procedure on assessment and...

(Procedure No: VCEC / GM /PO / 2018 / 001.v1) of 61

PROCEDURE ON ASSESSMENT AND LEARNING

Procedure Number: VCAS / AR /PR / 2018 / 014.v1

Title: Procedure on Assessment and Learning

Classification Category: Academic and Research

Approved Date: 14 November 2018

Type of Document: Public Internal

Review Date: 14 November 2020

Responsible for Implementation All Academic Units (Faculties, Schools, Centres, Institutes)

Approved by: Academic Senate

Stamp / Signature:

Contents

1. Purpose ............................................................................................................................... 4

2. Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 4

3. Scope .................................................................................................................................. 7

4. Procedure Description ........................................................................................................ 7

4.1 Curriculum Design ............................................................................................................... 7

4.2 Setting Assessments ........................................................................................................... 8

4.2.1 Setting coursework .................................................................................................... 9

4.2.2 Setting examination papers...................................................................................... 10

4.3 Pre-Moderation of Assessments ....................................................................................... 10

4.4 Information on Assessments ............................................................................................. 12

4.5 Assessment Submission and Administration of Examinations .......................................... 13

4.5.1 Coursework Submission ........................................................................................... 13

Submission One – Hard copy ................................................................................... 13

Submission Two – Online ......................................................................................... 14

Acceptable file types ................................................................................................ 15


Submission window and deadline ............................................................................ 15

Amending the submission deadline ......................................................................... 15

Late submission ....................................................................................................... 15

Quality of submitted work ....................................................................................... 16

Receipts for submission ........................................................................................... 16

Dissertation/thesis submission ................................................................................ 17

Assessment Offences ............................................................................................... 17

Submission under Reasonable Adjustment ............................................................. 18

4.5.2 Administration of Examinations ............................................................................... 20

Scheduling of Examinations ..................................................................................... 20

Exam Registrations ................................................................................................... 20

Registrations for Clash Examinations ....................................................................... 21

Clash examination time ........................................................................................... 21

Exam arrangements ................................................................................................. 21

4.5.3 Opportunities for Students Failing Assessments ...................................................... 22

Re-sit ........................................................................................................................ 22

Retake ...................................................................................................................... 24

4.5.5 Personal Circumstances ........................................................................................... 24

4.5.6 Cancellation or Disruption of Assessments .............................................................. 24

4.6 Marking and grading student performance ...................................................................... 25

Assessment of group work ................................................................................................ 26

Academic grievances and disputes about assessment processes and grades .................. 27

4.7 Post-Moderation of Assessments ..................................................................................... 27

Scaling of marks ................................................................................................................ 30

4.8 Feedback ........................................................................................................................... 31

4.9 Endorsement of Results .................................................................................................... 32

5. Compliance, Monitoring and Review ................................................................................ 34

6. Administrative matters, responsibilities and accountability ............................................. 35

6.1 Resources and Support for Academic Staff ............................................................... 35

6.2 Provision of information and student responsibility ................................................. 35


6.3 Responsibility of the programme coordinator .......................................................... 36

7. Funding and Financial Aspects .......................................................................................... 36

8. Orientation and Implementation of policies and related documents ............................... 36

9. Related Policies and Version Control ................................................................................ 37

Annexes ............................................................................................................................................ 38

Annex 1- Assessment Process Timelines ...................................................................................... 39

Annex 2 - Form1: Pre-assessment Moderation: Coursework ....................................................... 44

Annex 3 - Form 2: Pre-assessment Moderation: Examinations .................................................... 46

Annex 4 - Form 3: Post-marking Moderation ............................................................................... 49

Annex 5- Guidelines for Reasonable Adjustment ....................................................................... 50

Annex 6 - Assignment Coverpage ................................................................................................ 53

Annex 7 - Villa College Grading Scale and Grade Level Descriptors .............................................. 54


1. Purpose

The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidance on assessment practices for programmes in a

manner that is consistent, transparent and standardized to ensure quality control in all aspects

related to assessments.

This procedure intends to:

• Outline the key stages of assessment;

• Articulate assessments as an integral part of learning process and as the means by which

academic staff form judgements about the extent to which students have met the learning

outcomes;

• Facilitate the good practices and establish a standard across the College in administration of

Assessments;

• Align with the requirements of Maldives Qualifications Authority.

2. Definition of Terms

Appeal: A request to the College Assessment Committee for a review of a decision regarding

assessment.

Assessment: process of determining a students’ achievement of expected learning outcomes. This

may include a range of written and oral methods and practice or demonstration.

Assessment Criteria: a pre-defined standard of performance, target or benchmark against which

student performance are measured. These are the standards by which learning is judged.

Assessment component: all assessment in a particular category relating to a module. Assessment

elements are grouped together to form ‘components’.

Assessment element: Each piece of assessment for a module, an essay for example, is known as an

‘element’ of assessment.

Assessment item: these are individual questions or activities within assessment elements.

Award: a degree, diploma or certificate approved by the Academic Senate which may be conferred

or granted by Council.

Constructive alignment: the term used to describe the alignment of module aims, learning outcomes,

assessment tasks and assessment criteria.

Controlled Assessment: a form of supervised assessment that enables teaching staff to confirm that

students have carried out the work themselves.


Coursework: a piece of work that students would normally complete outside of the classroom. This

includes, but is not limited to the following: dissertations; essays; posters; group work; laboratory

reports; oral presentations; research reports; blogs; final projects; artworks; portfolios.

Criterion Referenced Assessment: the process of evaluating and grading the learning of students

against a set of pre-specified qualities or criteria, without reference to the achievement of others.

The pre-specified qualities or criteria are what students have to do during assessment in order to

demonstrate that they have achieved the learning outcomes.

Examination: any assessment task, written or observed practice, or other written paper which is

timetabled and which is taken into account in assessing the final results in a module.

Feedback: (in the context of assessment) information returned to students on their progress towards

a module’s learning outcomes. The information can also be quantified in the form of marks for

assessment. All assessment should incorporate both formative and summative feedback for

students.

Assessment for Learning (formative assessment): the process of seeking and interpreting evidence

for use by learners and teaching staff to decide where the learners are in their learning, where they

need to go and how best to get there. Formative assessment process is designed to help students

learn more effectively by giving them feedback on their performance and on how it can be improved.

Grade: a symbol that indicates the level of student performance in a module against specified

standards. Grades are awarded for the purposes of summative assessment, to enable the College to

provide a final statement for the student of the achievement of the learning outcomes in that

module;

Hurdle Assessment: a compulsory assessment task that must be passed, in addition to achieving an

overall passing result, in order to receive a passing grade in a module;

Learning outcome: the expression of the set of knowledge, skills and the application of the

knowledge and skills a person has acquired and is able to demonstrate as a result of learning;

Marks: the points awarded for an individual item of assessment;

Moderation: a quality assurance process by which an appropriately qualified independent individual

or group confirms that assessment is continuously conducted with accuracy, consistency and

fairness. Moderation includes the entire assessment event, including the design and post-event

analysis of the fitness of the assessment of student learning.

