they have been appointed

(b) to see any assessment material relating to the programme; particularly, but not exclusively, any

final stage assessment paper, scripts, course work or project reports relating to the assessments

with which they are specifically associated, and, where appropriate, industrial training reports

(c) to require, and be involved in, the oral assessment of any student

(d) to meet with students of any level at any point during the academic session.

2.11 Duties of an External Examiner associated with modules.

(a) to moderate the work of the internal Examiner in respect of the assessments with which the

External Examiner is associated

(b) to ensure that students are assessed according to the regulations approved for the modules within

that subject area

(c) to be satisfied that the work and marks awarded are consistent with the policies and regulations of

the University and best practice in Higher Education

(d) to inform the University on any matter which, in their view, militates against the maintenance of

proper academic standards

(e) to inform the Head of Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement if they decide to

resign over a matter of principle in order that this may be brought to the attention of Senate as a

matter of urgency

(f) to produce an annual report for consideration by the relevant School Board of the standards

attained by students in that subject area and on any other matter which may seem appropriate to

report

2.12 An External Examiner associated with modules has the right to take any action, which is necessary for the

fulfillment of their duties. These rights include the following:

(a) to see any assessment material relating to the modules;

(b) to amend draft assessment papers, or set additional assessment questions, in consultation with the

appropriate Module Leader(s)

(c) to receive written/oral feedback from the Module Leader(s) on any comments pertaining to draft

assessment papers

(d) to receive marking criteria for all draft assessment papers or other major instruments of assessment. It

is recognised that the possible range of assessment methods may necessitate specific marking criteria

and that the External Examiner and Module Leader(s) should adopt an approach which is appropriate

for the assessment method e.g. suggested solutions, marking schemes, outline answers, etc.

(e) to amend a mark given by a Module Leader in connection with an assessment in the module with

which the External Examiner is specifically associated (i.e with duties as set out in 2.11)

(f) to require, and be involved in, the oral assessment of any student



27

(g) to meet with students of any level at any point during the academic session.

In any matter on which the External Examiner(s) have declared a matter of principle, the decision

of the External Examiner(s) shall either be accepted as final by the Assessment Board or, in

exceptional cases, be referred to the Learning and Teaching Subcommittee.

Where there is a disagreement within a group of External Examiners on any matter which is

declared to be a matter of principle and which cannot be resolved within the group, the dispute

must be referred to the Senate. Senate may choose to devolve the responsibility for dealing with

such disputes to the Learning and Teaching Subcommittee.

In the exceptional circumstance of an External Examiner deciding to resign over a matter of

principle, this decision and the necessary background information must be reported by the Chair of

the relevant Assessment Board to the Head of Department of Governance and Quality

Enhancement as a matter of urgency. The Head of Department of Governance and Quality

Enhancement will then immediately arrange a meeting of the Chairs of Senate, the Learning and

Teaching Subcommittee, the Academic Policy Committee and the relevant School Board to

discuss any issues arising from the resignation.

An External Examiner has the right to raise any matter of serious concern directly with the Head of

Governance and Quality Enhancement, if necessary by means of a separate confidential written

report. Where this occurs the Head of Governance and Quality Enhancement will review the

issues and raise them with the Principal and Vice Chancellor as appropriate. The University will

provide a considered and timely response to any confidential report received, outlining any actions

we will be taking as a result.

Where an External Examiner has a serious concern relating to systemic failings with the academic

standards of a module, programme or programmes and has exhausted all published applicable

internal procedures, including the submission of a confidential report to the Principal and Vice

Chancellor, he/she may invoke the QAA‟s concerns scheme or inform the relevant professional,

statutory or regulatory body.

Procedure for the Appointment of External Examiners

2.13 In October of the preceding year, Heads of School Administration will present to School Boards an up-

to-date list of all External Examiners who are members of Assessment Boards within the School,

together with their period of tenure. At the same time, a list of new programmes scheduled to begin in

the following academic year together with the proposed number of External Examiners required will

be presented to the School Board.

2.14 Following presentation of the above list to the School Board, Heads of School Administration will

notify the Chairs of all Assessment Boards and the Executive Dean of School of those External

Examiners who are scheduled for retirement and of the need to nominate replacements for retiring

Examiners. Heads of School Administration will also notify the Chairs of Programme Development

Boards so that External Examiners may be nominated (if appropriate) for programmes scheduled to

start in the following academic year. It should be noted that External Examiners for new programmes

nominated prior to the programme approval or re-approval event will not normally be eligible to be

members of the Programme Approval or re-Approval Panel.

2.15 In December of each year, those individuals who have been notified of the need to appoint External

Examiners for the forthcoming session, will identify suitable nominees and seek to ascertain,

informally, whether the individual would be prepared to be nominated as an External Examiner.

2.16 All nominees must meet with the conditions laid down by the University in the "Criteria for the

Approval of External Examiners for Modules and Taught Programmes" (see paragraph 2.30).



28

2.17 When a suitable nominee has been identified, they will be requested to complete the institutional

nomination form.20 In the case of new appointees who have no previous experience of external

assessing for programmes at that level, the proposed nominee is required to submit a full CV.

2.18 Heads of Learning, Teaching and Quality in each School will ensure that appropriate advice and

guidance is provided during the nomination process. At any stage in the process, advice can be

obtained from the Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement.

2.19 External Examiner nomination forms, copies of the nominees' CVs, if appropriate, and any other

relevant information will be forwarded to the School Board, or appropriate School Committee, for

endorsement (in Trimester A of the year preceding the appointment).

2.20 Where the School Board (or appropriate School Committee) feels that an External Examiner's

nomination is inappropriate, it will set out its reasons in the minutes and will recommend that the

nomination be reconsidered.

2.21 The minutes of School Board meetings (or appropriate School Committee) confirming approval of

External Examiner nominations, together with the EXT forms, will be forwarded by the School to the

Department of Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement. The EXT forms will be

considered and approved by a sub group of the Learning and Teaching Subcommittee, chaired by an

appropriate senior member of University staff.

2.22 The approved EXT forms will be held in the Department of Department of Governance and Quality

Enhancement. The Learning and Teaching Subcommittee will receive notification of all appointments

as a For Information item on the committee‟s agenda. The Heads of School Administration will be

responsible for ensuring that each nomination form is checked carefully for accuracy prior to forms

being forwarded to the Department of Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement.

2.23 All parties involved in this procedure will seek to ensure that the procedure is completed at least six

months prior to an External Examiner's first involvement in assessments. The Department of

Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement will ensure that an institutional record of

External Examiner appointments is maintained in a database.

2.24 Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement will issue a formal letter of appointment to the

External Examiner showing the period of appointment and the annual fee associated with the post. The

current version of the University Assessment Regulations will also be forwarded with the formal letter

of appointment. A copy of the formal letter of appointment should also be forwarded to the

appropriate Executive Dean of School, who has budgetary responsibility for External Examiners' fees.

2.25 New External Examiners will be provided with an External Examiner‟s handbook which includes

information relating to the External Examiner role. In addition, the relevant School must ensure that

External Examiners are made aware of the extent of their own responsibilities in relation to the

modules/programmes for which they will act as Examiners. The relevant School will also ensure that

all External Examiners are provided with copies of the appropriate programme and module

documentation. Schools will be responsible for providing copies of up-to-date programme

documentation, including programme specific assessment regulations, to Department of Governance

and Quality Enhancement.

Termination of an External Examiner’s Contract

2.26 An External Examiner‟s contract can be terminated prematurely in the event of consistent failure to

fulfill the duties of the role. 20

EXT1: Application for Approval of an External Examiner for a Module and/or Taught Programme



29

2.27 The process of terminating an External Examiner‟s contract can only be initiated by one of the

following:

Chair of Programme Board

Chair of an Assessment Board

Executive Dean of School

Chair of the Academic Policy Committee

Chair of Learning and Teaching Subcommittee

Chair of School Board

Head of Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement

2.28 The final decision to terminate the contract of an External Examiner will be made by Learning and

Teaching Subcommittee, following a recommendation from the relevant School Board.

2.29 When the Learning and Teaching Subcommittee approves the termination of an External Examiner‟s

contract, the Secretary to Learning and Teaching Subcommittee will notify the relevant Head of School

Administration and the Head of Governance and Quality Enhancement who will then notify the

External Examiner of the decision.



30

2.30 Criteria for the Approval of External Examiners for Modules and Taught Programmes

The approval of External Examiner appointments is one of the processes by which the University

assures the Quality assurance of both subject areas and programmes. For this reason, the University is

committed to a policy of rigorous scrutiny of External Examiner nominations.

External Examiners should: i) have expertise in the relevant subject area/discipline

ii) be experienced in assessing

iii) be impartial in judgement

iv) be able to give the time needed for the role

Where more than one External Examiner is associated with an individual module or programme, it is

important that there be an appropriate balance and diversity in the team of Examiners.

The following outlines the criteria for consideration of proposed External Examiners; the notes printed

beneath each criterion provide a checklist of issues that should be considered by Boards in selecting

and nominating Examiners and by School Boards during their scrutiny of nominees.

The following guidelines for the appointment of External Examiners will apply:

a. An External Examiner's academic/professional qualifications should be appropriate to the

module/programme to be assessed

Both the level and the subject of the Examiner's qualifications should generally match what is to be

assessed in the module/programme

b. An External Examiner should have appropriate standing, expertise and experience to

maintain comparability of standards

Standing, expertise and experience may be indicated by:

the present (or last, if retired) post and place of work

the range and scope of experience across higher education/professions

current and recent active involvement in research/scholarly/professional activities in the field of

study concerned

c. An External Examiner should have enough recent external assessing or comparable related

experience to indicate competence in assessing students in the module/programme at that

level

If the proposed Examiner has no previous External Examiner experience at the appropriate level,

the application should be supported by one or more of the following:

extensive internal assessing experience at the appropriate level

external assessing experience at a different level

other relevant and recent experience likely to support the External Examiner role

Proposed Examiners without experience as externals should, where possible, join an

experienced team of externals or, where there is only one external, work initially alongside an

experienced current external, perhaps on a related module within that subject area.

d. External Examiners should be drawn from a wide variety of institutional/professional

contexts and traditions in order that the subject areas/programmes benefit from wide-ranging

external scrutiny

There should not be:

more than one External Examiner from the same institution in a team of External Examiners



31

reciprocal External Examiners between comparable subjects and/or programmes in two

institutions

replacement of an External Examiner by an individual from the same institution

an External Examiner from an institution which has been the source of Examiners for the

same subject area or programme in the recent past (normally five years)

e. External Examiners should not be over-extended by their external assessing duties

The Examiner should not currently hold more than the equivalent of two substantial undergraduate

External Examiners‟ appointments

If the Examiner appears to exceed the above limit, supporting arguments must be provided, e.g. that

the phasing of assessments alleviates the workload during an academic session,

f. There should be an appropriate balance and expertise in a team of External Examiners

appointed to Assessment Boards

The external assessing experience in the team as a whole must be sufficient and wide ranging

The proposed Examiner should complement the external assessing team in terms of expertise

and assessing experience

There should be an appropriate balance between the academic and professional

qualifications/experience of the team

The range of academic perspectives necessary to the programme should be represented in the

external assessing team

The phasing of appointments to the team should be structured to ensure continuity

g. External Examiners should be impartial in judgement and should not have previous close

involvement with the institution which might compromise objectivity

Over the last five years the proposed Examiner should not personally have been:

a member of staff, a governor, a student or a near relative of a member of staff in relation to

the module/subject area/programme

involved as an External Examiner for the module/subject area/programme when it was

approved by another validating body

significantly involved in recent or current substantive collaborative research activities with a

member of staff closely involved in the delivery, management or assessment of the

programme(s) or modules in question

The proposed Examiner should not personally be:

associated with the sponsorship of students

required to assess colleagues who are recruited as students to the module/subject

area/programme

in a position to influence significantly the future employment of students on the programme

likely to be involved with student placements or training in the Examiner's organisation

h. Chief External Examiners

If the team of External Examiners is large there may be a need for a chief External Examiner.

Where the Programme Board has identified a chief External Examiner he or she should have

sufficient external assessing experience to take an overview of the subject area/programme and

ensure that a consistent standard is maintained.

The appointment of a chief External Examiner from within a team of approved External Examiners

is a matter for the Programme Board. The approval of the appointment of an External Examiner



32

who is to act in this capacity will be subject to the normal criteria as set out above and the person

will also be expected to have subject responsibilities within the team.



33

MARKING, REPORTING OF MARKS AND NORMALISATION OF MODULE MARKS

Module Pass Marks and Component Minimums

The diagrams below are examples of different module structures.

Figure 1: Modules with Exam and Coursework Components

Figure 2: Coursework Only Modules

Overall Aggregate Mark (threshold/minimum =

pass mark)

Coursework 1

(Threshold/minimum = 0)

Coursework 2


Coursework 3


Overall Aggregate Mark

(threshold/minimum = pass mark)

Exam Aggregate (threshold/minimum

= 5% below the pass mark)

Coursework Aggregate

(threshold/minimum = 5% below the

pass mark)

Exam element (threshold/minimum

= 0)

Exam element (threshold/minimum

= 0)

Coursework element

(threshold/minimum = 0)

Coursework element

(threshold/minimum = 0)

APPENDIX 3



34

Figure 3: Modules with Exam and Coursework Components and with approved exception21

Figure 4: Modules with Coursework only and with approved exception

Normalisation of Marks

3.1 The normalisation of marks should be implemented in situations where a module marking scheme

differs from that normally applied to modules on the same programme. Such instances most

commonly occur where Professional or Statutory body requirements must be met in professional

and clinical modules.

Normalisation should not be used where M Level programmes are made up of modules which can

have pass marks of either 40% or 50 %.

21

The diagram is an example of a module which has an approved exception to the regulation regarding minimum pass marks being applied

to elements or sub-components of module assessment. It should be noted that exceptions are normally allowed only in cases where there are

clear professional and statutory body requirements.

Overall Aggregate (Threshold/Minimum =

pass mark)

Exam Aggregate Threshold/minimum = 5%

below pass mark

Coursework Aggregate Threshold/minimum = 5%

below pass mark

Exam Threshold/minimum = 5%

below pass mark

Coursework 1 Threshold/minimum = 5%

below pass mark

Coursework 2 Threshold/minimum = 5%

below pass mark

Overall Aggregate Mark (coursework only)

(threshold/minimum = pass mark)

Coursework 1

(Threshold/minimum = 5% below pass mark)

Coursework 2


Coursework 3




35

3.2 Programme Boards should identify modules where there is a potential, in the judgement of the

Board, for the module mark to skew the overall outcome in terms of Honours Classification and

Distinction; for example, where a Professional or Statutory body requires a pass mark of 80%, as

is the case in a number of professional and clinical modules. Where such modules are identified

Programmes should ensure that an appropriate formula is applied to normalise the mark against

the standard academic pass mark for modules within the Programme (i.e. 40% at undergraduate

level and as appropriate for post graduate programmes).

The following formula will normally be found to be appropriate:

(Score – old pass mark) x (100 –new pass mark) ÷ (100 – old pass mark) + new pass mark = new

(normalised) mark

e.g. a student scores 90 in a module with an 80% pass mark. Normal module pass mark = 40%

(90-80) x (100-40) ÷ (100-80) + 40 = 70%

In addition, where a pass mark is set at 100% by a Professional or Statutory body, Programme

Boards should give serious consideration to recording the result as pass/fail.

Marking and Moderation of Marks

3.3 Normally, all final level Projects and Dissertations should be independently, blind double marked.

Scripts relating to assessments at levels 3, 4 and M, will be moderated. Borderline assessments will

be moderated at all levels. All individuals involved with marking or moderating scripts will initial

the assessment script. In the case of final stage assessments the External Examiner(s) will be

involved. External Examiners(s) may also scrutinise sufficient other assessment scripts in any

subject area for which they are responsible to satisfy themselves of the general standard of

assessment by Module Leaders. Module Leaders will negotiate with External Examiners to ensure

that they are given sufficient time to scrutinise all scripts for the assessments for which they have

responsibility. The provisions of this paragraph shall apply to all assessment diets.

3.4 Where a student has answered more than the required number of questions in any coursework or

examination paper, the Module Leader must ensure that all the student‟s responses are marked. The

Module Leader will then determine the mark for the paper by selecting the best marks for the

required number of questions (e.g. if a paper requires five questions to be answered and the student

has attempted seven then the best five marks are used to calculate the overall mark for the paper). In

cases where the examination paper or coursework has more than one section, the same procedure as

described above will apply to each section.

3.5 3.5.1 If, in any module at levels 3, H and M, there is a range of assessments which includes

course work, laboratory work or any form of continuous assessment, at least two members

of the teaching team will normally have been involved in moderating such work and shall

report a mark to the assessment Board on a percentage basis. The rounding of marks in

University Management Information System is based on: mark >= xx.5 round up; mark <

xx.5 round down. This general rule should apply where raw marks are entered into

University Management Information System.

3.5.2 In the event of cumulative average marks being recorded as a fraction, e.g. 59.2, such

marks will be rounded up to the next whole number, e.g. in the Honours classification

overall aggregate calculation.



36

Recording of Marks

3.6 Assessment Boards will have access to records which indicate whether the candidates:

3.6.1 have previously entered a module or final stage assessment and with what result(s)

(including compensation)

3.6.2 have repeated any level of the programme

3.7 The mark to be recorded at second and subsequent diets shall be the actual mark achieved by the

student. The actual mark obtained at resit should be used in calculations to determine the

candidate's eligibility to benefit from Compensation (see paragraphs 11 to 19 of the University

Assessment Regulations). In all other calculations, normally for the purpose of Honours

Classification at levels 3 and 4, the mark obtained at any resit should be regarded as 40%

3.8 Where the provision of paragraphs 3.1 and 3.3 above in relation to blind marking, double marking

and moderation are not followed in their entirety, the Assessment Board must be provided with a

full explanation for any deviation in process and that explanation fully minuted in the record of the

Board‟s meeting.