Module: a subject or unit that a person may undertake with a higher education provider as part of a

course of study leading to a higher education award.

Non-award: a course of study that does not lead to an award.

Norm Referenced Assessment: the process of measuring a student’s performance in comparison to

the performance of other students.

Personal Circumstance: A situation, which is an exception to the general rule, is beyond the student’s

control, is not reasonably foreseeable and which prevents the student from engaging in a College

activity such as: withdrawing from a module prior to census/cut-off date, completing the

requirements for a module of study or attending a scheduled examination. Examples may include

sudden illness or disability; loss of employment; death of a close family member (parent, sibling,

spouse or child); natural catastrophe; or a political or civil uprising.


Pre-qualifying Criteria (PQC): document submitted to the Maldives Qualifications Authority which

includes the details of curricula, programme regulations and resources.

Programme: It comprises a set of modules upon completion of which can lead to an award or a non-

award.

Reasonable adjustment: the modification of assessment elements or processes which may be made

for students with a verified disability, medical or other condition.

Reliability: the degree to which an assessment produces stable and consistent results.

Re-sit: The opportunity to be assessed in a module component, having failed to reach the required

pass at the first sit.

Result: a generic term used to describe a mark or assigned grade.

Re-take: A retake is another opportunity to study the whole module and complete all the assessment

components, having failed to reach the required pass at the first sit and re-sit.

Rubric: a type of matrix that provides scaled levels of achievement or understanding for a set of

criteria or dimensions of quality for a given type of performance, for example, a paper, an oral

presentation, or use of teamwork skills.

Scaling: the adjustment of marks for an entire cohort carried out at on an assessment item so that

the marks better reflect the achievement of the students against the learning outcomes of the

modules and Grade Level Descriptors.

Summative Assessment: assessment that takes place after the learning has been completed and

provides information and feedback that sums up the teaching and learning process.

Validity: the extent to which an assessment item actually measures what it purports to measure.


3. Scope

This procedure applies to all the academic programmes developed and administered by Villa College.

For the programmes which are being conducted in affiliation with partner institutes, the prevailing

assessment related policies and procedures shall be that of the respective partner institutes.

4. Procedure Description

This procedure provides guidance for all aspects related to the Assessment Cycle. Assessment at the

College is guided by the core principles outlined in the Assessment Policy. It is expected that staff

use these principles when planning, implementing and reviewing assessment tasks and processes.

Figure 1: Assessment Cycle

4.1 Curriculum Design

The learning outcomes of modules are the criteria against which academic staff makes judgments

about student learning. Learning outcomes describe the knowledge, skills and attitudes

expected to be demonstrated by students for the completion of the module. Learning outcomes

Curriculum Design

Setting Assessments

Pre-Moderation of Assessments

Information on Assessments

Submission and Exams

Marking

Post-moderation

of Assessments

Feedback

Endorsement of marks

Monitoring and Review


may also take form of ethical values and professional conduct. The curriculum design process

must ensure that learning outcomes of individual modules are designed effectively to reflect this.

Further, during the curriculum design stage of each programme, the following considerations

will need to be made:

a) Take a programme level holistic view of the assessment experience of students ;

b) Take account of the diversity of the student body;

c) Design of the programme and its assessment formats should clearly allow

demonstration of the learning outcomes;

d) ‘Design out’ plagiarism (take measures to reduce the likelihood that students can or

would plagiarise);

e) Consider the proportion of controlled/uncontrolled assessments ;

f) The approach of “Assessment for Learning” should be used which links with the

Teaching and Learning Strategy of the College (including a range of assessment types

and opportunities for formative feedback);

g) Make meaningful translation of assessment outcomes to map against Grading Scale and

Grade Level Descriptors;

h) Consider all MQA Requirements.

Upon completion of all modules required for the programme, all generic and specific knowledge,

skills and attitudes, pertaining to the programme objectives, will be delivered in alignment with

Villa College Graduate Attributes.

4.2 Setting Assessments

Following principles must be taken into consideration in designing assessment components and

elements of a module:

1. Constructive alignment must be used in designing all assessments. There should be explicit

alignment between stated intended learning outcomes, the learning experiences provided for

students, and the assessment tasks. Assessment tasks should be designed to guide students’

meaningful learning and give them the opportunity to demonstrate their ability to meet the

intended learning outcomes of the module.

2. Learning should be assessed using criterion referenced assessments. Each student will be

assessed separately against the learning outcomes regardless of the performance of the other

students. Criterion referenced assessment (CRA) is the process of evaluating and grading

the learning of students against a set of pre-specified qualities or criteria, without reference

to the achievement of others. The pre-specified qualities or criteria are what students have

to do during assessment in order to demonstrate that they have achieved the learning

outcomes. How well they do this is described at different levels - these are standards and

are mapped against the Grade Level Descriptors.


3. Ensuring validity, reliability, fairness and authenticity of assessments is the key to

guaranteeing the quality of the College’s awards. A significant proportion of the total

assessment marks of the module must be allocated to assessments conducted under

controlled conditions. Where a significant proportion of the assessment of a module involve

take home assignments, measures must be taken to ensure authenticity of the work.

4. Assessment is an integral part of the learning and teaching cycle and it should support student

learning through a progression of assessment tasks that are developmental, timely, provide

indication of achievement and take into account student workload. Formative assessment

should be used to provide feedback to students on their learning that is both detailed and

constructive, returned in a timely manner, and allows students to benefit in the preparation

of future assessment tasks. It should also be used to enable staff to make judgments about

students’ progress against the criteria and standards, and to evaluate the effectiveness of

the teaching.

5. Student understanding of the assessment process must be facilitated by clear explanations

of: the assessment components; how the assessment elements relate to the learning

outcomes; and the criteria and standards against which students will be assessed.

4.2.1 Setting coursework

It is the responsibility of Module Leader to set the coursework for the respective module by

taking into account the above principles in section 4.2. For modules with a single lecturer,

the lecturer is deemed as the Module Leader. For modules delivered by multiple lecturers,

the Head of the Academic Unit shall appoint the Module Leader for that module at the start

of the semester. The Module Leader must set the coursework through a consultative

process with other lecturers teaching the module.

All documents pertaining to coursework including the assessment brief, marking criteria,

assessment cover sheet and filled pre-moderation form (Annex 2 - Form 1: Pre-assessment

Moderation: Coursework) must be submitted to the programme coordinator as per the

dates set in Annex 1 – Assessment Process Timeline.