37

EXAMPLES OF AUTOMATIC COMPENSATION, DISTINCTION AND PROFILING

4.1 Examples of the Application of Compensation

Module Pass Mark 40%

All diets

Overall average greater than or equal to 45%

Module Mark 35%-39% (No component of

the module mark less than 30%)

Automatic Compensation

Overall average greater than or equal to 45% Discretionary Compensation

Overall mark is raised by 1%

Module Mark 34% (No component of the

module mark less than 29%)


All diets

Overall average greater than or equal to 55% Automatic Compensation








All diets

Overall average greater than or equal to 60% Automatic Compensation







4.2 Example of the Application of Distinction in the Bachelor’s Degree

(marks used in the calculation are shown in bold)

Student A: 69, 74, 65, 67, 50, 68 (at Level SHE3)

50, 71, 65, 78, 64, 62 (at Level SHE2)

Distinction criteria is not met solely on level SHE3 marks, where the average is 66%.

However, taking into consideration the best 90 SHE3 credit points and the remaining best 30

credit points at SHE2 or above, an average of 71% is achieved. Therefore distinction is

awarded.

Note: Distinction can only be awarded where a candidate has passed all modules, included in the

calculation for distinction, at the first attempt. In addition, candidates must achieve passes at first

attempt in all modules at the level where distinction is being considered.

APPENDIX 4



38

4.3 Examples of Profiling for Honours Classification

(marks used in the calculation are shown in bold)

Scheme 1

The following examples are for programmes using the Honours Classification scheme calculated on the

basis of the best 180 SHEH and SHE3 level credits, of which a minimum of 90 must be at SHEH and

where the Dissertation/Project must be included (Scheme 1). (In these examples the dissertation/project

is a 40 credit SHEH module which means that one of the marks is counted twice).

Profiling can only be used where a student’s overall average mark is within 3% of attaining the 50,

60 and 70 boundary.

Student A SHEH: 70(x2), 57, 58, 71, 68 (100 credit points used)

SHE3: 72, 52, 71, 62, 70, 65 (80 credit points used)

Overall Average: 69% = 2.1

Profile: 120 credit points @ 1, no more than 30 credits more than one class below

Profile = 1st class

First class honours awarded

Student B SHEH: 60(x2), 62, 61, 48, 48 (100 credit points used)



Profile: 120 credit points @ 2.1, no more than 30 credits more than one class below

Profile = 2.1

2.1 awarded

Student C SHEH: 74(x2), 54, 46, 57, 72 (100 credit points used)



Profile: 120 credit points @ 1, mark is within 3% of boundary but more than 30 credit

points are more than one class below

Profile = 2.1

2.1 awarded

Scheme 2

The following examples are for programmes exempted from the normal Honours Classification scheme

and/or for direct entrants to Level 4 and are based on using the best 90 SHEH credit points plus the next

best 30 credit points at SHE3 or above, in the calculation of Honours Classification (Scheme 2).

Profiling can only be used where a student’s overall average mark falls within 3% of attaining the

50, 60 and 70 boundary.

Student A: 72, 72, 75, 75, 70, 44: overall average 68% = 2i

profile: 5 @ 1; only one mark more than one class below; no fails; average mark is

within 3% of boundary

profile = 1st

1st class honours awarded

Student B: 62, 64, 61, 63, 52, 40: overall average 57% = 2ii



39

profile: 4 @ 2i; one mark one class below; only one mark more than one class below;

average mark is within 3% of boundary

profile = 2i

2i awarded

Student C: 75, 70, 68, 56, 56, 47: overall average 62% = 2i

profile: 5 @ 2ii or better; one mark one class below: profile = 2ii

2i awarded

(Please see also paragraph 41 of the Assessment Regulations)

It is clear that performance in one module is "pulling" students A and B down and therefore the use of a

profiling system will ensure that these students do obtain an Honours degree appropriate to their ability.

In the case of student C, whose performance covers a wide range of marks, the average provides a better

reflection of his/her ability.

Scheme 3

A number of programmes have been exempted from Scheme 1 and apply a customised calculation to

determine Honours classification (Scheme 3).



40

CONDITIONS OF ENTRY TO ASSESSMENTS AND ASSESSMENT SCHEME

5.1 Assessments are open only to students of the University who have complied in all respects with the

conditions for admission and registration to the programme and/or all relevant modules thereof. This

includes the payment of relevant fees and compliance with such other requirements as may be

prescribed from time to time22

. No person whose registration has lapsed, or who has failed to register

for the appropriate programme and associated modules, is eligible as a candidate for any assessment.

Assessment Boards will withhold the marks of an assessment of any person who appears ineligible

pending an investigation and may ultimately disregard the attempt.

5.2 Formal examinations will be conducted according to the regulations given in The Assessment and

Graduation Processes, Section 2: Regulations for the Conduct of Examinations.

5.3 All registered students shall be entitled to enter the first diet of assessments on completion of the

normal programme of study without a special entry procedure and without payment of an additional

fee. Absence from any assessment without good cause and supporting evidence shall be deemed to be

an attempt.

5.4 There will be a first and a second diet for modules at all levels. 23

5.5 Modules will be assessed during the trimester in which they have been delivered24

. Resit assessments

for modules delivered in Trimesters A and B will be held prior to the start of the next academic year.

5.6 Entry to an assessment on a second or subsequent occasion, whether or not at a second diet of

assessments, shall be subject to such procedures as the Senate may approve from time to time and to

such additional fees as the University Court may from time to time determine.

5.7 Programme and module handbooks shall specify for each level of the programme/module:

(a) the titles of all modules to be assessed

(b) where applicable, the percentage marks awarded to each discrete element of the assessment for

each module, for example written papers, coursework, etc (see also section 5.12)

(c) the conditions necessary to satisfy the Assessors in any one module

(d) the approved criteria for progression whereby candidates will satisfy the Assessors at each level

of the programme

(e) the number and level of the credit points earned for each module when the assessment criteria are

satisfied.

5.8 Where appropriate, Assessment Boards may modify the form of assessment for individual students.

5.9 The Programme Board must be satisfied that, for each module, the coursework/laboratory schedule

is made available to students at the beginning of each trimester and that students are informed of the

submission dates for that module. Under normal circumstances, it is expected that the Module

Leader will perform this duty, using the guidance contained within Notes of Guidance to Academic

Staff on the Information to be Provided to Students to Assist their Preparation for Unseen

Examinations,25

as a template. In addition, Programme Boards must ensure that students are

22

The GCU Credit Control and Debt Management Policy lists sanctions which may be applied to students with overdue debt,

including prevention from sitting examinations (see page http://www.gcu.ac.uk/financeoffice/policiesguidelines/ and link Credit

Control and Debt Management Policy). 23

See also University Assessment Regulations paragraph 21 Maximum Number of Attempts at a Module 24

With the exception of “long thin” modules, which are assessed at the end of Trimester B. 25

Contained within The Assessment and Graduation Processes (Section 6, page 71).

APPENDIX 5

http://www.gcu.ac.uk/financeoffice/policiesguidelines/



41

informed of the regulations, which specify the penalties that may result from failure to meet the

submission dates for coursework, at the beginning of the session. It is the responsibility of the

Module Leader to ensure that adequate arrangements are in place for the recording of the receipt of

courseworks from students.

5.10 In each of the following eventualities, it is normally the Module Leader who has the responsibility

for determining the new submission date. It is the responsibility of all Module Leaders who grant

dispensation to inform the Programme Board.

(a) Penalties for late submission of coursework

Failure by a student to meet the submission deadlines for any piece of coursework (including

dissertations/projects) will be dealt with by the following general regulations 5.11 (a) i – iii.

However, where a student must attend a specialised teaching session, reference should be

made to 5.11 (a) iv.

i) Failure by a student to meet any given submission deadline without good cause will normally

result in a mark of zero for the piece of work concerned. Where a student fails to submit a

piece of coursework which the module descriptor has stipulated as essential then the student

will be deemed to have failed the module (see also 5.12).

ii) Where a student has good cause for a late submission and intimates this in advance of the

submission deadline, a later submission date should normally be negotiated. Where

appropriate, documentary evidence should be sought to support the claim. In the

circumstances outlined in this paragraph, maximum marks will be available. (It would be

expected that this regulation would apply in cases such as the following: serious domestic or

personal problems or attendance at the doctor, dentist, hospital, court of law or funeral).

iii) Where a student has good cause for late submission that they are unable, or for valid reasons,

unwilling to divulge in advance, it is normally expected that notification of the good cause

should be given no later than 10 working days after the submission deadline. A later

submission date should normally be negotiated. Where appropriate, documentary evidence

should be sought to support the claim. In the circumstances outlined in this paragraph,

maximum marks will be available. (It would be expected that this regulation would apply in

cases such as the following: illness of the candidate or unforeseen personal or domestic

problems.)

iv) Where assessment requires attendance at a specialised teaching session either at the

University (e.g. a laboratory, seminar, clinic, test etc) or elsewhere (e.g. an industrial or

clinical placement, field exercise, laboratory visit etc) and where a student has good cause

for non-attendance, the following procedures should be adopted: Regulations ii and iii

above should be used whenever it is possible to provide the student with an alternative

(e.g. provide data from another investigation, arrange attendance on another occasion) and

thus negotiate a revised submission date. Where it is impossible to make alternative

arrangements, the student should normally be allowed their average mark for a similar

exercise(s) to be used in calculating the final mark for that module. Clearly in clinically-

based/workshop-based/laboratory-based modules there is a limit to the number of classes

that can be missed and the student still deemed to have reached a satisfactory standard.

Where such criteria need to be satisfied, these criteria should be included in the module

assessment regulations and approved by the University at approval or review. It is possible

that in some circumstances, failure to submit coursework will require to be dealt with

under the conditions outlined in Appendix 6 - Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances.

v) Where there are sound academic and professional reasons, Programme Boards may seek

approval from the School Board for a minimum attendance requirement in respect of



42

specific modules or for all, or parts of, a particular programme. The relevant Programme

Boards must liaise to ensure that module, programme and student handbooks clearly

identify where this regulation is to be applied and the penalty for failure to meet the

minimum attendance requirement.26

.

vi) Where a student has failed to meet the minimum attendance requirement (as detailed in

module descriptors, programme regulations and student handbooks) then the Assessment

Board may decide that the student be required to re-enter the module with attendance or,

on the basis of the individual's overall performance, that an alternative form of action may

be more appropriate within the framework of the assessment regulations.

(b) In situations where the means of assessment for a module is one piece of coursework, failure

to submit that piece of coursework should be considered in the same way as failure to attend

an examination. Where appropriate, the conditions outlined in Appendix 6 may apply.

5.11 In cases where attendance at specific classes is essential, normally to satisfy Statutory or Professional

Body requirements, the module handbook shall specify these classes. The Module Leader must ensure

that all students are informed via the module handbook.

5.12 Students should not attempt to use the same substantive piece of work to meet the assessment

requirements of another item of coursework, dissertation or project. In a situation where an

Assessment Board believes there is evidence that a student has attempted to use the same

substantive piece of work for more than one item of coursework, the matter will be dealt with under

the terms of University Regulations Regarding Plagiarism and Cheating (Appendix 7). Both

module tutors and students must be aware of this regulation and it is the responsibility of module

tutors to ensure that assessment topics do not overlap significantly.

At level three and above the following statement should be incorporated into any piece of

coursework submitted by a student:

“this piece of coursework is my own original work and has not been submitted elsewhere in

fulfilment of the requirement of this or any other award.”

26

See also information on University procedures for student attendance monitoring at http://www.gcu.ac.uk/staff/saem/

http://www.gcu.ac.uk/staff/saem/



43

CONSIDERATION OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

NB:

A Mitigating Circumstances Form (MCF) must not be used by students to request an extension or

to provide an explanation for the late submission of an assessment. Requests for an extension or

explanations for the late submission of an assessment must be made via direct contact with the module

leader. In these circumstances, the procedure outlined in Appendix 5 Conditions of entry to assessments

and assessment scheme, paragraph 5.10 must be adhered to.

6.1 School Mitigating Circumstances Board

A Mitigating Circumstances Board will operate in each School for the consideration, on behalf of

individual Assessment Boards, of the validity of mitigating circumstances submitted by students in

mitigation of their performance in assessments which contribute to their progression and for final

award. The Graduate School, GCU Lead and other programme areas will ensure appropriate

arrangements are in place for their areas.

Each School will have a minimum of one combined UG/PG Mitigating Circumstances Board

meeting per Trimester plus an Autumn meeting to consider submissions for those students

completing their dissertations. Each Board will have a minimum of 8 members and the quorum for

the Board will be 75%. The Head of Administration in each School will be responsible for co-

ordinating the School Mitigating Circumstances Board meeting schedule for the Academic Session.

It is important to note that Mitigating Circumstances Boards are not intended to be

representational but rather an objective Board of appropriate members of senior School

academic staff who can provide a consistency of decision making.

The membership, including interschool representation, of each Mitigating Circumstances Board shall

be as follows:

Membership

3 x Dept LTQ reps/champions, with Chair rotating

3 x Dept Academic Disability Co-ordinators

One Dept LTQ rep from another School

At least one subject lead per dept. by rotation/agreement

In Attendance

Admin Support

Inter School Representation and Chairing of the Mitigating Circumstances Boards by

Departmental LTQ leads.

School Department Jan May Aug Sept/Oct

Combined Combined Combined MSc Award

GSBS

LEAR Chair SHLS SHLS

BM SHLS Chair

SSMJ SEBE Chair Chair

APPENDIX 6



44

SHLS

HCS Chair SEBE SEBE

PAHS SEBE Chair

LS GSBS Chair Chair

SEBE C&S Chair GSBS GSBS

MEEE GSBS Chair

CCIS SHLS Chair Chair

6.2 Pre-Screening of Mitigating Circumstances forms

The Chair of the Mitigating Circumstances Board (plus one other member of the board) to have

delegated authority to screen all MC forms prior to MC Board Meetings and approve applications

that clearly meet the eligibility criteria, see para 6.12. All other applications must be submitted to

the full Board for consideration.

NB: Where the Chair of the Board has an in depth knowledge of an applicant, the Chair

should be passed to another member of the Board for consideration of the application.

6.3 Each student wishing the University to take into account mitigating circumstances must complete the

"Mitigating Circumstances Form" (MCF).

Students must provide supporting evidence with the MCF and it must clearly relate to the specific

dates during which the mitigating circumstances were applicable. If the mitigating circumstance

relates to a medical problem, a medical certificate (or letter from a medical practitioner) must be

attached - a self-certificate form is not acceptable evidence.

The form must be submitted no later than 5 working days after last date of the examination diet in

each trimester, as set out in the standard Trimester Calendar. This applies to all assessments which

take place within each trimester. Where the submission date for an assessment is outwith a normal

exam diet (e.g. an MSc dissertation), the MCF must be submitted no later than 5 working days

after the submission/assessment date. Forms received after the deadlines will be rejected and late

submissions will only be accepted in exceptional circumstances. The form (MCF) and “Help Notes for

Students” on its completion will be available from Departmental and School Offices and Student

Administration Services.

Schools will ensure that there is process to confirm that the period of the mitigating circumstances

cited concur with the assessment dates.

6.4 Schools will ensure that Mitigating Circumstances forms (MCF) are collated and submitted timeously

to the School Mitigating Circumstances Board. The information on the form will be made available to

all members of the Mitigating Circumstances Board. The information contained within the MCFs

must be treated as strictly confidential and not discussed or divulged outwith the Board.

6.5 For each individual “Mitigating Circumstances Form” (MCF), the School Mitigating Circumstances

Board will normally, make one of the following decisions.

In the case of Retrospective Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances (RCMCF), the Chair of the

Mitigating Circumstances Board plus one member of the MCF Board have delegated authority to

make one of the following decisions.



45

During its deliberations, the Board must take cognizance of the specified list of circumstances

considered to be legitimate grounds for acceptance of a form, listed in paras 6.12 & 6.13.

6.5.1 That the notification contained within the MCF/ RCMCF be accepted and the Assessment Board

proceed immediately to take a decision on the basis of the directions set out in Paragraphs 6.7 to

6.10 below.

6.5.2 That the notification contained within the MCF RCMCF be not accepted and the submission be

discounted in the Assessment Boards deliberations.

6.5.3 That, very exceptionally, the Mitigating Circumstances Board may wish to consult with the

Assessment Board Chair where an informed decision cannot be reached by the Mitigating

Circumstances Board.

Note: Mitigating Circumstances Boards will not uphold mitigating circumstances where

corroborative evidence is not provided.

6.6 The Mitigating Circumstances Board shall maintain a record of decisions and their rationale and

provide this information to the Assessment Board with respect to each Mitigating Circumstances

Form/Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances Form considered. In the case of a student with multiple

Mitigating Circumstances Forms submitted, the outcome of these deliberations may be consolidated

into a single decision, as appropriate.

Decisions of the Schools Mitigating Circumstances Boards cannot be overturned.

In exceptional circumstances, the Assessment Board may choose to present a case to the School

Mitigating Circumstances Board seeking a reconsideration of its decision. This may include a

submission by the Assessment Board to the School Mitigating Circumstances Board under Item 8 of

the Mitigating Circumstances Guidelines for Staff. In these circumstances, the decision for the

individual student concerned should be recorded as deferred

Please note: It is the role of the School Mitigating Circumstances Board to make decisions

regarding whether or not the mitigation contained within a MCF/RCMCF should or should not be

accepted. This is designed to ensure consistency of decision making.

In addition to recording a decision for each student, the decision and rationale behind it must also be

recorded on the MCF which should be kept with the student‟s record. (Note: The MCF must be kept

until at least six months after the date of completion of the programme by the student, or six months

after their withdrawal)

Students must be notified of the outcome of their MCF/RCMCF submission by use of the

standard university MCF/RCMCF feedback form.

6.7 It is not the role of the School Mitigating Circumstances Board to make academic judgements on

behalf of the Assessment Board.

The Chair of the Assessment Board will report the decision of the Mitigating Circumstances Board to

the Assessment Board. Where the mitigating circumstances have been accepted by the Mitigating

Circumstances Board, the Assessment Board will make a judgement about the most appropriate

decision, taking into account the need to maintain academic standards and to act in the best interests of

the student concerned.



46

The Chair of the Assessment Board shall ensure the following:

i) MCFs submitted directly to the Assessment Board (i.e. not via a Mitigating Circumstances

Board) are not considered.

ii) That there is no discussion of mitigating circumstances relating to any student where these

circumstances have not been notified to the Board, via a Mitigating Circumstances Board,

by means of a MCF.

iii) Where a student has cited mitigating circumstances for a particular module assessment,

these circumstances will not be considered in relation to any other module assessments

undertaken by the student on the basis of supplementary information notified to the

Assessment Board by oral (or other) statement(s).

Where a candidate has given, to the satisfaction of the Mitigating Circumstances Board, due notice of

mitigating circumstances (in accordance with paragraph 6.3 above) and has been absent from or has

failed an assessment, the Assessment Board will consider:

the work which the candidate has submitted at the assessment(s), if any, for the module concerned

records of the candidate's performance during the entire programme

academic evaluation provided by the candidate's tutors

the results of any other form of assessment (e.g., oral) which may be set for the candidate

concerned

6.8 Where a candidate has given, to the satisfaction of the Mitigating Circumstances Board, due notice of

mitigating circumstances (in accordance with paragraph 6.3 above) and has been absent from or has

failed an assessment, the Assessment Board may, for example, decide:

i) that the student has passed and is eligible for progression or award with the original marks and the

mitigating circumstances are not considered to have impinged on the student‟s performance.

However, the submission of a MCF will be recorded in the student‟s assessment record and the

Mitigating Circumstances database for potential future reference.

ii) that, on the level of overall performance in a particular year and performance in previous years, the

student would have passed had he/she not been affected by circumstances outwith his/her control

(see paragraph 54 of the University Assessment Regulations). In situations where the Assessment

Board decision is to take cognisance of mitigating circumstances and award a pass in a particular

module, no mark should be recorded but a symbol i.e. 'P' representing a Pass from the Assessment

Board based on the mitigating circumstances will be recorded in the student's record and

transcript.

iii) that, in the light of the mitigating circumstances, the attempt at a particular diet be declared void

and that the student take the next diet as a first, second, third*, or fourth* attempt as appropriate.

iv) that, on the basis of overall performance in a particular year and, if appropriate, in previous years,

that the student would not have passed, notwithstanding the fact that he/she had been affected by

circumstances outwith his/her control

6.9 Assessment Boards may modify the form of assessment in accordance with the University Assessment

Regulations (see paragraphs 53 to 56).

6.10 On the basis of the information available to it, the Assessment Board may, if appropriate, permit the

candidate to proceed, or recommend the granting of a University award, an award with Distinction, a

degree, a degree with Distinction, a degree with Honours, etc.

6.11 Submission of Mitigating Circumstances after results have been published (Retrospective

Mitigating Circumstances)



47

A student who wishes to notify the University of Mitigating Circumstances which were not made

available to an Assessment Board before it took its decision must provide a written explanation as

to why they did not provide this information in advance of the Assessment Board meeting.

Retrospective Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances forms will only be accepted in

exceptional circumstances

Each student wishing the University to take into account retrospective mitigating circumstances

must complete the "Retrospective Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances Form (RCMCF).

The form must be received by the appropriate School within two calendar weeks of publication

of the Assessment Board’s decision.

The RCMCF must include full details of the circumstances which prevented the submission of a

Mitigating Circumstances Form (MCF) by the appropriate Trimester deadline, i.e. in advance of

the Assessment Board meeting.

All claims must include medical certificates or other documentation which support the

retrospective submission of the claim, i.e. the good reason for why the MCF form could not have

been submitted before the Assessment Board met.

The Chair of the Mitigating Circumstances Board and one other Board member have delegated

authority to screen all retrospective MCF forms and approve applications which clearly meet the

eligibility criteria to go forward for consideration under paragraphs 6.5.

During deliberations, cognizance must be taken of the specified list of circumstances considered

to be legitimate grounds for acceptance of a RCMC form, listed in paras 6.14 & 6.15.

For applications approved for further consideration, the Chair of the Mitigating Circumstances

Board plus one member of the MCF Board have delegated authority to act in accordance with

paragraph 6.5 and 6.6. Thereafter, the regulations governing the submission of an MCF apply.

Students will be notified of the outcome of their submission via the standard university RCMCF

feedback form no later than four weeks after the submission of their form.

NB: Where students wish to request further consideration of an Assessment Board Decision on

the basis of Procedural or other academic grounds, this must be submitted under the

University‟s Academic Appeal Regulation, using the Academic Appeal Form. Procedural or

academic grounds for an Academic Appeal are defined as Material administrative error,

Regulatory irregularity and other material irregularity. Examples: that the assessments were not

conducted in accordance with regulations for the programme; that the Assessment Board

Decision does not conform to University Assessment Regulations.

6.12 Legitimate Grounds for the submission of a Mitigating Circumstances Form.

Serious or significant medical conditions or illness (including both physical and mental health

problems).

Ailments such as severe colds, migraines, stomach upsets, etc., ONLY where the ailment was

so severe it was impossible for you to attend an examination/complete assessment AND

where notification was given to the module leader, normally within 48 hours of the

exam/deadline AND was followed by a certificate (or a letter on letter headed or officially

stamped paper) from a UK based GP, normally obtained within 48 hours of the exam/deadline.

If your illness occurred whilst outwith the UK then an appropriate letter or certificate from a

fully qualified medical practitioner on appropriate note paper will be required.



48

Exceptional personal circumstances (e.g. serious illness or death of a parent or other person

who brought you up, grandparent, brother or sister, spouse or partner or close friend, including

participation in funeral and associated rites; family break up; being a victim of significant

crime; being in a serious car accident).

A significant family crisis where there is evidence of acute stress caused.

Exceptional travel disruption beyond your control, and for which you can provide independent

evidence, which prevented you from attending an examination or other scheduled assessment.

6.13 Circumstances unlikely to be considered legitimate grounds for the submission of a

Mitigating Circumstances Form:

6.13.1 Forms submitted without independent supporting evidence.

6.13.2 Forms which do not state clearly how your performance in your assessments has been

affected.

6.13.3 Minor (usually seasonal) ailments such as sore throats, minor colds, headaches, hangovers

etc.

6.13.4 Long term illness or disability where special arrangements have already been made.

6.13.5 A description of a medical condition without reasonable supporting evidence (medical or

otherwise).

6.13.6 A medical condition supported by „retrospective‟/‟post-dated‟ medical evidence; e.g. a

doctor‟s note which states that you were seen by the Doctor more than 48 hours after the

illness occurred without additional corroborating evidence that you contacted your module

or programme leader at the time of the illness.

6.13.7 Circumstances which have already been fully catered for by the granting of a coursework

extension.

6.13.8 Examinations on the same or consecutive days or an inability to prioritise and schedule the

completion of several pieces of work over a period of time.

6.13.9 Adherence to or participation in a religious or cultural observance.

6.13.10 Death of a pet.

6.13.11 An inability to adjust to life away from home.

6.13.12 Problems caused by English not being your principal language.

6.13.13 Financial issues.

6.13.14 Concerns about political or social unrest in your home country which was ongoing at the

time you left to take up your place at Glasgow Caledonian (other than where there has

been a sharp deterioration since your departure)



49

6.13.15 Poor time management or personal organisation (e.g. failure to plan for travel problems

resulting in late submission of coursework or inability to get to an examination in time;

misreading the examination timetable).

6.13.16 Failure, loss or theft of data, a computer or other equipment.

6.13.17 Representing the University or your country at a sporting event (you should advise the

Module Leader in advance and arrange for an extension for coursework and/or for a first

attempt at a later diet of examinations).

6.13.18 Circumstances within your control (e.g. holiday; paid or voluntary employment; choosing

to miss an assessment or coursework deadline for something which you consider to be

more important).

6.13.19 MCF submitted after the published deadline, except where you were unable to meet the

submission date for exceptional reasons which can be validated (e.g. hospitalisation). In

this case you should submit an application for consideration of Retrospective Mitigating

Circumstances.

6.13.20 RMCF submitted with insufficient evidence of the circumstances which prevented the

submission of a MCF by the appropriate deadline.

6.14 Legitimate Grounds for submitting a Retrospective MCF:

An application for Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances can be made as a result of being

unable to apply for MC before the specified deadline due to exceptional circumstances (such as

hospitalisation or extenuating personal circumstances).

6.15 Inappropriate Grounds for submitting a Retrospective MCF:

Ignorance of the MC process or dissatisfaction with academic decisions would not be considered

appropriate grounds for submitting an RMCF.

Approved by Senate 11 October 2002 - Amended September 2003, October 2004, November 2005, October 2006, October 2007, October 2008, October 2009, October 2010, October 2011, October 2012. This version amended October

2013 PW-Governance and Quality Enhancement http://www.gcal.ac.uk/student/exams/ 50

Overview of the Mitigation Process

Mitigating circumstance affects a students performance

Missed assignment happens within trimester time?

Circumstances impact final assessment

/exam?

No case to considerStudent discusses

circumstances with module leader

Module leader makes a judgement re impact/dates etc

Extension granted by ML if

appropriate, keeping in mind the

time to mark and the results

publication dates.

There are legitimate grounds for

submission and dates are appropriate? (See

help sheet for students)

No case to consider

Student submits Mitigation form,

following the Help Sheet for Students

Mitigation Panel meets

Student informed of MITS decision via a

copy of the feedback form. Provisional

results will be emailed – Note MITS

decisions will normally not be applied until the

formal Assessment board

Decision passed to Assessment Board

Impact of mitigation considered by

assessment board as per Appendix 6 of Asssessment Regs.

yes No No

Yes

No

yes

Is there about to be a formal assessment

board?

NoYesStudent informed of MITS decision via a

copy of the feedback form together with Assessment Board

results

Overview of the Retrospective Mitigation Process

Student submits Retrospective

Mitigation form, following the Help Sheet for Students

Case considered by Chair of Mitigation

panel +1 other

Formal Assessment Board results are

published

Student considers that there are

Mitigating factors which could not be declared within 7

days of the assessment period due to exceptional

unforeseen circumstances

Decision passed to Assessment Board and Chairs Action

applied.

Student informed of decision via a copy of

the feedback form together with

updated Assessment Board result, normally

within 4 weeks.

Student informed of decision via a copy

of the feedback form, normally within 4 weeks.

Accepted

Rejected



51

PLEASE ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE READ THE “HELP SHEET FOR STUDENTS”

*Official Use Only

*Date Received ………………..

*Submitted On Time: Yes / No

Mitigating Circumstances Form 2013-14 Personal Details Name: ......................................................... Student ID: ..........................................……………… Address for correspondence ......................................................................................………………. .....................................................................................................................................…………..…… .....................................................................................................................................……………..… Telephone No: ............................................. Email address: …………………………………………….. Date of Submission of form:.................. (This date must be entered) Submission of the form Forms must be submitted by the appropriate assessment deadline in each Trimester. The deadlines for session 2013-14 are as follows: Trimester A assessment deadline – no later than 24 January 2014 Trimester B assessment deadline - no later than *16 May 2014 Trimester C/Resit assessment deadline – no later than 29 August 2014 Where the submission date for an assessment is after the Trimester deadline: In the event that your assessment submission date for the module(s) affected is scheduled after the final Trimester deadline for submission of a Mitigating Circumstances Form (MCF), you MUST submit your MCF no later than 5 working days after the submission date. State assessment submission date: ........................................ Late Submission MCF submitted after the submission deadlines will not be accepted. If, due to exceptional circumstances, you were unable to submit at MCF prior to the deadline, you may submit a Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances Form, which can be submitted up to two weeks after the publication of the Assessment Board‟s decision.

Category of Attendance (Please tick the appropriate boxes) Full-Time Part-Time Undergraduate Postgraduate CPD Distance Learning Other (please specify):……………………………..



52

Programme/Module Details Programme of Study ......................................................................................................................... AOS Code (This is indicated on your Student ID card) ............................................................ School: GSBS SEBE SHLS GCU LEAD GRADUATE SCHOOL

(please tick appropriate box)

Modules affected by mitigating circumstances (please complete for each module affected) Module Code

Module Title Date of Assessment

Assessment type*

……………

……………………………………………...

…………………..

…………………………

……………

……………………………………………..

…………………..

…………………………

……………

……………………………………………..

………………….

…………………………

……………

…………………………………………….

………………….

………………………….

……………

…………………………………………….

………………….

………………………….

……………

……………………………………………..

…………………..

………………………….

*eg exam, essay, dissertation etc. Nature of Mitigating Circumstances Nature of Mitigating Circumstances Medical Other (please tick box) Duration of impact of Mitigating Circumstances (start date )____________ to ___________ (end) Supporting Evidence You must provide supporting evidence and it must clearly relate to the specific dates during which the Mitigating Circumstances were applicable. If you are awaiting supporting evidence documentation, do not delay submission of the form. If you submit the MCF without supporting evidence, the supporting evidence documentation must be submitted no later than 5 working days after the Trimester MCF deadline and you must supply your personal details with the documentation. Please refer to the “Help Sheet for students” for further guidance (Section 7. “What evidence do I need to attach to my form?”). Please tick the appropriate box

I have provided additional separate documentation as supporting evidence consisting of _______________________________________________________ (please specify, e.g. medical certificate,) OR

I am awaiting additional supporting evidence documentation (it is your responsibility to submit

this within 5 working days of the trimester deadline detailed at the front of the form. If information is not received by the deadline your application will NOT be considered. No reminders for this will be issued.)



53

Personal Impact Statement You are required to include details of how the circumstances have affected your studies. Please provide as much information as you feel the Board needs to know to allow it to make a decision and which you feel comfortable disclosing. Please continue on a separate sheet if necessary. Please refer to the Help Sheet for Students for further guidance (“Section 6 – What sort of information should I include?”)

Declaration The information given in this form must be accurate and must have, or must be believed to have, had a direct and adverse effect on your academic performance. You MUST sign and date this declaration: The information I have given on this form is, to the best of my knowledge, true and has had a direct adverse effect on the assessment(s) named. Signed: ........................................................................... Date: ………………………... If you provide information or certificates which are subsequently found to be falsified or misleading in any way, you may be liable to action being taken against you under the Code of Student Discipline. PLEASE ENSURE THAT YOU COMPLETE “PART ONE” OF THE FORM OVERLEAF Claims for mitigation will not be deemed valid if:

The form is incomplete.

The form is submitted after the deadline detailed on page 1 of the form.

The form is not accompanied by relevant supporting information. July 2013



54

DECISION OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES BOARD

PART ONE: STUDENTS TO COMPLETE PART ONE NAME ……………………………………………………….. STUDENT ID …………………………

PROGRAMME NAME ……………………………………………………………………………………. AOS CODE ……………………………………………… FULL TIME PART TIME

YEAR OF STUDY 1ST

2ND

3RD

4TH

PART TWO: To be completed by a member of the Mitigating Circumstances Board Claim Accepted (Noted with and X in the box)

Your application for Mitigating Circumstances has been accepted and will be considered by the Assessment Board, who will act in accordance with section 6.8 of Appendix 6 of the University Assessment Regulations

Claim Rejected The Mitigating Circumstances Board REJECTED your claim on the following grounds (noted with an X)

1. You did not submit the form within the stated deadline.

2. Your mitigating circumstances did not meet the criteria as stated in the guidance

3. Your Personal Impact Statement did not contain sufficient information to allow members of the MC Board to judge the validity of your claim.

4. You did not submit appropriate supporting evidence.

5. The evidence submitted was not judged to have come from an appropriate external third party (such as a medical Doctor).

6. The dates on your form did not coincide with the dates of assessment.

7. You were not enrolled for the module which had been affected by the Mitigating Circumstances

8. Other Grounds (details below)

I declare the outcome of the Mitigating Circumstances Board as noted above to be accurate. Signed by a member of the MC Board: ………………………………………………………………………………………...

Date:

The decision of the Mitigating Circumstances Board is final and there is no right of appeal or opportunity to submit further evidence.

Note: Decisions will not be applied until the formal Assessment Board meets and will therefore not be shown on provisional results. For example, where you have submitted an MCF for Trimester A and you have received your provisional results by e-mail, the result will not reflect any mitigating circumstances that have been accepted. COPY OF FORM TO BE RETURNED TO STUDENT, ORIGINAL FORM TO BE RETAINED BY THE SCHOOL



55

Mitigating Circumstances - Help Sheet for Students

1. What is a Mitigating Circumstances Form (MCF)?

An MCF is the form provided when you need to tell the University about any circumstances that you feel have affected your academic performance and/or caused your absence from an assessment, i.e. coursework or exam. The University will only accept for consideration Mitigating Circumstances notified by this means, e.g. it cannot accept notification by e-mail, discussion with members of staff, letter etc.

Please do not use an MCF to request an extension or to provide an explanation for the late submission of an assessment. If you wish to request an extension or explain the late submission of an assessment you are required to contact your module leader. If you wish to request further consideration of an Assessment Board Decision on the basis of Procedural or other academic grounds, this must be submitted under the University‟s Academic Appeal Regulation, using the Academic Appeal Form. Procedural or academic grounds for an Academic Appeal are defined as Material administrative error, Regulatory irregularity and other material irregularity. Examples: that the assessments were not conducted in accordance with regulations for the programme; that the Assessment Board Decision does not conform to University Assessment Regulations.

2. What is Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances (RMC)?

An application for Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances can be made as a result of being unable to apply for MC before the specified deadline due to exceptional circumstances (such as hospitalisation or extenuating and unforeseen personal circumstances). A RMC application must be submitted on the RMC form within two calendar weeks after the publication of the Assessment Board’s decision, and must include appropriate evidence for the reason why the application is retrospective. Being unaware of the MC process or dissatisfaction with academic decisions are NOT grounds for submitting a RMC form.

3. Under what circumstances SHOULD I submit an MCF/RMCF?

Below is a list of circumstances that are legitimate grounds for the submission of an MCF/RMCF (Taken from Section 6.12 of Appendix 6 of Assessment Regulations)

Serious or significant medical conditions or illness (including both physical and mental health

problems).

Ailments such as severe colds, migraines, stomach upsets, etc., ONLY where the ailment was so

severe it was impossible for you to attend an examination/complete assessment AND where

notification was given in writing to the module leader, normally within 48 hours of the

exam/deadline AND was followed by a certificate (or a letter on letter headed or officially

stamped paper) from a UK based GP, normally obtained within 48 hours of the exam/deadline. If

your illness occurred whilst outwith the UK then an appropriate letter or certificate from a fully

qualified medical practitioner on appropriate note paper will be required.

Exceptional personal circumstances (e.g. serious illness or death of a parent or other person who

brought you up, grandparent, brother or sister, spouse or partner or close friend, including

participation in funeral and associated rites; family break up; being a victim of significant crime;

being in a serious car accident).

A significant family crisis where there is evidence of acute stress caused.



56

Exceptional travel disruption beyond your control, and for which you can provide independent

evidence, which prevented you from attending an examination or other scheduled assessment.