4.2.2 Setting examination papers

It is the responsibility of Module Leader to set the examinations paper for the respective

module. Where more than one lecturer delivers the module, the examinations and marking

schemes must be set through a consultative process with contribution from other lecturers.

All documents pertaining to examinations including the marking scheme and filled pre-

moderation form (Annex 3 - Form 1: Pre-assessment Moderation: Examinations) must be

submitted to the programme coordinator as per the dates set in Annex 1 – Assessment

Process Timeline.

When setting an examination paper the following considerations must be made in additions

to the considerations provided in section 4.2:

a) The questions must be set to evaluate and test the learning outcomes of

the module;

b) All the questions must be written in a clear straightforward language which

enables the student to understand what is being asked for;

c) An estimate of time allocated for completing the answer for each question

must be made and the total examination time should be appropriate;

d) There should be clear instructions related to the examination stated on the

examination paper (such as number of questions to be answered, duration

of examination, options for answering, etc);

e) Examination questions must not be repeated from examination papers

administered in the last 1 year. Recycle of examination question may be

done with reasonable changes brought to the original question taken from

examination papers administered 1 year prior to the semester in which the

examination is being set for;

4.3 Pre-Moderation of Assessments

Moderation is fundamental to good assessment practice. The purpose of moderation is

to:

a) maintain agreed standards in the assessment of student work through a

valid, consistent and transparent process; and

b) ensure that assessment reflects expected student performance.

Moderation applies broadly to a range of processes whereby assessment tasks and

assessment marks are scrutinized to ensure that the assessment criteria are consistently


applied to reflect the achievement of the students against the learning outcomes of the

modules and Grade Level Descriptors. Pre-moderation refers to the process of scrutiny of

the assessment components to check against the learning outcomes of the respective

module. Pre-Moderation of the assessment must take place for all assessments which

contribute to the module marks.

Following procedures are required to be placed for the moderation of assessment tasks:

Description Applicable

situation(s)

Applicable

forms / tools

Responsible

person(s)

Pre-

assessment

moderation

Moderator verification

followed by FAC approval:

Moderator to verify that the

assessment components

are valid, reflect the

standards and provides fair

opportunities for students

to demonstrate their

achievement of module

outcomes

Applicable to all

assessment

components: all

coursework and

examinations

Annex 2 - Form

1: Pre-

assessment

Moderation:

Coursework

Annex 3 - Form

2: Pre-

assessment

Moderation:

Examinations

Module

leader,

moderator,

coordinator

and FAC

Details of how pre-moderation of assessments are to be carried out are as follows:

Step 1: For all assessments, module leaders complete the relevant parts of the pre-

moderation forms (Annex 2 - Form 1: Pre-assessment Moderation: Coursework or Annex 3 -

Form 1: Pre-assessment Moderation: Examinations)

Step 2: Individual moderators verify the assessments with all related paper works and provide

comments on the pre-moderation forms (Annex 2 - Form 1: Pre-assessment Moderation:

Coursework or Annex 3 - Form 1: Pre-assessment Moderation: Examinations)

During the verification process, the moderator scrutinizes the assessments to ensure that the

assessment components are valid, reflect the standards and provides fair opportunities for

students to demonstrate their achievement of the module outcomes.

The following must be considered when moderating the assessments:

a) Assessment criteria against the learning outcomes

b) Marking criteria / rubric

c) Contribution to module mark

d) Submission details including word count and referencing

e) Feedback


The forms are sent back to the module leader.

Step 3: Module leader reviews the comments provided by the moderator, carries out any

adjustments required and fills the response section on the forms.

The forms are then sent to the programme leader to be submitted to the FAC.

Step 4: FAC reviews all the pre-moderation forms and approves the assessment components.

Any pending pre-moderation forms are either taken up by the FAC, or the programme

coordinator is notified.

The paper trails of moderation are an integral part of evidence required for internal and external

reviews to monitor the quality of the assessment administration. It is the responsibility of the

FAC to ensure all relevant paper works are processed and filed accordingly.

4.4 Information on Assessments

Details of assessment components will be specified and made available to students in the Module

Handbook. Requirements to pass the module will be explicitly stated in the Module Handbook.

All additional information relevant to the completion of the assessment components will be

provided to students in advance. The additional information related to the assessment

components should be presented in the form of an Assessment Brief which should cover the

following information:

a) Assessment Type

b) Weighting of assessments

c) Detailed Instructions

d) Assessment criteria/Marking criteria / Rubric

e) Contribution to module mark

f) Submission dates and times and other related details including late penalty

g) Feedback - Students will be informed as to when and how they will receive feedback

on each assessment task.

h) Word count

i) Required referencing type

j) Suggested reading materials

The Assessment Brief should be explained to the students in class, hard copy given to the students

and soft copy uploaded to Online Platform. The required referencing should be consistent with

the Procedure on Academic Integrity and Guidelines on Referencing.

Assessments may only be changed after the publication of the Module Handbook only under

exceptional circumstances and will require the approval of the Head of the Academic Unit. Any


changes will be communicated to students by the Head of Academic Unit. Such a change must be

entered into the Learning Management System (LMS).

Where minimum levels of attendance or completion of practical or other specified work are

required before a final examination can be sat, or a module grade awarded, these requirements

should be detailed in the Module Handbook and additional information included in the

Assessment Brief. There should be a clear rationale for such requirements and the expectations

should be communicated clearly to all students to whom they apply. (Refer to VC Attendance

Policy)

Students are responsible for reading and following the published compliance documents and

assessment information provided in module handbooks/assessment briefs.

4.5 Assessment Submission and Administration of Examinations

4.5.1 Coursework Submission

In general, all written assessments must be submitted on or before the deadline specified

in the module handbook or assessment brief. Students are required to make TWO

submissions:

Submission One – hard copy: students are required to submit the hard copy into

the assigned box at Students Desk at QI Campus or to the Campus Reception

respectively.

Submission Two – Online Soft Copy: Students are required to upload a soft copy to

the specified Online Platform.

Students are to be advised to follow below Rules when submitting assignments. Students

will be penalised if they fail to follow the Rules.

Submission One – Hard copy

Submit the HARD COPY of the assignment into the box of the respective faculty

(FACULTY NAME WILL BE WRITTEN ON THE BOX) at Student Desk at QI Campus. If at any

other Campus, submit to the Reception. If at a Learning Centre, upload via Turnitin Link

in Moodle.

Submit the hard copy BEFORE 18:00hrs of the due date. NOTE that assignments will be

collected and the box will be emptied at exactly 18:00hrs. Any assignment submitted


after 18:00hrs will be regarded as a LATE SUBMISSION and student will be penalized

according to rules followed for late submission.