4. Under what circumstanced should I NOT submit an MCF/RMCF?

Appendix 1 details circumstances unlikely to be considered legitimate grounds for the submission of an MCF/RMCF (Taken from Section 6.13 of the Appendix 6 of Assessment Regulations). If you submit a form with grounds listed as inappropriate it is highly unlikely that your application will be successful.

5. When do I need to submit it by?

The deadlines for the submission of MCFs in each trimester are detailed at the front of the form. Where your circumstances are ongoing, e.g. from trimester A to trimester B, you are required submit a MCF and supporting evidence in each trimester affected. RMCF must be submitted no later than two calendar weeks after the publication of the Assessment Board‟s decision. 6. What sort of information should I include?

You must complete the Personal Impact Statement section of the form. Use this part of the form to explain how the mitigating circumstances, medical or otherwise affected you personally in relation to your ability to complete your studies.

Use this part of the form to outline as much information as you feel the board needs to know and which you feel comfortable disclosing. You could include details of the situation that has affected you and how this may have impacted on you emotionally. You must include details of how the circumstances have affected your studies, without this information, the Mitigating Circumstances Board will not be able to consider your application.

7. What evidence do I need to attach to my form?

You must include appropriate supporting evidence. If the mitigating circumstances relate to a medical issue, a medical certificate (or a letter on letter headed or officially stamped paper) sourced from a visit to a UK based GP, is required - a self-certificate form is not acceptable evidence. If your illness occurred whilst outwith the UK then an appropriate letter or certificate from a fully qualified medical practitioner on appropriate note paper will be required.

If the mitigating circumstance is not due to a medical issue you are required to provide other appropriate evidence or appropriate written corroboration, e.g. a police incident number, death certificate. It is not appropriate to submit uncorroborated statements from tutors or other people whose knowledge of your condition or circumstances is through you informing them of it. If you have been affected by the illness of a close family member or a family bereavement, you need to use the Personal Impact Statement to explain how this impacted on you personally in relation to your ability to complete your studies. In this case, you will need to provide evidence relating directly to you in support of your Personal Impact Statement e.g. a medical certificate or letter from a medical practitioner.

Whatever the nature of the supporting evidence, you must ensure it contains the necessary details to clearly relate it to the specific dates during which the Mitigating Circumstances were applicable. If you do not do so it is likely that your MCF/RMCF will not be accepted. All evidence must be submitted in English.



57

For RMCF you must also provide evidence as to why you were not able to submit a MCF within the deadline stated and are applying for retrospective MCs.

8. What will happen to my form?

There are two stages to the process. The School Mitigating Circumstances Board will normally make a decision whether or not to accept your MCF. You will be notified of this decision. If the MCF is accepted then the Assessment Board for your programme can take the circumstances into consideration when making their decision regarding your progression or award (this will usually happen in June or August). Note, even if you have passed an assessment, if you have had a MC or RMC application accepted, the Assessment Board will take the impact of this into account when considering your results (See Appendix 6.8.i of the Assessment Regulations).

9. What are the possible outcomes?

There are a number of possible outcomes which are detailed in Appendix 6 of the University Assessment Regulations.

10. Will my Mitigating Circumstances be treated as confidential?

You may be assured that all discussions relating to your Mitigating Circumstances will be treated in the strictest confidence.

11. What do I need to do before submitting the form?

You are encouraged to take a photocopy of your form, for your records. Enclose the form and supporting evidence in an envelope marked “confidential”. 12. When will I hear if my application has been successful?

You will be informed if you have been successful or not around the same time as you get your exam results, except in the case of Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances, when you will be informed within four weeks of submitting your application form. 13. Where can I go to get help with completing the form?

If you need additional help or support to complete the form you should contact your Academic Advisor or the Advice Centre in the Students‟ Association. 14. To whom do I send the completed form?

You can submit your form and supporting evidence in the following ways. In all cases, you will receive an e-mail confirming receipt.

For programmes within the following Schools:

Glasgow School for Business and Society (GSBS):

By drop off in the School „Mitigating Circumstances‟ collection boxes in the Hamish Wood Building. The boxes are available on the first floor (outside the lifts) and fifth floor (outside the lifts) of the building.

By post to the Programmes Office, c/o Gillian Steed, Glasgow School for Business and Society, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA.



58

School of Engineering and Built Environment (SEBE):

By drop off in the „Mitigating Circumstances‟ postbox outside the Programmes Office M209

By post to MCF Submission, M209, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA‟

School of Health and Life Sciences (HLS):

By drop off in the „Mitigating Circumstances‟ collection box (outside A506, 5th Floor, Govan Mbeki Building)

By post to MCF Submission, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA

GCU LEAD (Learning Enhancement and Academic Development)

By post to the Programme Administrator, Room H113G, Level 1, William Harley Building (programmes run by the Scottish Centre for Work Based Learning)

By post to the Programme Administrator, Room H113J, Level 1, William Harley Building (AcceleRATE CPD programmes)

Graduate School

By drop off in the Submission Box outside Graduate School Office, Milton Street Building, MS009

By post to Programme Administrator, Graduate School, MS007 Milton Street Building, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA

GCU London – All Schools

By drop off to Ruth Cawthorne, Student Office, First Floor, GCU London, 40 Fashion Street, London

By post to the appropriate postal contact for your School as detailed above.

You may also submit your form to The Base on the Ground Floor of the Saltire Centre.

For further guidance on Mitigating Circumstances and Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances, please refer to Appendix 6 of the University Assessment Regulations on the Exams Home Page at: http://www.gcu.ac.uk/student/exams/

http://www.gcu.ac.uk/student/exams/



59

(CONSIDERATION OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES )Appendix I

Circumstances UNLIKELY to be considered legitimate grounds for the approval of Mitigating Circumstances or Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances

(Section 6.13, Appendix 6 Assessment Regulations)

1. Forms submitted without independent supporting evidence.

2. Forms which do not state clearly how your performance in your assessments has been affected.

3. Minor (usually seasonal) ailments such as sore throats, minor colds, headaches, hangovers etc.

4. Long term illness or disability where special arrangements have already been made.

5. A description of a medical condition without reasonable supporting evidence (medical or

otherwise).

6. A medical condition supported by „retrospective‟/‟post-dated‟ medical evidence; e.g. a doctor‟s

note which states that you were seen by the Doctor more than 48 hours after the illness occurred

without additional corroborating evidence that you contacted your module or programme leader

at the time of the illness.

7. Circumstances which have already been fully catered for by the granting of a coursework

extension.

8. Examinations on the same or consecutive days or an inability to prioritise and schedule the

completion of several pieces of work over a period of time.

9. Adherence to or participation in a religious or cultural observance.

10. Death of a pet.

11. An inability to adjust to life away from home.

12. Problems caused by English not being your principal language.

13. Financial issues.

14. Concerns about political or social unrest in your home country which was ongoing at the time you

left to take up your place at Glasgow Caledonian (other than where there has been a sharp

deterioration since your departure)

15. Poor time management or personal organisation (e.g. failure to plan for travel problems resulting

in late submission of coursework or inability to get to an examination in time; misreading the

examination timetable).

16. Failure, loss or theft of data, a computer or other equipment.

17. Representing the University or your country at a sporting event (you should advise the Module

Leader in advance and arrange for an extension for coursework and/or for a first attempt at a

later diet of examinations).



60

18. Circumstances within your control (e.g. holiday; paid or voluntary employment; choosing to miss

an assessment or coursework deadline for something which you consider to be more important).

19. MCF submitted after the published deadline, except where you were unable to meet the

submission date for exceptional reasons which can be validated (e.g. hospitalisation). In this

case you should submit an application for consideration of Retrospective Mitigating

Circumstances.

20. RMCF submitted with insufficient evidence of the circumstances which prevented the submission

of a MCF by the appropriate deadline.

July 2013

61

UNIVERSITY REGULATIONS REGARDING PLAGIARISM AND CHEATING

Please refer to Section 7.5 for definitions of plagiarism and cheating.

7.1 Plagiarism: Regulations and Procedures27

7.1.1 Where plagiarism is suspected, the Module Leader concerned shall report the matter in

writing to the Head of Department within which the module is located. The report shall

contain full details of the circumstances surrounding the alleged irregularity, including all

appropriate documentary evidence. Any further consideration of the student‟s work for the

module where plagiarism is suspected and for all other modules undertaken in the Trimester

shall be held in abeyance until the procedures below have been completed, which should

normally be within 30 days. The student will receive notification of any penalty in

accordance with the process outlined in 7.1.4 (iv).

7.1.2 In the first instance the Head of Department shall consult with Governance and Quality to

ascertain if the student has previously committed plagiarism. Thereafter the Head of

Department shall:

assess the extent of the suspected plagiarism and will deal with suspected cases that are

first offences and not considered to be major.

refer all suspected repeat offences and suspected cases of major offences to a Plagiarism

Assessor28

, via Governance and Quality, for investigation under the provisions of

Section 7.1.5 below.

all cases of confirmed third offences will be referred to the Senate Disciplinary

Committee.

In minor cases, where the matter is dealt with at Departmental level, the process will be

managed by the School. In all other cases the process will be managed by Governance and

Quality.

7.1.3 In determining what constitutes a major offence, the Head of Department will take into

account the student's level of study and length of exposure to the procedures, practices and

regulations of the University. In addition, the Head of Department may consult informally

with an independent Plagiarism Assessor, assigned by Governance and Quality, if he/she

requires advice as whether or not the case is a major offence. The Head of Department

should also discuss the case informally with the School‟s Associate Dean of Learning

Teaching and Quality to ensure that the Associate Dean‟s University wide experience as a

Plagiarism Assessor is utilised to confirm that the proposed actions are in line with normal

University practice.

7.1.4 First Offences

i. With respect to first offences which are not considered to be major, the student will be

informed in writing by the Head of Department of the alleged offence and of the

requirement to attend for interview, as soon as is practicable. Where the Head of

Department has a potential conflict of interest, he/she should pass the case to another

Head of Department within the School.

ii. The student shall have the right to be accompanied, assisted or represented at the interview

by one of the following:

a parent or guardian;

27

Regulations and procedures addressing all other forms of cheating and academic irregularity begin at paragraph 7.2. 28

The Plagiarism Assessors will be the Associate Deans of Learning, Teaching and Quality or other appropriate member of

academic staff. In any investigation, the Plagiarism Assessor (and their School) will not have any involvement with the

student at programme or module level. Governance and Quality will assign an appropriate Plagiarism Assessor.

APPENDIX 7

62

a fellow student or other friend;

an Officer of the Students' Association;

a member of University staff.

At the beginning of the interview, the Head of Department will ascertain who is to be the

spokesperson for the student (the student or a representative). The Head of Department

shall have the right, however, to question the student directly where necessary. The Head

of Department will also retain a record of the meeting.

iii. At the interview, the student will be shown his or her work and given a clear explanation

of the alleged irregularity. The student will be given the opportunity to justify the work.

iv. If the Head of Department is satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that an offence has

occurred he or she will:

Decide on the penalty to be imposed. This will either be resubmission of the work or

reduction in the mark for the assignment up to and including a mark of zero;

Notify the Chair of the Assessment Board of the penalty in writing;

Notify Governance and Quality of the penalty in writing. Governance and Quality will

add the case to the central register of students who have plagiarised;

Notify the student in writing of the penalty imposed and their right of appeal (see 7.4);

Ensure that the student is given written instruction about plagiarism and the necessity

of properly acknowledging and referencing sources prior to any resubmission.

v. If the Head of Department is not satisfied that an offence has occurred but considers that

the student has engaged in poor academic practice then the student will receive a warning

and written instructions about plagiarism. Governance and Quality will be notified that

an investigation has taken place and that no further action will be taken.

vi. If it is judged that there is no case for the student to answer, the student will be informed

in writing by the Head of Department and the piece of work in question will be marked in

accordance with normal arrangements, without penalty. Governance and Quality will be

notified that an investigation has taken place and that no further action will be taken.

7.1.5 Major Offences/Second Offences

i. Where an allegation of a major or repeat offence has occurred, the case will be referred

by the Head of Department via Governance and Quality to a Plagiarism Assessor. The

Head of Department is responsible for ensuring that the case passed to Governance and

Quality is accompanied by all relevant documentation including a signed Plagiarism

Major Offence Pro-forma. On receipt of the case, Governance and Quality will

immediately advise the student in writing that a major or repeat plagiarism offence is

suspected to have occurred and that an investigation by an independent Plagiarism

Assessor is in progress. The student will be informed of their right to appear before the

Plagiarism Assessor accompanied by a representative (as described in paragraph 7.1.4

above) and that full details of the alleged irregularity will be made available to the student

at the interview.

ii. The Plagiarism Assessor shall arrange to interview the student and, as appropriate, come

to a decision on the basis of the student's statement and the supporting evidence.

iii. Failure by the student to appear before the Plagiarism Assessor or to submit a statement

shall not prevent the investigation proceeding.

63

iv. If the Plagiarism Assessor decides the student has committed an offence, the following

outcomes are possible:

the rescindment of the assessment result or the complete examination diet (in this case

this means all coursework and formal examinations) at issue. In either case the

rescinded result will count as an attempt(s) at the module assessment;

the matter is referred directly to the Senate Disciplinary Committee (this would be

automatic in the case of a confirmed third offence);

the student is given written instruction about plagiarism and the necessity of properly

acknowledging and referencing sources. It is the responsibility of the Head of

Department to ensure that this happens as soon as possible after the investigation

has concluded and prior to any resubmission;

v. The Plagiarism Assessor will notify Governance and Quality of his/her decision.

vi. Governance and Quality will:

Notify the relevant Head of Department in writing:

Notify the Chair of the relevant Assessment Board in writing; it should be noted that

the Assessment Board may amend the penalty in exceptional circumstances which

must be properly minuted at the Assessment Board.29

The chair of the Assessment

Board must also provide Governance and Quality with a copy of the minute. An

example of such a situation would be where Consideration of Mitigating

Circumstances has been upheld and the Board feels that the Mitigating Circumstances

were a sufficient mitigation for the plagiarism.

Notify any other relevant programme staff in writing;

Add the case to the central register of students who have plagiarised;

Notify the student in writing of the penalty imposed and his/her right of appeal.

Advise the student, if appropriate, to consult with their programme organiser to

receive guidance/advice as to the academic implications of the penalty imposed.

vii. If the Plagiarism Assessor is not satisfied that an offence has occurred but considers that

the student has engaged in poor academic practice, the student will receive a warning

and written instruction about plagiarism from the Plagiarism Assessor. The Plagiarism

Assessor will also notify Governance and Quality, who will notify the Head of

Department and the Chair of the relevant Assessment Board in writing of the outcome

of the investigation. The provisions of bullet point 2 in vi above also apply in this case.

viii. If the Plagiarism Assessor judges that there is no case for the student to answer, he/she

will notify Governance and Quality that an investigation has taken place and that no

further action is to be taken. The student will be informed in writing by Governance

and Quality and the piece of work in question will be marked in accordance with normal

arrangements and without penalty.

7.2 Cheating in Formal Assessments: Regulations and Procedures

Examinations

7.2.1 Where an academic irregularity is suspected in an examination, the senior invigilator shall

act in accordance with the procedures set out in the Scheme of Invigilation30

and shall report

29

Where programmes have programme specific regulations relating to Professional and Statutory Body fitness for practice

requirements, the penalty may be amended to meet the requirements of these regulations. These regulations should be clearly

described in the programme specific regulations in the programme documentation. 30

See Assessment and Graduation Processes section 1.

64

the alleged irregularity to Governance and Quality utilising the senior invigilator's report

form. On receipt of notification of an alleged academic irregularity, Governance and Quality

shall proceed in accordance with the Code of Student Discipline31

and shall instigate the

procedures required under the regulations in order that the alleged academic irregularity may

be investigated and considered by the Senate Disciplinary Committee as appropriate.

Other Formal Assessments

7.2.2 Where an academic irregularity is suspected in any other formal assessment, the matter will

be referred to the Executive Dean of School (or equivalent) to determine whether or not the

offence constitutes a major or minor offence under the terms of the Code of Student

Discipline. Cases of plagiarism will be dealt with under the procedures for plagiarism

detailed in 7.1 above.

All Formal Assessments

7.2.3 Governance and Quality will inform the Chair of the appropriate Assessment Board in

writing that an investigation into an alleged examination irregularity is underway.

7.2.4 The Assessment Board will not consider the case of any student who is the subject of an

enquiry into an alleged irregularity in an examination. However, all course work and

examination scripts that are available shall be marked in the normal manner.

7.2.5 In the event of the allegation not being sustained by the Senate Disciplinary Committee, the

relevant Assessment Board will be required to consider the student's performance in the

normal manner. However, the Chair of the Assessment Board may, after due consultation

with relevant internal and External Examiners, take Chair's action to avoid the need for a

formal meeting of the Assessment Board.

7.2.6 Should the allegation be sustained, the matter will be considered by the Senate Disciplinary

Committee. The Clerk to the Senate Disciplinary Committee shall inform the relevant Chair

of the Assessment Board of the outcome of the investigation.

7.2.7 Penalties

The Senate Disciplinary Committee has the power to impose penalties. These include:32

31

http//www.gcu.ac.uk/student/about/regulations/documents/CodeofStudentDiscipline.doc 32

Code of Student Discipline, section 4

an admonition

a reprimand

disqualification from appropriate

examinations/assessments

suspension for a specified period

expulsion

7.3 Late Discovery

Where an alleged academic irregularity comes to light after an Assessment Board has met to

consider a student's assessment the procedure shall be the same as described above.

The Assessment Board shall be reconvened as soon as practicable following receipt by the Chair of

the Board of the result of the investigation and the recommended penalty.

65

If the outcome of the reconvened Assessment Board affects the student's final result, the Chair of

the Assessment Board shall inform Governance and Quality in writing of the reasons for the varied

result. Governance and Quality will inform the student of the altered final result with the reasons.

7.4 Appeals33

Plagiarism

A student may appeal against the decision following an investigation as follows:

i. where the decision was taken by a Head of Department, the student may appeal to a Plagiarism

Assessor, appointed by Governance and Quality.

ii. where the decision was taken by a Plagiarism Assessor, the student may appeal to the Senate

Disciplinary Committee. The decision of the Senate Disciplinary Committee, in the case of

such an appeal, will be final.

Cheating or other academic irregularity

A student may appeal against the decision following an investigation as follows:

i. where the decision was taken by an Executive Dean of School (or equivalent), the student may

appeal to the Senate Disciplinary Committee.

ii. where the decision was taken by the Senate Disciplinary Committee, the student may appeal to

the Appeal Committee of the University Court.