On the cover of the assignment, clearly write the name, student ID, lecturers name and

any additional details specified in the Assessment Brief.

Assessment submission processes will include a cover sheet with a student declaration

of originality.

Submission Two – Online

‘Online submission’ for VC students is defined as work that is submitted electronically

to the specified Online Platform for assessment by the College.

Online submission will only be considered as ‘submitted’ on successful completion of

the defined submission process. Failed submission attempts, or partial completion of

the electronic process by the submission deadline (including any permitted extension

for late work and/or reasonable adjustments) will not be considered as ‘submitted’.

The module leader/lecturer must ensure that the Submission Link (Eg: Turnitin Link) for

submitting the assignment is created in the Learning Management System (LMS)

module page latest by end of the second week of the semester.

Students may be given a window period until 23.59 hours to upload the soft copy of the

assessment to Online Platform.


Acceptable file types

It is the responsibility of each respective Programme Coordinator/Module Leader to define

the type of file that they consider acceptable in the submission instructions presented to

students in the Assignment Brief. It is the responsibility of the student to submit in the

format specified in the submission instructions. This will ensure that the submission can be

read and assessed.

Submission window and deadline

The deadline for all submissions will be published on the Online Platform (Eg: Moodle) by

the Programme Coordinator/Module Leader of the Academic Unit. College administration

is responsible for maintenance of this information.

The deadline date for all submissions of assessed work will be provided by the Module

Leader in the Module Handbook. This date will be treated as the actual date of submission,

there is no expectation that this will be changed unless there are exceptional circumstances

for doing so.

Assessed work must be submitted and received before 23:59 on the published date given

on Online platform to be recorded as ‘on time.’

The date and time of submission is taken from the Online Platform when the submission is

complete.

Amending the submission deadline

Once provided by the Programme Coordinator/Module Leader, submission deadline is not

expected to change prior to submission. Circumstances that will be considered for changing

a submission deadline are:

a) Administrative error in entering an incorrect date

b) Unavoidable circumstances that will compromise the assessment submission on

the original date.

Late submission

Students have a 24 hour window for late submissions. The mark for elements of assessment

submitted up to 24 hours after the published deadline will be penalised. After this 24 hour


‘window’ has elapsed, the work will not be accepted and will be recorded as a non-

submission.

The penalty for late submission is as follows:

A mark of more than 50% for the element will be reduced to 50%

A mark lower than 50% will stand and will be used in the calculation of the overall

module outcome.

Student unable to submit within the specific timeline due to personal circumstances must

submit Personal Circumstances form in accordance with the Procedure on Personal

Circumstances. And such applications will be processed in accordance with the Procedure

on Personal Circumstances, which shall be communicated to the student.

Quality of submitted work

Students are responsible for the quality of work submitted. Online assessment extends this

responsibility to the student checking the quality of the submission after it has been

submitted. It is the student’s responsibility to check and resolve any corruption in transit.

Where any work submitted has been corrupted in transit, including any resubmissions, to

the extent that the final submission cannot be assessed, the work will be given a mark of

zero.

In instances of a student submitting an electronic file for assessment that fails to comply

with the published instructions, and the work cannot be assessed as a result (e.g. the file

type cannot be opened and read) then this work will be given a mark of zero. This recognises

that a submission has been made by the deadline, but cannot be assessed.

Receipts for submission

Students will receive an electronic receipt for all submissions. Students should review these

receipts immediately following submission to check all files have uploaded and open

successfully. They should not be considered as confirmation that the submission meets the


submission criteria, or that the submission can be accessed by the Module Leader for

marking.

Copies of electronic receipts will be accepted as evidence to support a student’s complaint

or academic appeal. Any receipt submitted as evidence that is proved to be forged or

altered in any way will be treated by the College in the same way as all other instances of

falsified evidence.

Dissertation/thesis submission

Dissertation/thesis must be submitted in accordance with the dissertation submission

guidelines. Three hard copies of the dissertation must be submitted by 18.00hours of the

due date and soft copy uploaded to Submission Link (Turnitin Link) on Online Platform

(Moodle). The Link must be created by Institute for Research and Innovation by second

week of each semester.

A dissertation submission cover page should accompany each hard copy submission.

Assessment Offences

All assessment submitted online shall be subject to Guidelines on Academic Integrity.

To prevent holding up the release of all marks for a given module run being delayed, the

procedure for managing assessment offences relating to work submitted online and release

of marks is as follows:

• Unless the investigation is completed within 4 weeks of submission and a mark

reflecting the outcome can be given, the mark released to the student will be NR (Refer to

Annex 7- Grading Scale and Grade Descriptors)

• Unless the investigation can be completed within 4 weeks of submission, the

feedback to the student will reflect that the grade NR has been allocated due to an ongoing

assessment offence investigation

• The Module Leaders should ensure that once the investigation is completed the

actual mark and feedback should be provided to the student

• The grade of NR will be released to SMS and will remain until such time as the

outcome of the investigation is concluded. At this point the actual mark will be entered into

SMS by the respective Academic Unit and approved by the assessment Committee.


Submission under Reasonable Adjustment

The following rules apply to students with a verified disability, long term medical condition,

requesting for reasonable adjustments to assessment processes.

Reasonable Adjustment (RA) is a modification to the delivery of an assessment element or

to the processes related to administering an assessment component, which may be made

only for students with a verified disability and long term medical condition.

The following principles will be applied in considering Reasonable Adjustment:

a. A student will not be unreasonably prevented from successfully completing a

programme of study that he/she has registered for.

b. Reasonable Adjustments will not undermine the quality expected of the academic

standards of a programme or a module as demonstrated in the learning outcomes.

c. All requests for Reasonable Adjustments will be processed in line with this procedure.

d. RAs must not affect the validity or reliability of assessment outcomes.

Reasonable Adjustments may fall into the following categories:

1. Disability

2. Long Term Medical condition

The College will also consider the facts of each individual case and make individual

adjustments if appropriate. There are three main factors to address when considering

Reasonable Adjustments:

a) Whether the student is disadvantaged by the processes outlined for the

assessment;

b) Whether the suggested adjustments would help overcome the disadvantage;

c) Whether the adjustments are reasonable.

Reasonable Adjustments can include:

a) Alternative Exam Arrangement such as changes to a classroom environment

or arrangement;

b) adapting assessment materials such as changing font size;

c) providing assistance during assessment such as a scribe and


d) Using assistive technology such as a laptop.

Additional details that will guide in making such adjustments are detailed out in Annex 5 –

Guidelines for Reasonable Adjustments.

RAs for scheduled examinations will, be completed 3-4 weeks prior to the commencement

of the Examination Period. It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that an application

for an RA is made prior to the deadline.