Appeals will only be considered where new information is presented which was not previously

made available during the investigation and valid supporting evidence must be provided.

7.5 Definitions

7.5.1 Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the deliberate and substantial unacknowledged incorporation in a student's

work of material derived from the work (published or unpublished) of another. Examples of

plagiarism include:

i) The extensive use of another person's material without reference or acknowledgement

ii) The summarising of another person's work by changing some words or altering the

order of presentation without acknowledgement

iii) The substantial and unauthorised use of the ideas of another person without

acknowledgement of the source

iv) Copying the work of another student with or without that student's knowledge or

agreement

v) Deliberate use of commissioned material and presented as the student's own

vi) Collusion

vii) Self-plagiarism (the re-use of own previously written work or data presented for

assessment on a previous occasion)

7.5.2 Cheating

Examples of cheating include:

33

Code of Student Discipline, sections 5 and 6

66

i) Communicating during an examination with any person other than a properly authorised

invigilator or another authorised member of staff

ii) Introducing any written or printed materials into the examination room unless expressly

permitted by the Assessment Board or programme regulations

iii) Introducing any electronically stored information into the examination room unless

expressly permitted by the Assessment Board or programme regulations

iv) Gaining access to any unauthorised material relating to an examination during or before

the examination

v) Obtaining a copy of an 'unseen' written examination paper in advance of the date and

time for its authorised release

vi) Falsifying data

vii) Personating Revised regulations approved by APC, 11 October 2006

(Amended October 2007, October 2008 and September 2010, October 2011)

67

Plagiarism detected by

Module Leader

Head of Department contacts

Governance and Quality to

ascertain if it is a first offence and

makes an initial judgement on the

severity (in consultation with

plagiarism assessor if necessary).

Assessment

Board -notes the

decision

Flow diagram of proposed procedures

in respect of plagiarism

Minor offence

Repeated minor offence

or major offence

Governance and

Quality adds the

case to the central

register

Plagiarism Assessor

decides on penalty or

passes matter to SDC

Governance and

Quality adds the

case to the central

register

Assessment

Board -notes the

decision

Senate Disciplinary

Committee

Student NotifiedHead of Department

decides on the penalty

Student and

relevant staff

notified

Student and

relevant staff

notified

Governance and

Quality adds the

case to the central

register

Flow diagram of procedures in respect of plagiarism

68

PLAGIARISM MAJOR OFFENCE PROFORMA

This form is to be used for the reporting of suspected Major Offences of Plagiarism to Governance and Quality. On

completion by Head of Department, please return to Plagiarism Offences, Governance and Quality, Room H213, William

Harley Building.

Student Name: Student ID Number:

School: Course & Level:

Head of Dept: Programme Leader:

AB Chair: Module Leader(s):

Has the central register for plagiarism been checked for a previous offence: Yes

No

Is this a first offence? (Please check with Governance and Quality):

Yes

No

In the case of a second/repeat offence please detail what guidance was previously given to the student:

Please list the module(s) and Trimester in which plagiarism has occurred:

Please provide details of the offence providing as much information as possible including details of evidence being presented

for investigation.

In my capacity as Head of Department I consider this to constitute a Major Offence of Plagiarism in terms of the University

Regulations regarding Cheating and Plagiarism.

Signature: Date:

LEC/Plagiarism/Oct2011

69

ASSESSMENT AND GRADUATION PROCESSES

70

1. Scheme of Invigilation

1.1 Appointment of Invigilators

1.1.1 Allocation of all invigilators will be done by the Examinations Office, from a pool of

externally recruited staff. Duties will only be allocated to Invigilators who have attended an

appropriate training session.

1.1.2 A senior invigilator shall be appointed for each examination room.

1.1.3 Invigilators shall normally be allocated on the ratio of 1:30 candidates. Two invigilators must

be present in the examinations room at all times.

1.2 Roles and Responsibilities

Senior Invigilator

The Senior Invigilator will:

1.2.1 Collect the examination papers, script books, Examination Attendance Records, Display Lists

and Certificate of Invigilation Reports, together with any other requisite ancillary materials

(as specified by the Assessors) from the Examinations Office at least thirty minutes before the

start of the examination. Examinations Office staff will already have laid out materials and

put up Display Lists in the main examination rooms.

1.2.2 Check that the examination room is properly arranged and that the requisite

stationery/ancillary materials have been provided, and report any discrepancies to the

Assessments Manager.

1.2.3 Ensure the examination papers and requisite ancillary materials are placed on candidates‟

desks prior to the candidates entering the room. All other preparations for the examination,

including putting up the display list(s) outside the examination room, must be completed

before candidates are permitted to enter the examination room.

1.2.4 Open the doors of the examination room at least 15 minutes before the start of the

examination and permit candidates to enter. Instruct candidates, as they enter the room, that

they must deposit all coats, bags, multimedia equipment, books, etc, at the front or back of the

examination room and that they may not read the examination paper or commence written

work, other than completion of the front-piece of the examination script, until they are

permitted to start the examination.

1.2.5 Manage situations where candidates whose names are not listed on the Examination

Attendance Record present themselves in the examination room. Ensure any names of

additional candidates are added to Examination Attendance Record. Ensure also that their

details are added to the correct Record and their script(s) are reconciled within the appropriate

set of scripts.

1.2.6 Make the required announcements to the candidates prior to the start of the examination

session and with 15 minutes remaining and at the end of the examination.

1.2.7 Instruct candidates to place their student ID cards on the top, right-hand corner of their

desks, where they can be checked by the invigilators without candidates being disturbed.

71

1.2.8 Read the items one to ten below to all candidates approximately five minutes before the

examination session begins, stating the start time of the examination:

1.2.8.1. Announce appropriate Emergency Evacuation procedures.

1.2.8.2 Inform candidates it is expected that they check that they are sitting in the correct

seat and have been issued with the correct examination paper.

1.2.8.3 Inform candidates that no extra time for examinations will be given in the

examination venue. If the candidate should receive extra time to complete the

examination, they must go immediately to the Examinations Office in M122A.

1.2.8.4. Inform candidates that electronic media devices and mobile phones must be

switched off and stored away from desks. Unauthorised aids are not allowed into

the examination room and any such items must, on request, be surrendered to the

Senior Invigilator who will hand them over to the University.

1.2.8.5. Inform candidates that they must not pass any information from one to another,

work in collusion with any other person, copy from another candidate or engage

in any similar activity.

1.2.8.6. State that candidates who feel ill during the examination must make every

reasonable effort to inform an invigilator of their condition. Candidates may

notify the University of any circumstances they consider may have affected their

performance in the examination by using the Consideration of Mitigating

Circumstances process, details of which may be obtained from the GCU student

website.

1.2.8.7 Inform candidates that they may leave the examination after one-third of the

scheduled duration has elapsed but may not normally leave during the final fifteen

minutes.

1.2.8.8 Inform candidates that they may take the question paper out of the room once they

have completed the examination but may not remove the question paper before

one-third of the scheduled duration has elapsed. If the Module Leader has

stipulated for a particular examination paper that the candidates must return all

copies of the paper, candidates are not allowed to take the examination paper out

of this room at any time.

1.2.8.9 Inform candidates it is their responsibility to make sure that script material is

securely fastened together using the treasury tags provided and collected by an

invigilator. At the end of the examination, candidates must remain seated until

your script is collected.

1.2.8.10 Inform candidates that they must place their student ID cards on the top, right-

hand corner of their desk, where they can be checked by the invigilators.

1.2.8.11 At the appointed time, the invigilator will announce to candidates they may begin

their examinations

1.2.8.12 Inform candidates when there are fifteen minutes remaining and that they must

remain seated until an invigilator gives them permission to leave the examination

room.

72

1.2.8.13 Inform candidates at the end of the examination session that they must stop

writing and make sure their script material is fastened securely, and to remain

seated until the script has been collected by an invigilator.

1.2.8 Admit candidates who arrive late only until the point where one third of the scheduled

duration for the examination has elapsed. Candidates will not be allowed to leave the

examination venue with a copy of the examination paper during the first third of the

scheduled examination duration.

1.2.9 Arrange a check of the candidate‟s identity and student ID card, which should have been

placed on the top, right-hand corner of desks. Cards can be checked against the name on the

Examination Attendance Record without candidates being disturbed. The invigilator must

mark “AB” for absence or indicate the candidate is present by entering a . Ensure the

Attendance Record is updated where candidates are admitted to the room after the attendance

is taken. (See also 1.2.8 above)

1.2.10 Ensure invigilators are positioned appropriately within the examination room in order to

monitor the candidates and respond to requests for additional materials, i.e. supplementary

paper, treasury tags and requests to leave the examination room temporarily. Should a

question arise regarding the content of the examination paper, arrange for the Module Leader

to return to the examination venue to respond.

1.2.11 Ensure that if ever any abnormality or anomalous situation is encountered at an examination

that it is immediately reported to the Assessments Manager.

1.2.12 Record any instances of doubt of a candidate‟s eligibility to sit an examination on the

Certificate of Invigilation Report in order that appropriate action may be taken. However, the

candidate should not be prevented from sitting the examination.

1.2.13 Arrange for assistant invigilation staff to leave the examination room on a rota basis for an

appropriate refreshment break, provided that there are always at least two invigilators on duty.

Breaks should not exceed 20 minutes in duration. Normally, a break will only be given where

the examination duration is two hours or more.

1.2.14 Complete a reconciliation of the worked scripts at the end of the examination session.

Assisted by all invigilators, ensure the scripts for each paper being examined are arranged into

numerical by seat number order. Carry out a check to confirm, by using the students‟ ID card

numbers, that an examination script has been collected from each candidate marked present

on the Examination Attendance Record(s).

1.2.15 Ensure a thorough search of the examination room is undertaken if there is a discrepancy in

the reconciliation and it appears a script is missing. Notify the Examinations Office

immediately.

1.2.16 Complete and sign the Certificate of Invigilation Report pro forma when the reconciliation

exercise has been completed. Return the signed Certificate of Invigilation Report, the scripts,

the Examination Attendance Record(s) and the Examination Envelopes to the Examinations

Office. Any cases arising under 1.2.4 and 1.2.5 must be fully documented in the Invigilation

Report. Further, any errors found in an examination paper should be fully detailed in the

report.

73

1.2.17 The Senior Invigilator will ensure that all ancillary examination materials are returned to the

Examinations Office, except in the case of examinations held in the main examination venues

when ancillary materials should be deposited on one of the tables provided.

All Invigilators

1.2.18 Invigilators must not answer enquiries by candidates as to the meaning of examination

questions. The Module Leader or a member of academic staff with specialist knowledge of

each paper being examined will be present in the examination room 10 minutes prior to the

start of each examination and will leave 10 minutes after the examination has started. In

situations where the same examination is being held in 2 or more separate venues at the

same time, it is the responsibility of the Module Leader or “specialist” to make

appropriate arrangements with a colleague to provide suitable cover. The Module

Leader will be responsible to the senior invigilator for ensuring that candidates have been

issued with the correct materials and will answer any questions arising from the content of the

paper. They may also conduct a random check of candidates‟ electronic calculators prior to

the commencement of the examination.

1.2.19 Whenever an abnormality or anomalous situation is encountered in the absence of the

Senior Invigilator, it must be immediately reported to the Assessments Manager (or

their assistant) in order that immediate and appropriate action may be taken, in

consultation, where necessary, with the appropriate academic staff.

1.2.20 During the examination, no other work should be undertaken by invigilators who must devote

their whole attention to supervision. While an examination is in progress only essential

conversation should be carried out and this as quietly as possible to prevent disturbance to

candidates.

1.2.21 If an invigilator suspects that an examinee is giving or receiving information during an

examination or is in any way infringing the Regulations for the Conduct of Examinations,

they will note the name of the candidate and the number of their desk and report the

circumstances to the senior invigilator. The candidate should be permitted to continue the

examination in the normal way but shall be informed that the circumstances will be reported

to the Examinations Office. Any unauthorised materials removed from the candidate must be

handed into the Examinations Office as soon as possible.

1.2.22 Invigilators will watch the candidates for signs of stress or illness and report any such

occurrence to the senior invigilator.

1.2.23 In the event of a medical emergency arising during an examination, one of the invigilators on

duty should immediately summon first-aid assistance.

1.2.24 Invigilators will ensure that any candidate who has to leave the examination room

temporarily is escorted throughout the absence by an invigilator.

1.2.25 Assistant invigilators are reminded that the senior invigilator is responsible for all aspects of

the conduct of examinations while they are in progress. Invigilators should not leave the

examination room during the examination except with the agreement of the senior invigilator.

1.2.26 All assistant invigilators must assist with the reconciliation of attendance and scripts

process and remain present in the examination room until the reconciliation process has

been successfully completed. If required, they must assist the Senior Invigilator in

returning the scripts and materials to the Examinations Office.

74

Emergency Procedures

1.3.1 In the event that the University fire alarm sounds or other similar emergency arises during

an examination session, the room must be evacuated as quickly as possible, in accordance

with standard University procedures. Candidates should be instructed to leave all

examination materials, including scripts, on their desks and to report to the invigilators at

the assembly point after evacuation of the building. The procedure to be adopted thereafter

will be determined by the nature/extent of the emergency.

1.3.2 All Senior Invigilators should report to the Assessments Manager as soon as possible after

vacating the building. The Assessments Manager, in consultation with the Senior

Invigilators, will decide whether an examination can continue or not.

1.3.3 If the examination can continue, invigilators should return to the examination room as soon

as possible after the "all clear" has been given. Candidates will be re-admitted to the

examination and allowed to resume the examination using the original scripts. An

appropriate time allowance should be given to candidates to compensate for the

interruption. The attendance at the reconvened examination must be taken. The Senior

Invigilator should note in his/her report the time at which the examination was interrupted

and re-started and the time at which the examination was concluded.

75

2. Regulations for the Conduct of Examinations

2.1 These Regulations apply to all examinations conducted under the aegis of the Senate of Glasgow

Caledonian University.

2.2 Examinations for which the University is responsible are open only to registered students of the

University who have completed the required programme of study and who have complied with the

Regulations for that programme. No person whose registration has lapsed or who has failed to

register for the appropriate programme and associated modules is eligible as a candidate for any

assessment. The appropriate Assessment Board will withhold the marks of an assessment of any

person who appears ineligible, pending an investigation, and may ultimately disregard the

attempt (see also section 1.2.12 Scheme of Invigilation).

2.3 i) It is a condition of admission to any examination that the candidate agrees to observe these

Regulations and any further written or oral instructions issued to him/her by any authorised body or

person including Assessment Boards and Invigilators.

ii) Failure to observe these Regulations or any such instructions will constitute an academic offence

which may lead to proceedings being instituted under the University's Code of Student Discipline.

iii) Subject to the provisions of Regulation 2.3 (iv) below, if an invigilator suspects a candidate of

infringing any part of these Regulations, and especially any part of Regulation 2.4 below, he/she

will permit the candidate to continue the examination in the normal way but shall, as soon as

practicable, cause the circumstances to be reported to the Examinations Office.

iv) Any candidate whose conduct is, in the view of an invigilator, disturbing to other candidates and

who persists in this conduct after a warning, shall be required to leave the examination centre.

His/her answer book will be sent to the Examinations Office by the invigilator who will give full

details of the circumstances.

v) Smoking is prohibited at all University examinations. Candidates will not be permitted to leave the

examination centre temporarily for the purposes of smoking.

vi) Candidates are not permitted to introduce into the examination centre any foodstuffs and/or

beverages the consumption of which, in the opinion of the Senior Invigilator, would disturb other

candidates.

2.4. i) Candidates at any examination are only permitted to use books, instruments including electronic

calculators, notes or other materials or aids that have been specifically permitted by the appropriate

Assessment Board or other authorised body for the examination in question. The use of

dictionaries by students whose first language is not English is covered in section 2.4 (ii). The use of

electronic personal organisers is not permitted in any University examination and mobile phones

and electronic media devices must be switched off and stored away from students‟ desks. Any such

devices found to be in use during the course of an examination will be confiscated immediately

and may be retained by the University at its absolute discretion for the purpose of

investigation. No other books, instruments including electronic calculators and those which may

hold electronically stored information, notes, loose papers (written or blank) or other materials or

aids whatsoever may be introduced into an examination room or handled or consulted during an

examination. Any unauthorised items in the possession of a candidate on entry to the examination

room shall be deposited immediately with the invigilator. Coats, bags and similar items shall be

deposited outside the examination centre or as directed by the invigilator.

ii) Students, whose first language is not English, are allowed to use a standard English/Foreign

Language dictionary.

iii) Any unauthorised items introduced by a candidate into an examination room must, upon request, be

surrendered to the invigilator who will hand them over to the University which may make copies

thereof and the original items, together with any copies, may be retained by the University at its

absolute discretion.

76

iv) Candidates must not read the examination paper or commence written work, other than the

completion of the front piece of the examination script, until the Senior Invigilator declares, at the

appropriate time, that candidates may start the examination.

v) Candidates shall not, unless expressly so authorised, pass any information from one to another, nor

shall any candidate work in collusion with any other person or copy from another candidate or

engage in any similar activity.

vi) Where the Regulations for any qualification provide for part or all of an examination to consist of

'take-away' papers, essays or any other work done in a candidate's own time, course work or any

form of continuous assessment, the work submitted by the candidate must be his/her own and any

quotation from the published or unpublished work of any other person must be duly acknowledged.

2.5 Save where the relevant Assessment Board has determined otherwise, any materials submitted by a

candidate for examination, including written replies to examination papers, essays, dissertations or

reports, whensoever written or prepared, will not be returned to candidates and the copyright therein is

possessed by the University. Entry to an examination will be deemed to constitute an agreement by the

candidate with the University to assign such copyright to the University.

2.6 Where candidates require consideration with regard to disabilities or special examination needs (see

Section 3), the relevant Programme Organiser will liaise with the Student Administration Services and

with appropriate staff from the Department of Student Services to ensure that appropriate provision is

made.

2.7 Any candidate who falls ill during an examination must make every reasonable effort to inform an

invigilator of their condition and complete a Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances form if they

feel that the illness has adversely affected their performance (See Appendix 6 - Consideration of

Mitigating Circumstances).