Students with examination clashes should refer to the Examination Rules. If a student sits an

Alternative Exam Arrangement that is not aligned with the scheduled examination

timetable, the student will sign a Statutory Declaration to ensure confidentiality of the

examination paper. Examinations Office will send the amended final examination timetable

to the relevant student.

Students with a verified disability or long term medical conditions may be provided

reasonable adjustments. Students will submit a Reasonable Adjustment Form to the Student

Desk to seek approval and determination of appropriate reasonable adjustments. Students

are required to provide relevant documentation to substantiate their condition by the 2nd

week of the semester. A student experiencing a personal circumstance may also be provided

reasonable adjustments for examinations. In such an instance, the student will submit a

Personal Circumstances Form AND a Reasonable Adjustment Form to the Student Desk to

seek approval and determination of appropriate reasonable adjustments in relation to the

Personal Circumstance.

When a request for a RA is submitted, it will be routed to the related Academic unit. The

Programme Coordinator will submit a request to the Faculty Assessment Committee where

a decision will be made. For each student requesting for RA, an Access Plan for the duration

requested, detailing alternative examination arrangements, will be made. The student will

be notified in writing within 5 working days of making the decision.

All Access Plans for students with a verified disability or a long term medical condition that

are approved by the Faculty Assessment Committee, must be informed in writing to the

Chief of Examinations and the Registration Department at least 2 weeks prior to the exam

period of each semester.

Annex 5 Reasonable Adjustment Guidelines provides guidance for making such adjustments.


Decisions regarding a RA for a student will be notified to the student, relevant programme

coordinator Chief of Examinations and Registration Department by the Secretariat of the

Faculty Assessment Committee.

All related records for a student requesting RA must be filed in the students personal file.

Where it has been agreed that a student can submit on a different date under the

Reasonable Adjustment Rules, the student should submit a copy of the assignment to an

agreed submission point.

4.5.2 Administration of Examinations

Scheduling of Examinations

All examinations must be set during the examination period allocated in the Academic

Calendar. This includes main examinations and re-sits examinations. It is the

responsibility of the Examinations Office to set the examinations times, venue and

dates for each of the modules being run in the particular semester.

An Exam time table with the information on examination must be published at least

4 weeks before the commencement of the exam period.

Exam Registrations

All students enrolled in the respective modules should register for the exams. Exam

registration can be done only if the student:

a) Have met the attendance criteria (achieved 75% attendance)

b) Have cleared all the outstanding payments

Registration Department must inform all students to register for the exams at least a

week before commencement of the exam period through SMS notification, notice on

Online Platform/campus. Eligible Students shall be registered for exams and Exam

Authorised Slip generated from the Student Management System. Prior to this

faculties should ensure that the attendance percentage is updated in the system.

Students will be required to present an Identification (NID, or Student ID) along with

Exam Authorisation Slip to enter to the examination venue.


Registrations for Clash Examinations

Students who have to sit two or more examinations on the same day and same time

must fill Examination Clash Reporting Form and submit it to the Students’ Desk at least

(3) working days prior to the commencement of the examination period. Students will

then:

be required to sit clash examinations on the same day;

be supervised throughout the period;

need to bring their own food as they will not be allowed to go out of the

premises;

get an SMS from the Examination’s Office at least a day before clash

examination to be held.

Clash examination time

In normal circumstances all clash examinations will be scheduled in accordance with

the time set by the Examination Office.

Examinations scheduled for morning, clash examination will be held after the first

examination is over. Students are cautioned that students will NOT BE PERMITTED

to leave the examination venue after their first examination. It is a responsibility

of student to inform the invigilator in charge of the examination venue and seek

advice from them about their clashed examination. If the student leaves the

examination venue, they may NOT be allowed to do their clashed examination.

Exam arrangements

It is the responsibility of the Examinations Office to make all the arrangements for

administering the examinations including allocation of invigilators, printing exam

papers and coordinating with the respective departments and faculties in receiving

the exam papers and sending the exam scripts for marking.

Invigilators must be allocated for supervision of exam sessions and must follow the

Examination Rules and Regulations. All records related to examinations must be kept

in accordance with the Examination Rules and Regulations. Top priority must be given

to ensure that un-administered examination papers are held in highly confidential

manner with access to only authorised persons. Breach of any confidentiality of exam

papers or academic misconduct shall be documented in the form of an incident report

as specified in the Examination Rules and Regulations.


Exam scripts must be issued to the respective faculties no later than 2 days after

administering the exam for QI Campus. For exams administered in the atolls, answer

scripts must be sent to the Examinations Office within 7 days after administering the

exam. If the deadline for sending the answer scripts from atolls cannot be met, the

faculty coordinator will need to liaise with Centre for Atoll Campus Administration

and the Examinations Office to make the necessary arrangements for obtaining the

answer scripts in adequate time to allow for marking and endorsement of results.

Students with a verified disability or medical condition may be provided reasonable

adjustments in accordance with the Rules for Reasonable Adjustments. All such

requests by students with verified disability or medical condition must be informed

to the Chief of Examinations and the programme coordinator by the Student

Services/Registration Department at least 4 weeks prior to the exam period of each

semester. Considerations must be given for allowing reasonable accommodations for

the students depending on the condition as recommended in the Rules for

Reasonable Adjustments.

4.5.3 Opportunities for Students Failing Assessments

All students will be given four opportunities to attempt the modules as follows:

a) First module attempt

b) Resit for failed components / elements of the modules

c) Retake the whole module in another semester

d) Resit for the module student is retaking

The following sections provide the details of retake and resit of assessments.

Re-sit

If a module is not passed at the first sit, students are entitled to one re-sit during the

period allocated for the re-sit in Academic Calendar. In the re-sit, they are assessed in

the component/elements which they failed at the first sit.

All resit components where a student scores a passmark (50% or more) will be capped

at 50%. Where a student scores a fail mark, (49% or below) the score will remain. All

approved Personal Circumstances will result in uncapped marks.


Example 1:

Student Scores :

1. Assignment 1: 10/30


Total Assignment marks 22 /50 (for Assignment 1 and 2)

3. Examination: 29/50

Outcome:

Resit required for: Assignment 1: Student has to resit (resubmit)

Assignment 1

Calculation of marks:

Resit (resubmitted assignment) score = 17/30 : This will be capped at 50%

(ie: 15/30, although the student scored higher than 15 actually in the

resit, hence maximum mark he/she can get is 15/30 for this component

Final marks: Assignment 1 = 15 , Assignment 2 = 12, Examination = 29

(Total : 15+12+29 = 56 for the module overall mark)

Example 2:

Student Scores:


Total Assignment marks 25 /50 (for Assignment 1)

2. Examination: 20/50

Outcome:

Resit required for: Examination: Student has to resit examination.