2.8 All examinations shall take place at the time and place published but the appropriate Director(or

nominee) may, in exceptional circumstances, make arrangements for examinations to be held other

than as published. In such instances, the Examinations Office will ensure that candidates are notified.

It is the responsibility of candidates to ascertain the examination dates and locations from the

appropriate, designated University notice boards.

2.9 Candidates should present themselves outside the examination centre at least 15 minutes before the

commencement of the examination but shall not enter the room until instructed to do so by the

invigilators.

2.10 Candidates must bring their student ID cards and make them available for inspection in the

examination venue to allow their identity to be verified. Where necessary a face recognition check

may be made to verify a candidate‟s identity.

2.11 i) Candidates admitted to the examination centre after the starting time shall not be granted any

additional time after the end of the examination period stipulated on the question paper in which to

complete the examination.

ii) Candidates should not leave the examination centre during the first one-third of its scheduled

duration except for personal reasons. No candidate shall normally be permitted to leave the

examination centre during the 15 minutes prior to the end of the examination.

2.12 A candidate who requires to be absent temporarily from the examination centre shall be accompanied

by an authorised person.

2.13 Each candidate should note his/her desk number on all internal answer sheets/books.

77

2.14 Complete silence shall be observed whilst the examination papers are being distributed and

throughout the examination. If a candidate wishes to attract the attention of an Invigilator, he/she

should do so by raising a hand.

2.15 No leaves shall be torn out of examination books. It is the responsibility of the candidate to see that

any script material is securely fastened together (using the treasury tags provided by the Exams

Office and handed to an invigilator.

2.16 Each candidate shall cease writing at the end of the examination when instructed to do so by the

invigilators and shall remain seated at the end of the examination until his/her script has been

collected.

2.17 Where a candidate requires special arrangements to be made for an examination, the provisions

outlined in Section 3 Special Examination Arrangements for Disabled Students shall apply.

2.18 Candidates whose first language is not English may request additional time for examinations (see

Section 4 Special Examination Arrangements for International Students).

2.19 In exceptional circumstances, arrangements may be made for a candidate to take resit diet

examinations at another institution (see Section 5 Resit Examinations at other Institutions).

78

3. Special Examination Arrangements for Disabled Students

3.1 Obtain Approval for Appropriate Assessment Arrangements

3.1.1 Applicants or students who have notified the University, at application stage, of an impairment or

condition which may impact on aspects of teaching or assessment practices will be invited by the

Disability Service to attend a meeting at which their needs will be assessed. This „Needs

Assessment‟ will include consideration of need for adjustments to examination and class test

arrangements.

3.1.2 Students who subsequently disclose an impairment or condition, during the course of their studies,

or who subsequently acquire an impairment or condition, or who may reasonably be considered to

be disabled (although they may have not previously disclosed or recognized this) should be

referred to the Disability Service for a confidential discussion, and Needs Assessment (if

appropriate).

3.1.3 The Disability Service is an accredited Assessment Centre, and Needs Assessments are conducted

in compliance with guidance issued by the Scottish Government in the „Toolkit of Quality

Indicators‟ . Recommendations for adjustments to academic examinations will only be made

where there is evidence of likely substantial disadvantage (related to the impact of disability)

without such an adjustment . In all such cases, the Disability Service will require, and retain,

appropriate documentary evidence of the specific nature of impairment or condition. This may

include:

• For students with a specific learning difficulty, such as dyslexia, an Educational

Psychologist‟s report;

• A statement from an appropriately qualified medical professional, such as a GP, Consultant,

Occupational Therapist, Audiologist, Psychologist or Psychiatrist.

3.2 Formal Diet Examinations

The Examinations Office, based within the Student Administration Services, puts in place

arrangements that are consistent with the adjustments recommended for individual disabled

students by the Disability Service. This may include the allocation of additional time, separate

venues, venues restricted to students with additional exam arrangements, use of computer,

scribes/readers, or any other reasonable adjustment agreed with the Academic School.

3.3 Notification of exams arrangements

The Disability Service will notify the Programme Administrator, in writing (email or memo) of

students‟ exam needs. Programme administrators are responsible for ensuring that these details are

communicated to the Examinations Office prior to every exam diet for the duration of the

student‟s course. A deadline for notifying the Exams Office will be published by the

Examinations Office prior to each exam diet. If details are not forwarded by the Programme

Administrator by the deadline it is the responsibility of the academic school to ensure

arrangements are put in place.

Cases where failure to meet the deadline was caused by late assessment of the student‟s needs by

the Disability Service (due to either late disclosure or late diagnosis/acquisition of disability) will

be considered by the academic school and Examinations Office (with recourse to advice from the

Disability Service, as appropriate) on an individual basis. In such cases, a reasonable adjustment

will be sought for the immediate exam diet, within the resources and timeframe available.

79

3.4 Class assessments (Academic Units)

In ensuring consistency for class assessments, students will be entitled to the same or comparable

support arrangements which are in place for examinations in the formal diets of December, May

and August (resits).

80

4. Special Examination Arrangements for International Students

4.1 Policy

The University has adopted the following policy for International Students whose first

language is not English, undertaking formal examinations at GCU:

4.1.1 Students studying in the UK or a collaborative institution for their first year,

irrespective of level, should be allocated 45 minutes additional time in a 3-hour

exam (pro rata for examinations of alternative duration).

4.1.2 No additional time should be allowed for any International Students

beyond their first year of study in the UK or a collaborative institution on

the basis of English language.

4.1.3 This policy applies to formal examinations and class tests.

4.2 Procedures

4.2.1 Students who come into this category are required to make contact with their

Programme Organiser if they require special exam arrangements. Students

must make contact with the Programme Organiser no later than the end of

week 2 in each Trimester. There is no guarantee that special examination

arrangements will be provided if the appropriate deadlines are not met.

4.2.2 The Programme Organiser/nominee forwards the appropriate pro forma

with details of individual students to the Examinations Office no later than

the end of week 4 in each Trimester.

4.2.3 The Examinations Office will notify the Programme Leader/nominee of

the examination arrangements for individual students.

4.2.4 The Programme Organiser/nominee will inform the student of the

appropriate details.

4.2.5 For class tests, Schools will ensure that appropriate arrangements are in

place.

81

5. Resit Examinations at Other Institutions

Guidelines Governing Applications by Students for Permission to Take August Diet

Examinations at Other Institutions

5.1 Policy

It is University policy that all students must attend the University for their examinations in

December and April/May and also the resit diet in August.

For all students who are required by programme or other GCU regulations to be located elsewhere

during an assessment period and are unable to attend examinations (e.g. work placement, GCU

Sports Bursaries), the host School, in consultation with the Programme Leader and Examinations

Office will be expected to make suitable arrangements for students. No fee will be charged for such

students.

Where students are unable to attempt examinations due to Mitigating Circumstances such as illness,

then the arrangements described within “Consideration of Mitigating Circumstances” will apply.

5.2 August Resit Diet at Other Institutions

5.2.1 For any student who is unable to attend the University for the August resit diet, the

University will provide, only in the circumstances specified in 5.2.2, a service which will

allow such students to apply for prior permission to take their resit examinations at other

institutions. The exercise of this right is contingent upon the student following the

procedure set out in paragraph 5.3.

5.2.2 The entitlement to make use of this service will be limited to students who are unable to be

in Glasgow due to:

residence for personal reasons over 500 miles from Glasgow34

; and/or

medical reasons, certified by a duly qualified General or other Medical Practitioner,

which would not preclude an attempt at an examination but would preclude travel to

Glasgow for such an attempt.

5.2.3 For the avoidance of doubt, for the purposes of these guidelines, “personal reasons” do not

include holidays and non-placement summer employment.

5.2.4 Incoming Erasmus exchange/study abroad students

Each School will operate and administer their own policy for incoming Erasmus

exchange/study abroad students. This will include an Incoming ERASMUS handbook, for

ALL incoming students to the School, outlining key staff, both pastoral and administrative

support, in addition to the International Office staff pages. Definitive dates of academic

calendar including resit assessment period, and guidelines thereon with regard to

communication of results and result dates, at first and second diet, with the student and the

partner institution.

Incoming Erasmus exchange/study abroad students and failure at first diet

34

Outwith a geographical area having a radius of 500 miles from the entrance to the Britannia Building, Glasgow Caledonian

University, City Campus, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow, G4 0BA

82

Each School will operate and administer their own policy for incoming Erasmus

exchange/study abroad students who fail formal examinations at the first diet. Students will

be informed of the policy and arrangements for resubmissions at the beginning of their

period of study at GCU, i.e. when students are first introduced to a module by the module

leader.

Schools may require students to take the formal resit examination or, for example, ask

students to:

Take an alternative piece of work (such as a coursework) instead of a formal

examination.

Where an alternate form of assessment is not permitted, for example, by a

Professional or Statutory body:

Take the same resit examination as GCU students at their home institution (at the

same time as GCU students and administered by colleagues at the home institution

and by School administrators at GCU)

5.3 Procedure to be followed by Applicants

5.3.1 Students may apply for this service by completing a request form provided by the

Examinations Office. The completed form must be submitted to the Student

Administration Services no later than 7 weeks prior to the start of the August diet and no

exception will be made for submission outwith this timescale.

5.3.2 The Student Administration Services will review your application form in order to confirm

your eligibility for the service with regard to the criterion that for personal reasons you

reside over 500 miles from Glasgow. The decision of the appropriate Director (or

nominee) in this respect is final.

5.3.3 All applications must be authorised by the appropriate School responsible for the student‟s

programme. This will include confirmation that the personal reasons indicated on your

application form which require you to reside over 500 miles from Glasgow are valid.

5.3.4 It is the student‟s responsibility to locate an establishment to sit their exam(s). Students

must first look to take their exams at a British Council Office. If there is no British

Council Office in their home country or the British Council is unable to host the exam they

should look for an alternative venue which must be an Institute of Higher Education. No

other type of establishment will be considered appropriate.

5.3.5 The University will apply a fee of £75 for each examination taken at a host institution

under this procedure. The fee is payable at the time of application.

5.3.6 Students will also be liable for any administrative fee charged by the host institution.

The University retains the right to withdraw from the arrangement at any stage if it cannot be

satisfied, at its sole discretion, on the security of the examination or for any other reason associated

with the administration of the examinations(s). In such cases, the application fee for the examination

will be returned to the student. In cases where the student withdraws from the arrangement,

application fees will not be refunded

83

6. Notes of Guidance to Academic Staff on Information to be provided to Students

to Assist Their Preparation for Unseen Assessments (including assessments

containing an unseen component)

Preamble

Assessments at Glasgow Caledonian University may take a variety of formats and instruments of

assessment may include seen elements which have been approved through normal channels as part of the

institution‟s ongoing procedures for module approval.

The following notes of guidance are designed to relate specifically to instruments of assessment

which are wholly unseen or to those unseen elements of assessment within formal coursework or

examinations. The need for such guidance has been identified through the student Academic Appeals

process and also in student reports within Annual Programme Board Reports. It is anticipated that by

adhering to the following practices, the risk of inappropriate information on the content of unseen

assessments being provided unintentionally and/or informally to students should be minimised if not

entirely removed.

Paramount within the guidance is that, for all modules at GCU, everything which a student needs to know

about an assessment should be provided in a written format. Thereafter, no further information should be

divulged verbally by lecturers except where this is a re-iteration of what is provided in the written format.

It is important that information given to all students taking a particular unseen assessment is standardised.

No individual student, or group of students, should be given any information which may provide, or

appear to provide, an advantage over any other student(s).

The following guidelines constitute the bounds of acceptable information which should be provided to all

students undertaking modules at Glasgow Caledonian University which contain an unseen assessment or

to those elements of assessment containing an unseen component:

Clear details on the format and structure of any formal coursework or examination paper forming part

of the overall assessment for a module must be made available to students either within module

handbooks or in notes of guidance distributed to all students on that module - such guidance should

clearly indicate the weighting attached to different elements of the paper and, for formal examinations,

how many questions will be derived from each distinct area of the syllabus - Under no circumstances

should the specific topics of individual questions in a formal unseen examination be divulged to

students

A general guide to the marking criteria which will be used by all lecturers when marking coursework

or examinations for a particular module should be provided within module handbooks or in notes of

guidance. Two exemplars of marking criteria are given on pages 72 and 73; however, it is

recognised that different discipline areas may have adaptations of these models to suit their own

modules. However, these must be consistent with the levels outlined in the exemplars. The

marking criteria should provide clear guidance to students on what is expected. This will help to

ensure transparency and consistency within an effective Quality Assurance framework.

All students should be made aware of the different types of responses which may be required to

individual questions, e.g. short response, case study, essay etc, and also the different styles of

responses which may be required, e.g. give an account of, discuss, relate, compare and contrast,

describe, write an essay entitled etc. Students should be provided with guidance on the features of

answers which will gain certain marks.

For existing modules, students should be directed towards examples of previous examination or

coursework papers as a guide as to what may reasonably be expected in terms of assessment

For new modules being delivered for the first time, students should be given exemplars of the types of

examination questions which may be set along with clear guidance on the structure and format of any

coursework or formal examination papers along the lines indicated above

84

Exemplar A

Examples of the marking criteria which may be used for marking assessments within a specific module

Mark Comment

75-100% Excellent - Outstanding in every/almost every respect, and revealing wide reading, lucid

writing, extensive knowledge and thorough understanding

70-74% Excellent - Outstanding but at a less elevated level than the above

65-69% Very Good - wide knowledge and good understanding of material covered in the module

but without the insight associated with excellence. Clear accurate presentation

60-64% Very Good - as above but may contain minor errors and omissions

55-59% Good - Good knowledge and understanding of the topic but likely to be limited to lecture

material and the answer may be marred by poor presentation, inaccuracy or omission

50-54% Good - as above but with more defects

45-49% Satisfactory - Factually correct for the most part but with pronounced shortcomings in

content, relevance or accuracy

40-44% Just Satisfactory - A weak answer but containing just enough relevant facts and evidence

of understanding to justify a pass

35-39% Marginal Fail - major weaknesses, inaccuracies, irrelevancies and omissions but

containing a few relevant facts; could be considered for compensation

30-34% Fail - but containing some relevant facts and some evidence of understanding

< 30% Clear Fail - little or no relevant material, generally little or no evidence of understanding

For honours programmes:

Marks between 70-100% equate to the performance expected of a 1st class honours candidate;

Marks between 60-69% equate to the performance expected of a 2i class honours candidate;

Marks between 50-59% equate to the performance expected of a 2ii class honours candidate;

Marks between 40-49% equate to the performance expected of a 3rd

class honours candidate.

85

Exemplar B

Examples of the marking criteria which may be used for marking assessments within a specific module

Mark Comment

81-100% Work of exceptional quality that shows an excellent command of the subject in question

and originality in thought and extent of knowledge acquired

70-80% Work that shows an excellent, though not necessarily faultless, command of the subject in

question, together with elements of originality in thought and in the extent of knowledge

acquired

60-69% Work that shows an above average command of the subject in question, possessing

qualities of thoroughness, conscientiousness, and insight

50-59% Work that reveals that the student has acquired a basic command of the material covered

in the course

40-49% Work that shows some understanding of the material covered in the course, but of a poor

quality and with elements of misunderstanding and lack of thoroughness

35-39% Work that fails to come up to the standard expected of University students admitted to an

Honours degree, but where there are sufficient signs that understanding prevails over

misunderstanding and could be considered for compensation

30-34% Fail - but containing some relevant facts and some evidence of understanding

0-29% Fail - Work that contains very few, if any, relevant facts and shows little or no

understanding of the material covered

For honours programmes:

Marks between 70-100% equate to the performance expected of a 1st class honours candidate;

Marks between 60-69% equate to the performance expected of a 2i class honours candidate;

Marks between 50-59% equate to the performance expected of a 2ii class honours candidate;

Marks between 40-49% equate to the performance expected of a 3rd

class honours candidate.

86

7. Guidance Note on Assessment Loading

Examinations

Type of

Module

Proportion of total

module assessment

Suggested upper limit on

examination time

10 100% 1.5 hours at L1 and L2

2 hours at L3, LH and LM

10 70% 1.5 hours

10 50% and under 1 hour

20 100% 2 hours at L1 and L2

3 hours at L3, LH and LM

20 70% 2 hours

20 50% and under 2 hours

Coursework

Type of

Module

Proportion of total

module assessment

Suggested upper limit

10 100% 1500 words or equivalent at L1 and L2

2000 words or equivalent at L3, LH and LM



10 50% and under 1000 words or equivalent at L1 and L2






20 50% and under 1500 words or equivalent at L1 and L2


87

Project/Dissertation

Type of

Module

Suggested upper limit

20 up to 5000 words or equivalent at LH

up to 7000 words or equivalent at LM


up to 14000 words or equivalent at LM


up to 20,000 words or equivalent at LM

Notes

1. It is acknowledged that the above guidance on coursework assignments will not apply in some

situations e.g. laboratory reports

2. Assessments should be proportionate to the size of the unit of study. A 6,000 word coursework

essay for a ten credit unit is clearly too much, since a student studying in six such units would be

expected to write 36,000 words that Trimester.

3. As far as possible, individual units of study of 10 credits should be tested by one method of

assessment only. Whilst it is recognised that it is the learning outcome which dictates the

assessment, staff designing modules should be aware of the potential overload issue when setting

the outcomes and when determining the balance between the different components which

contribute to the total assessment for the module. There may also be the requirements of a

professional body to take into consideration, for example, the need to assess both practical/clinical

and academic elements within even a 10 credit module.

4. In formulating assessments, colleagues should pay attention to the forms of assessment which

students are being asked to undertake on other units of study offered as part of that course. A

balance of assessment is desirable.

88

8. Procedures for the Security, Approval and Retention of Examination Papers

The following sets out the University‟s requirements for the security, approval and retention of unseen

examination papers, their associated marking schemes and model answers. It will be the responsibility of

each individual School to ensure that appropriate processes and procedures are in place to meet these

requirements.

1. Each Module Leader is responsible for the production of all assessment instruments required to complete

the module.

2. The appropriate draft examination papers for both first and resit diets, together with associated marking

schemes or model answers and a record of the process used for internal moderation, will be forwarded by

the responsible School to the designated External Examiner for each assessment.

3. Each External Examiner is required to certify that they have received, read and moderated the

examination papers sent to them.

4. Where an External Examiner requires changes to be made to a draft examination paper, the changes

should be annotated on the paper and each annotation initialled on the draft. The draft should be returned

to the appropriate member of academic staff together with a note from the External Examiner stating that,

subject to the completion of the annotated amendments, the paper is approved.