Calculation of marks:

Resit examination score = 20/50: There is no need to cap since the marks

student scored is 20 (below the pass percentage). Hence this failed marks

will remain.

Final marks: Assignment 1 = 25 , Examination = 20

(Total : 25+20= 45 for the module overall mark)


Retake

A retake is another opportunity to study the whole module for students who have failed

their first module attempt and the resit attempt. A retake includes a sit and a re-sit.

4.5.5 Personal Circumstances

Students may apply for extensions, resits, retakes based on personal circumstances. All

applications for Personal Circumstances will be attended to in accordance with the

Procedure on Personal Circumstances.

4.5.6 Cancellation or Disruption of Assessments

When an examination, test or assignment has been cancelled or disrupted for reasons

beyond the control of the students (for example weather, fire, power failure, etc.),

responsibility for determining subsequent actions fall to the VC Assessment Committee. In

cases where the College has declared a disruption as a serious incident, the College

Assessment Committee will advise affected Heads of Academic Units of appropriate

processes to determine the outcome of the module.

When advising Academic Units, the following options for compensating for a cancelled or

disrupted examination, test or assignment will be suggested. This list is not exhaustive:

holding the examination or test at an alternative time;

setting an alternative assessment task;

discarding that particular test or examination from computation of the overall grade;

attributing full possible marks for the disrupted examination or test and adding these to

assessment for work already completed to compute a final grade;

if the examination is disrupted after more than half of the examination time has elapsed,

completed work might be marked and the weighting of the exam or test decreased

accordingly.


The option chosen will depend on a number of factors, for example the level of the module;

the weighting of the examination or test; whether or not the examination is required for

professional purposes, whether the module is a prerequisite for other modules; the number

of sites at which the examination was to be administered; and whether or not all sites, or all

students were affected.

Any student, who feels they have been disadvantaged by the process used to achieve their final

grade, may apply to the Appeal Committee for a review.

4.6 Marking and grading student performance

Standard approach for marking should be adopted for allocating marks for all the assessment

components. This will include the following:

o Final module grades should indicate demonstrated achievement at the end of the

module, through an accumulation of appropriate evidence from module work and/or

final examination.

o Grades for individual pieces of assessment should be awarded only on the basis of

demonstrated achievement in the task being assessed.

o The conversion of marks to letter grades must follow the College Grading Scale and

Grade Level Descriptors (Annex 7 - Grading Scale and Grade Level Descriptors)

o Adjustment of marks and grades may occur through moderation and scaling processes.

Marks allocated for assessment tasks should reflect the standard achieved and should be

consistent across different cohorts of students. Borderline cases should be considered with

focus on evaluating if learning objectives have been met prior to finalization of the marks.

To ensure consistency in marking, marking should be done based on pre-determined rubric,

which are shared with the students. The rubric may be specific or a holistic one, depending on

the module. All examination papers must have a marking guide/answer script which forms the

basis of marking and should be prepared along with examination papers.

Student will be shown their grade and mark for all assessment tasks except for the final

examinations. For modules with only coursework assessments, the marks of final assessment

task will not be revealed to the student. Final examination’s result (mark and grade) would not

be revealed to the students. At the end of the semester only after endorsement of marks, the

student’s aggregate grade will be displayed. Students name should not be visible when


displaying cohort results on a public forum such as Moodle or Notice Board. Student results

should be provided individually via Online portal or through official Notification of Results.

Assessment of group work

o Performance in group tasks is an acceptable component of student module grades. The

percentage contribution from group tasks should be related to the learning outcomes of the

module.

o Before individual grades are finalised, the lecturer(s) should seek and take account of

additional information about the contributions of individuals to team efforts, particularly if

group tasks contribute significantly towards the final module grade. Contribution by each

group member can be evaluated based on the peer evaluation report submitted by each

group member.

o When using group work for assessment, lecturers should ensure that appropriate

mechanisms (such as procedures to help facilitate collaboration between group members,

or to ensure that group members contribute equally) are in place to support students

working in groups.

It is the responsibility of the module leader to ensure that marking of the all assessment

tasks including exam answer scripts are done in a timely manner which allows for

endorsement of the results and dissemination of the results by the Results Release date.

Marking of coursework components such as assignments should be completed by the

module lecturer within 20 working days of coursework submission date. Faculties must keep

record of the following information in the form of Coursework Handover Register:

a) Module Name

b) Marker Name (Module Lecturer / Lecturer teaching the cohort/ alternative

marker)

c) Marker Contact Number

d) Marker Contact Email

e) Handed Date

f) Deadline for Marking

g) Returned Date

The programme coordinator shall follow up with any pending unmarked assessment

components one week after the assessment is given for marking. If the marking progress is

unsatisfactory, alternative marker for completing the marking should be considered. Failure


to submit the marked assessment component by the deadline will mean that programme

coordinator has to make arrangements to retrieve and re-allocate the marking to an

alternative marker.

The Faculty Dean or Head of the Faculty should ensure all reasonable measures are taken

to complete the marking process and to ensure results are released by the specified date.

Academic grievances and disputes about assessment processes and grades

Students with concerns about assessment processes or grades should be advised to speak

first with the relevant lecturer. If the matter cannot be resolved, then the student should

meet and discuss the matter with the Head of the Academic Unit and thereafter follow the

procedures outlined in Appeals and Grievances Procedures .

4.7 Post-Moderation of Assessments

Moderation applies broadly to a range of processes whereby assessment tasks and

assessment marks are scrutinized to ensure that the assessment criteria are consistently

applied to reflect the achievement of the students against the learning outcomes of the

modules and Grade Level Descriptors.

Post-moderation is fundamental to good assessment practice. The purpose of post-

moderation is to: maintain agreed standards in the assessment of student work through a

valid, consistent and transparent process; and ensure that assessment reflects student

performance.

Following procedures are required to be in place for post-moderation of assessment tasks:

Description Applicable

situation(s)

Applicable

forms /

tools

Responsible

person(s)

Pre-

standardisation

Team pre-marking exercise using

samples of assessments to set

standards. The purpose is to check that

profiles of marks from team members

appear to be consistent (or that

discrepancies can be explained and

rationalised and this is evidenced).

At least THREE scripts are marked

across the range; marking discussed

and agreed.

In case of more

than one marker;

or

Where a new

lecturer is taking

over the marking of

an established

module

NA Module

leader


Post-marking

moderation

Moderator verifications of marks

followed by FAC approval: Post-

marking moderation form (Annex - 3)

to be completed by the moderator and

approve by FAC in order to confirm the

fairness and validity of marking

processes and standards. [Any pending

post-moderation forms are either

taken up by the FAC, or the programme

coordinator is notified.]