5. Where an External Examiner feels unable to approve a draft examination paper, the paper should be

certified as received and read, with clear and specific reasons provided as to why approval has been

withheld.

6. The record and certification of each External Examiner‟s moderation will be maintained on file within

the School for two years following completion of the academic year in which the examination was

delivered.

7. Approved examination papers must be certified and delivered by the Module Leader in accordance with

local School procedures no later than the deadline notified by the School Office.

8. Once approved and delivered in accordance with School procedures, under no circumstances must a copy

of an examination paper be maintained either electronically or in hard copy by any member of staff, other

than those authorised by the Executive Dean to do so, prior to the examination taking place.

9. The copying of all examination papers must be undertaken by Print and Design Services unless otherwise

agreed by one of the following: Director of Student Experience, Head of Academic Governance, Head of

Student Administration Services, Assessment and Graduation Manager.

10. The School will be responsible for ensuring the secure delivery of the requisite number of each approved

examination paper in a sealed envelope to the Examinations Office no later than the deadline previously

notified by the University Examinations Office. The Examinations Office shall provide a receipt of

delivery and shall secure the papers until their release to the Senior Invigilator on the day of the

examination.

11. The School will ensure that an electronic copy of each examination paper submitted by the School is

entered into the central University Past Examination Paper database no later than 2 months following the

completion of each assessment diet. Where, for whatever reason, it is not possible to convert all or part

of an examination paper into an electronic document, then a paper copy shall be held in the School Office

and a copy provided to the Examinations Office. All examination papers will be held on the database for

a period of six years for internal reference purposes.

Approved by Senate 13 December 2002 + Amended by APPC on 21 May 2003

89

9. Procedure for the Submission of Examination Papers and the Collection of

Worked Examination Scripts

1 Standard University Front Cover for Examination Papers

The University Assessment Regulations stipulate that all assessment papers must have the

standard University front cover. A sample form of this document is issued to Module Leaders

(and programme administrators) with examination dates.

2 Submission of Examination Papers

Module Leaders or their nominees are required to submit the appropriate number of examination

papers to the Examinations Office (Room M122A) a minimum of three working weeks prior to

the beginning of the week in which the examination is scheduled to take place.

An examination envelope cover sheet must be completed for each venue in which the

examination is running. A copy of the cover sheet is issued to Module Leaders (and programme

administrators) with Exam dates. Examination envelopes with blank front covers can be obtained

from the Examinations Office.

3 Attendance at examination venue by Module Leader or appropriate specialist

Appendix 1 paragraph 1.5 (v) of the University Assessment Regulations stipulate that the Module

Leader is responsible to the Executive Dean of School for ensuring that for each examination paper,

the Module Leader or other appropriate specialist is present in the examination room at the

beginning of the examination and remains present for a further 10 minutes to answer any legitimate

questions from candidates.

4 Secure submission of additional materials/answer sheets to be submitted by Examination

Candidates

Any materials and/or answer sheets (e.g. for multiple choice examinations) that candidates have

to submit with the examination script booklet must have a hole punched in them (at the top-left

hand corner) to allow students to attach them to the examination script booklet with treasury

tags.

5 Collection of Worked Examination Scripts

Please note that staff will be required to produce staff identity cards upon collection of

completed examination scripts for marking. Members of staff are also required to sign out the

examination scripts and by doing so are agreeing to ensure that they are kept secure and

confidential at all times.

In order to ensure the effective and secure administration of an examination diet there are

restricted times during the examination period that Module Leaders or their nominees can

collect examination papers from the Examinations Office and these are as follows:

MORNING: 0930hrs – 1130hrs AFTERNOON: 1400hrs – 1600hrs

10.00 – 12.00 (December only)

If you wish to collect worked examination scripts from an afternoon session on the same

day as the examination, please contact the Examinations Office staff (x3336) who will

advise you of the procedure.

90

10. Policy on the Retention of Students' Work

10.1 Student work should be retained for a minimum of one calendar year from the date of the relevant

Assessment Board.

10.2 This applies to both coursework and examination scripts.

10.3 For the purposes of a student's third year marks being taken into consideration for the honours

classification, the assessed work for all modules at Level 3 and above, taken when the student is on

Level 3 and/or Level 4 must be retained for one year from the date of the relevant Assessment

Board (i.e. the Board at which the honours classification is determined). This will include all

honours degrees unless specific exemption has been given.

10.4 In cases where professional or statutory bodies have a requirement for elements of student's work to

be retained for a longer period, these requirements will take precedence.

10.5 Regulation 2.5 of the Assessment and Graduation Processes indicates that "Save where the relevant

Assessment Board has determined otherwise, any materials submitted by a candidate for

examination, including written replies to examination papers, essays, dissertations or reports,

whensover written or prepared, will not be returned to candidates ….". In cases where Assessment

Boards have agreed that material may be returned to candidates, arrangements must be made by the

academic unit for the retention of that material, for example, by keeping a copy or, in cases where

the piece of work is not in a written format, retaining similar evidence of the production of that

piece of work

10.6 At the end of this period, it is important that any the material to be disposed of is disposed of in

accordance with the University's procedures for the disposal of confidential waste.

Approved by Senate: 26 April 2002

91

11 Academic Appeals

11.1 A student who wishes to exercise their right to appeal, on the grounds of procedural or other

irregularity, must do so by completing an Academic Appeal form which must be submitted to the

Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement within two calendar weeks of publication of

the decision against which the appeal is being made. Appeals will not normally be considered if they

are submitted outwith the two calendar weeks‟ period unless the student can provide good reasons

why the delay has occurred. No appeal will be considered if it is received later than six months from

the date of the original decision. The appeal form should include full details of the grounds on which

the appeal is based and be accompanied by any supporting documentation.

11.2 All appeal forms shall be given preliminary consideration by the Department of Governance and

Quality Enhancement, who shall be empowered to act on behalf of the Academic Appeals Committee

in dismissing appeals that are not able to be considered under the University‟s regulations for

academic appeals, do not have grounds for appeal or do not have sufficient evidence to support an

appeal. In all such cases the Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement shall inform the

student accordingly and there shall be no further right of appeal. The student may, within seven days

of notification of the decision, request a meeting with the Department of Governance and Quality

Enhancement to clarify the reasons for the rejection of the appeal at this stage.

11.3 On receipt of an appeal form, the Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement will notify,

when appropriate, the relevant Assessment Board Chair who shall prepare a written statement

providing, in detail, the proposed outcome of the appeal, including any proposed change to the

original Assessment Board decision. This statement will normally be lodged with the Department of

Governance and Quality Enhancement within five working days of notification.

11.4 Disagreement with the academic judgment of an Assessment Board, (e.g. with regard to assessment

marks, progression decisions or final level of award) cannot, in itself, constitute grounds for an

appeal. Also, an appeal cannot be considered that is based on information which has already been

given full and proper consideration by an Assessment Board or that is based on information which,

for no good reason, was not made available to the Assessment Board at the time it took the decision

in question.

11.5 Where the Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement is satisfied that there appears to be

sufficient grounds for appeal, they will investigate the case and seek a resolution in consultation with

the relevant academic staff35

. Where a resolution is achieved, agreed by the Department Governance

and Quality and the Chair of the Assessment Board, the Department of Governance and Quality

Enhancement shall inform the student accordingly and there will be no further right of appeal. Where

an agreed resolution is not possible, the appropriate Director (or nominee) will consult with the Chair

of the Academic Appeals Committee and, where necessary, convene a meeting of the Academic

Appeals Committee within twenty-eight days of receipt of the student's appeal and shall provide the

student with seven days' notice of the date, time and place of the meeting.

11.6 Where a meeting of the Academic Appeals Committee is deemed to be necessary, appellants shall

have the right to appear personally before the Academic Appeals Committee and to be accompanied

by a person of their choice.

11.7 The Academic Appeals Committee may, if it so wishes, consult with the Chair or some other

appointed representative of an Assessment Board against whose decision an appeal is being

considered, and it may call for any information it requires, including details of student attendance and

academic performance, in order to make an informed decision.

35

Where an appeal is upheld and the original decision of an Assessment Board is changed, an Assessment Board Chair‟s

Action must be taken immediately.

92

11.8 Should the Academic Appeals Committee decide that a case for reconsideration has not been proven,

the appeal shall be dismissed. The Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement shall inform

the appellant in writing of the reasons for the dismissal and there shall be no further right of appeal.

11.9 In those cases where the Academic Appeals Committee requires an Assessment Board to reconsider

its decision, the appropriate Director (or nominee) will inform the Assessment Board Chair in writing

accordingly and the Assessment Board shall reconvene forthwith to reconsider its decision.

11.10 In all cases referred to an Assessment Board for reconsideration, the External Examiner(s) shall be

informed of the appeal by the Chair of the Assessment Board and be given full information on the

background to the appeal.

11.11 If the Assessment Board rejects an appeal and if, in the opinion of the Academic Appeals Committee,

due and proper account has still not been taken of the relevant factors, then the Academic Appeals

Committee can recommend to Senate that the decision be annulled. The Academic Appeals

Committee may recommend to Senate that the decision be annulled if it is not possible to reconvene

the Assessment Board to hear the appeal.

11.12 The appellant and other students affected, if appropriate, shall be informed in writing by the

Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement after the ruling of a decision of annulment and

shall be informed of the follow-up action being taken by Senate.

11.13 If the External Examiner(s) cannot attend the meeting of the Assessment Board at which the matter is

to be discussed, the views of the External Examiner(s) shall be sought prior to the meeting, preferably

in writing.

11.14 All factors relevant to the appeal and the Assessment Board's decision shall be minuted.

11.15 The Assessment Board Chair shall, as soon as possible after the meeting of the Assessment Board,

inform the Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement in writing of the Board's decision.

11.16 The Academic Appeals Committee may decide that the case in support of an appeal is not sufficiently

strong or that the material submitted has already been properly considered by the Assessment Board

concerned. In either of such circumstances the appeal shall be rejected and there is no further right of

appeal. In the following circumstances the Academic Appeals Committee may require an Assessment

Board to reconsider its decision:

11.16.1 If the Academic Appeals Committee is satisfied by evidence from a student or any other

person that there has been a material administrative error, or that the assessments were not

conducted in accordance with the current regulations for the programme, or that some other

material irregularity has occurred.

11.17 The Academic Appeals Committee may, if it considers that the Assessment Board has not taken due

and proper account of the relevant factors as specified in 11.16.1 above, remit the matter for

consideration by Senate and may advise Senate to annul the decision of the Assessment Board.

11.18 In cases where it is not possible to reconvene an Assessment Board, the Academic Appeals

Committee may recommend to Senate that the decision of the Assessment Board be annulled without

making a prior request for reconsideration. If an error or irregularity is found to have affected more

than one candidate, Senate may be advised to annul the whole assessment or any part thereof.

93

Academic Appeals Committee Terms of Reference

11.19 The Academic Appeals Committee is directly responsible to Senate and has the following terms of

reference:

To consider appeals from registered students against University Assessment Boards' decisions

which result in their studies being terminated or their normal progression being delayed or

which relate to the classification of their awards.

Composition of the Academic Appeals Committee

11.20 The Academic Appeals Committee consists of a Chair who shall be nominated by the Chair of

Senate, four members of full-time academic staff and a full-time officer of the Students' Association.

Appellants have the right to object to the involvement of a representative of the Students' Association

and, in such circumstances, the representative of the Students' Association would not attend or take

any other part in the proceedings.

11.21 The four members of the Academic Appeals Committee are drawn from a pool of full-time academic

staff appointed by the School Boards for a period of three years. No member may be involved in

considering an appeal against a decision of an Assessment Board of which he or she is a member.

11.22 The Chair and two other members will constitute a quorum and meetings will be clerked by a

representative of the Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement.

94

ACADEMIC APPEALS

Appeal form received & acknowledged by Governance & Quality. Appeals must be

received within 2 calendar weeks of publication of decision being appealed.

Is the appeal within scope of the academic appeals regulations and does it

contain valid grounds for appeal?

Appeal is dismissed. Governance & Quality

informs student. There is no further right of appeal.

YES

Governance & Quality gives preliminary consideration to appeal and notifies

appropriate Assessment Board Chair who prepares a written statement to be lodged with Governance & Quality, normally within five working days.

Has a satisfactory resolution been achieved and appeal

upheld following initial consideration?

Governance & Quality consults Chair of Academic

Appeals Committee and convenes a meeting of the

Academic Appeals Committee within 28 days of

receipt of appeal.

Is the appeal upheld?

Academic Appeals Committee requires Assessment Board to

reconsider its original decision.

Assessment Board considers appeal and outcome reported to Governance

& Quality who reports the outcome to Academic Appeals Committee.

Has the Academic Appeals Committee concluded that the

Assessment Board has still not taken due and proper account of the

relevant factors?

Appeal is referred to Senate by the Academic Appeals Committee with the recommendation that the decision of the Assessment Board be annulled.

Senate decides on annulment as appropriate and

Governance & Quality informs student of final decision and

any follow up action, if appropriate. There is no further right of appeal.

Decision of the Assessment Board is confirmed and student

informed by Governance & Quality. There is no further right

of appeal.

Appeal is dismissed. Governance & Quality informs student. There

is no further right of appeal.

Appeal is upheld. Governance & Quality informs student. There


Does Governance & Quality believe that

there are still grounds for further

consideration following feedback from Assessment

Board Chair?

Appeal is dismissed. Governance & Quality informs student. There


YES

YES

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

95

Glasgow Caledonian University

Academic Appeal Form - Help Sheet for Students

What is an appeal?

An appeal is a formal procedure by which a registered student can appeal, on the grounds of procedural or other

irregularity, against a University Assessment Board decision which result in their studies being terminated or

their normal progression being delayed or which relate to the classification of their awards. In order to submit

your appeal you must complete the University‟s Academic Appeal Form.

On what grounds can I appeal against an Assessment Board’s decision?

Appeals can be made on the grounds of material administrative error, regulatory irregularity or other

material irregularity, for example that the assessments were not conducted in accordance with current

regulations for the programme. You must provide documentary evidence in support of your appeal.

Academic Appeals cannot be made on the grounds of personal or medical factors. In such cases, students should

submit a Retrospective Mitigating Circumstances Form (refer to Appendix 6 of the University Assessment

Regulations).

An appeal will be rejected, and therefore not re-considered by the Assessment Board or referred to the

Academic Appeals Committee, in the following circumstances:

1. The case in support of the appeal is not sufficiently strong

2. The information contained in the appeal has already been properly considered by the Assessment Board

concerned

3. The appeal is against a requirement to re-sit an assessment at the normal re-sit diet

4. The appeal is based solely on a request for another opportunity to be given

5. The appeal is based solely on disagreement with the academic judgement of the Assessment Board

6. The appeal is based solely on the student not understanding or not being aware of the published

assessment regulations and procedures for a module or programme.

How long do I have to submit the appeal?

You have ten working days (two calendar weeks) from the publication date of the Assessment Board‟s

decision. Appeals will not normally be considered if received outwith this period, unless you can provide valid

reasons for the delay. No appeal received after six months from the date of the Board‟s decision will be

considered.

How do I appeal?

96

The appeal must be made on the University‟s Academic Appeal Form available from:

The Base on the Ground Floor of the Saltire Centre

The Exams Guide website at http://www.gcu.ac.uk/student/exams/index.html

Who considers my appeal?

All appeals are given preliminary consideration by the Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement. If

the Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement is satisfied there are grounds for appeal, the appeal may

proceed to the Academic Appeals Committee only where a satisfactory resolution cannot be reached in

consultation with the relevant academic staff. The Academic Appeals Committee will normally meet within 28

days of the Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement receiving your appeal.

How long do I have to wait to hear the result of my appeal?

The Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement will notify you in writing as soon as possible once a

decision has been made.

What are the possible outcomes of my appeal?

The appeal may be upheld. An example outcome may be to treat an attempt as void or to allow to

proceed with your studies.

The appeal may not be upheld. In such decisions there is no further right of appeal.

Where do I send the completed Academic Appeal Form?

You can submit your appeal form and supporting evidence in the following ways:

By hand, to the Academic Appeals Drop Box, located at the Base.

By post, to Academic Appeals, Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement, Glasgow Caledonian

University, Cowcaddens Road, G4 0BA.

http://www.gcu.ac.uk/student/exams/index.html

97

ACADEMIC APPEAL FORM

Before completing this form please take time to read the attached information on Academic Appeals

PERSONAL DETAILS

Name: Student ID. No.

Address for Correspondence:

E-mail address:

Telephone Number:

School:

Programme:

ASSESSMENT PERIOD

Please indicate the assessment period which your appeal relates to (please tick):

May/June August/September

January/February Other (please indicate month)

GROUNDS FOR APPEAL

Please detail the grounds on which you are appealing (continue on a separate sheet if required). Grounds include

material administrative error, regulatory irregularity or other material irregularity. Academic Appeals cannot be

made on the grounds of personal or medical factors. In such cases, students should submit a Retrospective

Mitigating Circumstances Form (refer to Section 6.11 of the University’s Assessment Regulations).

Please provide details of the written evidence you are submitting in support of your appeal (continue on additional

sheet if required). Please note that failure to supply valid supporting evidence, as required by the Academic Appeals

Regulations, is likely to result in the appeal being rejected.

Please detail modules and/or assessments and the Trimester the appeal relates to.

98

Please indicate your preferred outcome of this appeal

The information given in this form must be accurate and must have, or must be believed to have, had a direct and adverse effect

on your academic performance. You MUST sign and date this declaration:

The information I have given on this form is, to the best of my knowledge, true and has had a direct adverse effect on the assessment(s)

named.

I am aware of the timescales for the submission of Academic Appeals.

I give my permission for the information contained within the appeal and supporting documentation to be considered by appropriate

members of University Staff.

If you provide information or certificates which are subsequently found to be falsified or misleading in any way, you may be

liable to action being taken against you under the Code of Student Discipline.

Signature: Date:

Please submit completed appeal forms:

By hand, to the Academic Appeals Drop Box, located at the Base.

By post, to Academic Appeals, Department of Governance and Quality Enhancement, Glasgow Caledonian University,

Cowcaddens Road, G4 0BA.

LEC/Appeals/Oct2013

99

12. Graduation and Awards Regulations

12.1 Conditions of Entry to Graduation

12.1.1 Graduation is open only to registered students of the University who have fulfilled the

academic requirements of their programme and who have been recommended for the

appropriate award by the relevant Assessment Board (hereafter referred to as Graduands).

12.1.2 In order to receive their award parchment and become a graduate of the University,

Graduands must register for their graduation and pay the appropriate registration fee as set

by the University. A graduand will not be deemed to be a graduate of the University until

they have registered and completed the process of graduation at a University graduation

and awards ceremony, either in person or in absentia, and their name and level of award

included in the official graduation listings.

12.1.3 Potential graduands are required to register for graduation within the specified registration

period by applying University graduation procedures as determined by the University.

Potential graduands will be notified via their official GCU email address. Dates for

registration will be published on the Graduation website and the student academic

calendar.

12.1.4 Potential graduands will be registered for gradation in the name that is recorded on the

Student Records System at the time the award decision was made by the Assessment

Board. The award parchment will bear the registered name of the graduand and cannot be

changed at a later date.

12.2 Attendance and In Absentia Reports

12.2.1 The Graduation and Awards Unit will post the appropriate parchments(s) to all graduates

who have registered to graduate in absentia, and have paid the appropriate fee, by recorded

delivery to the address provide by the graduate on his/her graduation registration form.

12.2.2 A graduand who indicates on his/her graduation registration form that he/she intends to

attend the graduation ceremony in person, but subsequently does not attend the graduation

ceremony, will be deemed to have graduated in absentia. Such a graduate will not be

eligible to attend another ceremony for the purpose of receiving the specific award(s) with

which he/she has been deemed to have graduated in absentia.

12.2.3 Any graduand who has not returned to their programme of studies and/or who has not

accepted the University‟s invitation to register for graduation by the beginning of October

of the year following their recommendation for an award, will be graduated in absentia at

the November ceremonies. The graduation parchment will only be posted to the graduate‟s

home address or be available for collection from the University once the graduation

registration fee has been paid.

12.3 Progression through Programme of Study

12.3.1 Certificate/Diploma/Unclassified Degree awards will be conferred only on students who

exit at that level of the programme. They will not normally be conferred on students who

continue their studies immediately to the Diploma/Degree and Honours level respectively

or who transfer to a different programme within the University using their existing credits.

Where a student does not successfully complete the Diploma/Degree or Honours level and

he/she is eligible for the Certificate/Diploma or Degree award, he/she will be issued with

the appropriate award.

100

12.3.2 A student who successfully completes the Honours level will be conferred with the

appropriate Honours award as determined by the Assessment Board. Such a student does

not have the right to be conferred with the Undergraduate Degree award based on a

previous session(s) performance at Level III.

12.3.3 University Postgraduate Certificate and named Postgraduate Certificate awards will be

conferred only on students who exit at that stage of their programme of study. However,

they will not normally be conferred on students who continue their studies immediately to

the Postgraduate Diploma and Masters level respectively. Where a student does not

successfully complete the Postgraduate Diploma or Masters stage, and he/she is eligible for

and awarded the University Postgraduate Certificate/Postgraduate Certificate or University

Postgraduate Diploma/Postgraduate Diploma, he/she will be issued the University

Postgraduate Certificate/Postgraduate Certificate or University Postgraduate

Diploma/Postgraduate Diploma, as appropriate.

12.3.4 All potential graduands who leave the University before the end of their programme of

study and have eligibility for an exit award, must contact the Graduation and Awards Unit

and register to graduate either in person or in absentia.

12.4 Appeals

12.4.1 Once a graduand has graduated from the University, they are deemed to have accepted the

recommendation of the Assessment Board and to have become a graduate of the

University. Academic appeals from graduates against award recommendations of the

Assessment Boards will not be considered by the University.

12.4.2 Graduands who wish to appeal the award recommendation of an Assessment Board may

do so by utilising the regulations of the Academic Appeals Committee. Graduands who

lodge an academic appeal have the following options:

i) Attend the graduation ceremony as planned while the Appeal is being considered;

ii) Defer graduation until the next set of ceremonies by which time the result of the

Appeal will be known;

iii) Graduate in absentia and await the outcome of their Appeal.

12.4.3 Graduands who wish to take up Option (i) will be included in the graduation listings with

the award they are appealing against. They will not be given their award parchment at the

ceremony but will receive a presentation folder with a letter. Once the Appeal has been

heard and a decision made and the School has made a change (where applicable) to the

student‟s award decision36

, the Graduation and Awards Unit will post the award

parchment, by recorded delivery, to the graduate‟s home address. The graduate will not be

invited to attend another ceremony. If the Appeal is upheld, the graduate‟s name and new

level of award will be included in the next set of graduation ceremonies to record the

higher award.

12.4.4 Graduands who wish to take up Option (ii) will be invited to attend the next set of

ceremonies once the decision of their Appeal has been reached. The award parchment will

be presented to them at the ceremony.

12.4.5 Graduands who wish to take up Option (iii) will be included in the graduation listings and

their award parchment will be posted, recorded delivery, once a decision has been made.

The graduate will not be invited to attend another ceremony. If the appeal is upheld, the

36

Any change to a student‟s award decision must be recorded by an Assessment Board Chair‟s Action Sheet and the change

must be made by the School on the University‟s Central Record System before an award parchment can be sent to the

graduate.

101

graduate‟s name and new level of award will be included in the next set of graduation

ceremonies to record the higher award.

12.4.6 Graduands who appeal against the decision of an Assessment Board which states that they

are not eligible for an award, cannot attend a graduation and awards ceremony or be

included in the graduation listings.

12.5 Graduation and Awards Unit

12.5.1 The Graduation and Awards Unit establishes and maintains the official University

Graduation and Awards listings.

12.5.2 The Graduation and Awards Unit is the only office in the University which is authorised to

issue award parchments bearing the University‟s Official Seal.

12.5.3 No duplicate copies of award parchments will be issued by the Graduation and Awards

Unit. However, graduates may apply for a replacement of lost, stolen or damaged award

parchments. Satisfactory evidence of loss, damage or theft must be provided and a

declaration signed by the graduate confirming the validity of the request. A fee will be

levied for the issue of replacement award parchments, as determined by the University,

from time to time.

12.6 Regulation of the issue of University Awards and Appropriate Fees

12.6.1 The issuing of all University awards shall be subject to these Regulations as amended and

approved by Senate, from time to time, and to such additional fees as the University Court

may, from time to time, determine.

12.6.2 Prospective graduands who have outstanding debt(s) to the University will normally be

excluded from attendance at a Graduation and Awards Ceremony and from receipt of an

academic parchment.

102

13. Project and Dissertation Supervision

If there are particular reasons for not following the procedures below, the reasons must be clearly

documented in the minutes of the School Board and the deviation highlighted in the Module Handbook.

13.1 Administration of Supervision

13.1.1 The Module Leader for a dissertation/project module shall normally discharge the duties of

Dissertation/Project Co-ordinator. Responsibility for the implementation of these guidelines shall

(unless otherwise specified) rest with the School.

13.1.2 The duties of the Dissertation/Project Co-coordinator will normally include overseeing the processes

by which:

research methods are taught (where these form part of the learning outcomes of the module) (see

also 13.2 below);

titles are approved (see also 13.3 below);

supervisors are allocated;

guidelines are issued to students and supervisors;

students' progress is monitored;

students' work is assessed;

grievances are dealt with (see also 13.4 below).

ethical approval is given for any research, including questionnaires and surveys, involving human

participants

enhanced disclosure is sought, if necessary

proposals comply with health and safety legislation;

13.2 Research Methods

Programme Boards shall ensure that the programme of study of each student who is required to submit

a dissertation/project is structured so as to ensure that they are adequately prepared in research methods

appropriate to their discipline and programme.

Programme Boards shall be required within their Approved Programme Documentation to identify

where such preparation in research methods is received.

13.3 Approval of Outline Proposals

13.3.1 Schools shall have in place mechanisms which ensure the feasibility of a student's choice of title is

established at the earliest possible date. The criteria used in the approval of a dissertation/project

title include:

is it related to the student's own range of interests?

is it related to the aims and objectives of the student‟s programme?

does it combine an academic approach with some practical work?

is the problem reasonably open-ended?

will it require an original contribution from the student?

are the resources required readily available?

13.3.2 In cases where students are required to produce an outline proposal for approval, such a proposal

should be submitted by students to the Dissertation/Project Co-ordinator as early as possible.

Schools may give consideration to the outline proposal being formally assessed so as to encourage

students to produce an outline proposal of high quality.

It is noted that in respect of certain dissertation/project modules, students choose a topic from a list

of suitable topics provided by the Module Leader. In such cases the outline proposal would discuss

how the student intended to approach the chosen topic.

103

13.4 Guidelines to Students and Staff

Schools shall ensure that for dissertation/project modules, a Module (Dissertation) Handbook is issued

to students. This Handbook should also be issued to supervisors. It is required that within the

Handbook there are clear arrangements for a grievance procedure and it must be explicitly stated that

where the student's grievance relates to the standard of supervision, no appeal against the mark

awarded for the dissertation/project will be entertained unless the student has initiated the grievance

procedure prior to submission of the dissertation/project.

The Module (Dissertation) Handbook must contain a copy of this section of the Assessment and

Graduation Procedures and also material relating to:

a timetable for dissertation/project stages and submission

the organisation and management of the dissertation/project

the procedure for approval of outline proposal and title

supervision arrangements (internal and external as appropriate) - including a statement of the

respective responsibilities of supervisor and supervisee

the presentation of the dissertation/project

the assessment schedule/statement of assessment criteria

arrangements for: student support

mechanisms for feedback from students

grievances

ethical approval

enhanced disclosure

13.5 Monitoring of Student Progress

13.5.1 It is required that supervisors keep a formal record of contact with students. Schools should develop

and issue a suitable pro forma for this purpose.

13.5.2 It is required that Dissertation/Project Co-ordinators ensure that supervisors provide them with

regular progress reports. It is required that these should be in a standard format developed by the

School for this purpose.

13.6 Respective Roles of Supervisor and Student

13.6.1 It is recommended that the supervisor should meet the student regularly. The ultimate responsibility

lies with the student for making contact and maintaining contact with the supervisor.

13.6.2 The supervisor and student should agree a set of control points for monitoring progress.

13.6.3 Supervisors are expected to warn students where there is a possibility of the student failing the

dissertation/project or of not realising their full potential in respect of the dissertation/project

component. However supervisors must avoid raising a student's expectation of a particular

classification and students should not be given any indication of the actual mark which the

dissertation/project is likely to be awarded.

104

What is expected of students?

student to be independent

student to seek advice and comment on their work from others

to have regular meetings with supervisor

student to be honest when reporting on progress

student to follow advice which has been specifically requested by the student

student to be interested in the work

student to take ultimate responsibility for the direction and content of the

dissertation/project

What is expected of supervisors?

to read the student's work and be familiar with it

to be available when necessary, and within reason

to be friendly, open, supportive

to give students serious attention during interviews

to be constructively critical

to have a good knowledge of the research area and to exchange ideas freely

to be aware of future pitfalls in the research topic

13.7 Assessment

13.7.1 A marking schedule or statement of assessment criteria must be made available to both students and

supervisors. It is required that this be included in the Module (Dissertation) Handbook.

13.7.2 There should be independent second marking of all dissertations/projects. The second examiner

should have no knowledge of the mark given by any other examiner. Where there is a failure to

agree a mark, it shall be the responsibility of the Dissertation/Project Co-ordinator to organise the

reassessment of the dissertation/project in order to reach a formal mark.

13.7.3 All markers should be required to complete a pro-forma statement/report to justify the mark awarded.

13.7.4 It is required that a representative sample of dissertations/projects should be scrutinised by the

appropriate External Examiner. Agreement should be reached with the External Examiner in respect

of the nature of the sample, which will be scrutinised.

13.7.5 Students should incorporate into their dissertation/project the following statement:

“this dissertation/project is my own original work and has not been submitted elsewhere in fulfilment

of the requirements of this or any other award”

Students are advised to retain all the data and materials relating to their dissertation/project

(including lab books) until after they have graduated.

Section 14 revised by Academic Secretariat August 2005

105

14. PROCEDURE FOR ANONYMOUS MARKING (FORMAL WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS)

Specialist examination stationery will be produced for anonymous marking.

Candidates will be required to enter their name and signature in the space provided for this

purpose on examination answer books, which they will then conceal by folding over and

gumming down the top right hand corner of the answer book

Candidates will also be required to enter their student ID number in the space provided for this purpose

on the examination answer books and also on any supplementary answer books or sheets they may use.

They should not enter their names or signatures on supplementary answer books or sheets.

Candidates will be responsible for entering the correct student ID number onto the examination answer

book.

In order to accommodate students who fail to bring their student ID card with them, student ID

numbers will be available from the attendance lists provided to the senior invigilator (procedures for

verifying the identity of students who do not bring their student ID cards are issued under separate

cover).

The names and signatures of candidates will remain concealed until the point at which the marks are to

be entered onto the examination results publishing system.

Once the internal marking process has been completed, a member of staff designated by the Head of

the academic unit concerned will reveal the candidates‟ names and transfer each candidate‟s mark(s) to

the examination mark sheets. Anonymity should be removed from scripts before they are issued to

External Examiners.

Examination mark sheets will include candidates‟ names and student ID numbers.

The current practice whereby Assessment Boards are presented with the names and marks of

candidates will continue.

Assessors will be expected to observe the principles and practice of anonymous marking.

Where any form of examination irregularity is suspected, the appropriate Director (or nominee) will

have the authority to allow the removal of anonymity on the examination answer books of the relevant

student(s).

106

15. POLICY ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK

1. At programme level, details of the practice of student performance feedback must be provided in

Student Programme Handbooks.

2. All modules will have a published student feedback strategy.

3. All Schools will adopt the Principles of Student Feedback practice (see below).

4. Student feedback will be given on all forms of assessed work and on any other group or individual

contributions to a module.

5. All modules will provide generic assessment feedback using Blackboard or some other

appropriate method.

6. All modules will set up bulletin boards which include the facility for students to pose questions.

7. All programmes will have a programme portal through which feedback can be provided on

meetings of SSCGs and Programme Boards.

Principles of Student Feedback

For each of the 7 principles of good feedback practice, some practical examples are presented below.

These examples do not represent a comprehensive list nor is any one example mandatory. However there

is an expectation that many modules will use one or more of these or alternative techniques to satisfy the

principles.

A: Facilitating the Development of Self-Assessment

Students can be asked to:

i. request the kinds of feedback they would like when they hand in work;

ii. identify the strengths and weaknesses in their own work in relation to criteria or standards before

handing it in for teacher feedback;

iii. reflect on their achievements and selecting work in order to compile a portfolio;

iv. set achievement milestones for a task and reflecting back on progress and forward to the next

stage of action;

v. give feedback on each other‟s work (peer feedback) also helps support the development of self-

assessment skills (for example, Gibbs, 1999).

B: Encouraging Teacher and Peer Dialogue

Good examples of feedback dialogue in class include:

i. providing feedback using one-minute papers (Angelo and Cross, 1990);

ii. reviewing feedback in tutorials where students are asked to read the feedback

iii. comments they have been given and discuss these with peers – they might also be asked to

suggest strategies to improve performance next time;

iv. asking students to find one or two examples of feedback comments that they found useful and to

explain how they helped. Other ways of using feedback dialogue in a planned way, for

assignments, might involve:

(a) having students give each other descriptive feedback on their work in relation to published

criteria before submission; (b) group projects.

C: Clarify Good Performance

Strategies that have proved effective in clarifying criteria, standards and goals include:

i. providing better definitions of requirements using carefully constructed criteria sheets and

performance level definitions;

ii. providing students with exemplar assignments with attached feedback;

iii. increasing discussion and reflection about criteria and standards in class;

iv. involving students in assessment exercises where they mark or comment on other students‟ work

in relation to defined criteria and standards;

107

v. workshops where students in collaboration with their teacher devise their own assessment criteria

for a piece of work;

vi. combinations of the above five have proved particularly effective.

D: Providing Opportunities to Close the Gap between Current and Desired Performance

Strategies for teachers that can help students use external feedback to close the gap include:

i. increasing the number of opportunities for resubmission;

ii. modelling the strategies that might be used to close a performance gap in class (for example,

model how to structure an essay when given a new question);

iii. writing down some „action points‟ alongside the normal feedback they provide. This would

identify for students what they should do next time to improve their performance;

iv. asking students to identify their own action points in class based on the feedback they have just

received thereby integrating the process into the teaching and learning situation and involving the

students more actively in the generation and planned use of feedback.

E: Delivers high quality information to students about their learning

Strategies that increase the quality of feedback include:

i. making sure that feedback is provided in relation to pre-defined criteria but paying particular

attention to the number of criteria;

ii. providing feedback soon after a submission;

iii. providing corrective advice, not just information on strengths/ weaknesses;

iv. limiting the amount of feedback so that it is used;

v. prioritising areas for improvement;

vi. providing online tests so that feedback can be accessed anytime, any place and as many times as

students wish;

vii. focusing on students with greatest difficulties.

F: Encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem

The implication of these studies for teaching practice is that motivation and self-esteem are more likely to

be enhanced when a course has many low-stakes tasks with feedback geared to providing information

about progress and achievement rather than high stakes summative assessment tasks where information is

only about success or failure or about how students compare with peers. Other strategies that would help

encourage high levels of motivation to succeed include:

i. providing marks on written work only after students have responded to feedback comments;

ii. allocating time for students to re-write selected pieces of work – this would help change students‟

expectations about purpose;

iii. automated testing with feedback;

iv. drafts and resubmissions.

G: Provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the teaching

Strategies are available to teachers to help generate and collate quality information about student learning

and help them decide how to use it include:

i. using one-minute papers where students carry out a small assessment task and hand this in

anonymously at the end of a class, such as What was the main point of this lecture? or What

question remains outstanding for you at the end of this teaching session?

ii. having students request the feedback they would like when they make an assignment submission;

iii. asking students to identify where they are having difficulties when they hand in assessed work;

iv. asking students in groups to identify „a question worth asking‟, based on prior study, that they

would like to explore for a short time at the beginning of the next tutorial;

v. quick evaluation strategies at key points in teaching. Approved by Academic Policy and Planning Committee 25 May 2005; Approved by Senate 11 October 2002 - Amended September 2003, October 2004,

November 2005 This version: amended October 2006: PW-Governance and Quality http://www.gcal.ac.uk/student/exams/

assessment regulations 13-14

Documents