Applicable to all

assessment

components: all

coursework and

examinations

Annex 4 -

Form 3:

Post-

marking

Moderatio

n

FAC and

Programm

e

coordinato

r

Sample second marking: At least THREE

scripts from across the grade range to

be marked by a different marker.

Differences in marking (especially

grade boundaries) and discrepancies

discussed and amendments are

brought to marking.

Sample marking might identify a

problem across the whole range of

marks or just in particular areas of

range, adjustments should reflect this.

If marking is consistently lenient or

harsh, FAC may decide to do scaling (as

describe in the next section).

If sample second marking identifies

that marking standards/marking

criteria are NOT consistently applied,

the whole cohort needs to be marked

again.

Applicable to cases

referred by

programme

coordinator or FAC.

NA Programm

e

coordinato

r and FAC

Double blind marking of

dissertations/research projects/thesis:

Marking to be done by two different

markers separately, followed by

reconciliation to agree marks –include

a third marker if unable to reach an

agreement.

As a rule of thumb, if the difference

between the markers is greater than

10%, a third marker is used, and the

agreed marking should be reflective of

two closest marks.

Applicable to all

dissertations/resear

ch projects/thesis

with 60 or more

credits.

NA FAC and

Programm

e

coordinato

r

Scaling is the adjustment of marks for

an entire cohort carried out on an

assessment element so that the marks

better reflect the achievement of the

students against the learning

Applicable to

exceptional

circumstances

where sample

second marking

Procedure

outlined as

outlined

below in

FAC


outcomes of the modules and Grade

Level Descriptors. This is done if the

marking provided are consistently

harsh or lenient. [Details are provided

below]

does not resolve the

issues. The decision

to scale will be

undertaken by the

FAC.

next

section


Scaling of marks

Scaling is the adjustment of marks for an entire cohort carried out at on an assessment item

so that the marks better reflect the achievement of the students against the learning

outcomes of the modules and Grade Level Descriptors.

Scaling should only be undertaken in exceptional circumstances. The decision to scale will

be undertaken by the FAC.

Scaling is a criterion-referenced process, rather than a norm-referenced process. By this, we

mean that scaling should not be undertaken merely to obtain a desired mean mark for the

marks of all students for an assessment component or for a module overall. Rather, scaling

must be undertaken with clear sight of the learning outcomes of the piece of assessment in

mind. Scaling will be undertaken at the level of individual assessment components.

In the case of very small cohorts (less than 10) statistical comparisons and pre-set ranges

are likely to be invalid. In such cases, if marks appear to be irregular, all student work should

be moderated/remarked.

Mechanisms for Scaling

Any mechanism for scaling developed by a Faculty must satisfy the following criteria:

any scaling mechanism used should be criterion referenced and not norm

referenced;

the rank order of students after scaling must be the same as the rank order

of students before scaling;

any scaling mechanism must encompass the full range of raw marks from 0

to 100.

Detailed procedure for scaling

The following are the detailed steps for scaling:

Step 1: Markers discuss the standards, grading and Grade Level Descriptors of the

module to become familiarized with the criterion referenced marking.

Step 2: Three marking scripts are selected at different levels and are marked by two

different markers (one additional marker if scripts have already been sample


remarked) independently. If the new markers marks (for any one script) differ by 20%

of the maximum possible marks, a third marker marks the same scripts.

Step 3: The average increase or decrease in the marks (in all three scripts) are

calculated (in case of a third marker, the average of the closest two).

Step 4: All candidates’ marks are increased/decreased by the same average

calculated.

Step 5: Marks for borderline candidates with “Fail” are decided by the Faculty

Assessment Committee based on the evidence.

4.8 Feedback

If students are to gain maximum benefit, they need feedback on each assessment. This should

be timely, sufficiently detailed and constructive and it should generate suggestions for

improving future work.

All in-module assessed work should be discussed with students in a timely way, and

opportunity to view facilitated, normally within four weeks of the assessment’s due

date.

Assessed work must be discussed with students before the next assessed task takes

place, or the final examination, or final assessment is submitted, in order that

students can benefit from feedback before further assessment events. This is

particularly important when the assessment builds on a previous assessment.

In addition to a mark or grade, students should receive, where appropriate, an

indication of the strengths and weaknesses of their work and guidance about how to

improve the quality of future work. This could take the form of: oral or written

feedback and student specific comments; exemplars of student work at various grade

levels; and/or a general commentary on common errors demonstrated by the class.

Teaching staff are urged to provide criteria and rubrics for students that clearly

demonstrate different levels of achievement.


4.9 Endorsement of Results

The “College Assessment Committee” of the Academic Senate of Villa College is responsible for

endorsement of marks for all the modules. The endorsement process shall be a three tier

process as summarised below:

Figure 2: Result Endorsement Levels

The following steps must be followed for endorsement of results.

Level 1: Faculty Assessment Committee

As per the Terms of Reference, the Faculty Assessment Committees shall provide a

mechanism for monitoring, reviewing and resolving problems in relation to assessment,

including the timing of assessment and student workload and make regular reports to the

College Assessment Committee.

a) The FAC will meet to moderate the marking, and recommend changes where required

and keep records of the moderation process. In this process, FAC will ensure:

Faculty Assessment Committee approval

Endorsement of Results by College Assessment Committee

Consideration of Awards and completion of levels by the Admission and Awards

Committee


a)

− Consistency in marking standards even when more than one marker is involved ;

− Consideration of borderline marks and review in a fair manner considering the

learning outcomes ;

− Consistency in the academic level and challenge of questions ;

− Comparability with assessment of similar learning outcomes at the same level in

other institutions across the sector ;

− Principles of criterion referenced assessment are adhered to ;

− Transparency and accuracy of marks including administrative checks in totalling the

marks;

− Finalised marks are appropriate and to the expected standard

− Completion of the Form 3: Post-marking Moderation (Annex 6). This form must be

kept for record and audit purposes and should be presented to the Assessment

Committee if requested.

b) Once the Faculty Assessment Committee review and endorse the Post-marking

Moderation, the respective staff from the academic unit, shall prepare the marksheets

and upload to the Student Management System.

Level 2: College Assessment Committee

The College Assessment Committee will meet every semester as per scheduled dates to

endorse marks and review performance of the students. Marks endorsement shall be carried

out by the Assessment Committee or designated Sub-Committee(s) chosen by the Assessment

Committee.

a) A report from the Student Management System showing the overall progress of the

students must be made available for review by the College Assessment Committee.

b) The College Assessment Committee shall review the marks and consider the progress of

the students prior to endorsement of the results.

c) At the module level, The College Assessment Committee shall consider the performance

of the students, adverse circumstances in teaching or conduct of assessment, and any

issues or positive aspects related to teaching of the module.

d) The results shall be endorsed by the College Assessment Committee.

e) The system shall be updated with the information related to the endorsement of the

module results. Any outstanding issues must be resolved by Chair’s action or as per the

recommendation of the Chair.


f) The Registration Department will be the custodian of student records and final academic

student records including the marks for the modules should be recorded and

maintained at Registration Department.

Level 3: Admission and Awards Committee

Admission and Awards Committee has the mandate to approve the Awards. Admission and

Awards Committee must meet as scheduled, to endorse students who have completed a

programme or completed a level of study.

a) The Admission and Awards Committee must be presented with the information related

to the completion of the level for each individual student. The following must be

considered:

CGPA or average of the student

Completion of all the requirements for the level

b) Diploma or other level based qualifications must be approved by the Admission and

Awards Committee prior to sending to the Academic Senate for endorsement and

College Council for Conferment.

5. Compliance, Monitoring and Review

All the assessment related aspects including the type of assessments, weightage, performance

of students, practical aspects related to administration of assessments must be considered

when reviewing the assessments every three years. Such review shall be taken by the College

Assessment Committee and supported by the Institute of Academic Development. Any

recommendations made shall be reflected in the updated PQC document and where required

informed to MQA. Monitoring and review of assessments should be documented in the

Academic Senate Report prepared by the College Assessment Committee. Regular

monitoring of the compliance with the procedures may be undertaken by Institute of

Academic Development as part of internal audit or as required.


6. Administrative matters, responsibilities and accountability

6.1 Resources and Support for Academic Staff

It is the responsibility of the Dean/Head of School to supply all new academic staff upon

appointment with a copy of this document before beginning teaching and assessment duties.

Faculty/schools should ensure that all lecturers and casual lecturers receive appropriate

guidance and training related to the marking of student work before marking is undertaken.

Annually, the Institute for Academic Development should provide opportunities for new and

established academic staff to discuss and enhance assessment practices.

Where assignments require computer or library resources, the library and CICT should be

notified of core material required. In the case of non-electronic library resources,

programme coordinators must endeavour to place material needed for assessment tasks on

restricted loan as soon as is practicable and also in response to student need.

6.2 Provision of information and student responsibility

Students should be notified of College assessment policies and faculty/school practices and

procedures. To this end, faculty/schools will provide the following information in a timely

manner to students and staff through notification on the programme and programme in student

handbooks, module outlines, Learning Management System, library web pages or any other

appropriate means:

Faculty/school guidelines and procedures should be clearly articulated and widely promulgated

regarding;

o Grading practices, grading criteria, and moderation practices;

o Granting of extensions of time for submitting assessed work and penalties imposed for

the late submission of work;

o Procedures relating to the missing of tests and other assessment deadlines due to

sporting, cultural or religious festivals/events;

o Appeal provisions and procedures;


o Provisions for students with disabilities, particularly in relation to the sitting of tests and

exams; and

o Expectations regarding academic integrity, especially in relation to plagiarism.

6.3 Responsibility of the programme coordinator

The Programme Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that marking is consistent and fair and

that appropriate and timely feedback is given to students which will enable them to improve

their performance in future comparable assessment tasks. To achieve these outcomes,

Programme Coordinators should ensure that:

o marking is undertaken by those academic staff who have taught the module and set the

examination/assessment task – any departure from this practice must be justified to,

and approved by, the relevant Head of Faculty/School;

o a process is convened prior to the examiners’ meeting which scrutinises and verifies that

standards of marking, award of grades and provision of feedback to students has been

consistent and comparable across all markers; and

o module teaching teams should ensure that appropriate moderation arrangements are

put in place where an assessed task has multiple examiners and/or replicates previous

episodes of that assessment.

7. Funding and Financial Aspects

All financial aspects that are covered under this procedure will be done in accordance and

in compliance with Villa College Student Finance Policy.

8. Orientation and Implementation of policies and related documents

Orientation of this procedure shall be undertaken by Institute of Academic Development

This procedure shall be implemented from January 2019 onwards


9. Related Policies and Version Control

Related Policies / Procedure

Version Policy / Procedure Name Number Approval Date Approved by Status

Policy on Student Assessment

and Learning Academic Senate

Student Finance Policy College Council

Appeals and Grievances

Procedures

Academic Senate

Examination Rules

Academic Senate

VC Attendance Policy Academic Senate

Version History Version Procedure Name Procedure

Number

Approval Date Approved by Summary of

Changes


Annexes


Annex 1- Assessment Process Timelines

Process 1: Administration of Assessment Components (excluding examinations)

Responsible Person Task Timeline

Programme Coordinator Assigning the Assessment

Preparation

1 Week before semester

commencement

Module Leader/Lecturer Preparing the Assessment

+ Assessment Brief

Week 1

Module Leader/Lecturer Complete Form 1: Pre

Assessment Moderation

Form

Week 2

Module Leader/Lecturer Create TurnitIn Link for

Assessment submission

Week 2

Programme Coordinator Collects all Pre Assessment

Moderation Forms and

submit to FAC

Week 2

Head of Academic Unit Conducts FAC Review Week 3

FAC Approved the set

Assessment

Week 3

Module Leader/Lecturer Disseminate the

Assessment brief/ Upload

to Moodle

Week 3

Student Submit the Assessment As per deadline

Administrative Staff Collects the Assessment

and allocate to marker

As per due date given to

marker

Module Leader/Lecturer Marks the Assessment in

accordance with the rubric

3 weeks after assessment

submission deadline

Programme Coordinator Follow up on marking

status (If necessary make

alternative arrangements)

1 week after assigning to

marker

Programme Coordinator Obtain marked

Assessment and feedback

sheets

3 Weeks after assigning for

marking

Programme Coordinator Allocate 3 samples for

peer review

3 days after obtaining

marked assessments


Programme Coordinator Ensure Peer Reviewers

complete Post

Moderation Forms

1 week after obtaining

marked assessments

Programme Coordinator Collects all Post

Assessment Moderation

Forms and submit to FAC

2 Weeks after obtaining

marked assessments

Dean / Head of School Conducts FAC Review 2-3 Weeks after obtaining

marked assessments

FAC Approved the marked

assessments

2-3 Weeks after obtaining

marked assessments

Administrative staff/

Lecturer

Enter the marks to system/

marksheet

2-3 Weeks after obtaining

marked assessments


Process 2: Administration of Examinations


Module Leader/Lecturer Preparing the Examination Paper

+ Answer Scheme

Week 4

Module Leader/Lecturer Complete Form 1: Pre

Moderation Form (Examination)

Week 4

Programme Coordinator Collects all Pre Moderation Forms

(Examination) and submit to FAC

Week 5 - 6

Faculty Assessment

Committee

Moderate and approve the

Examination Papers

Week 7-8

Programme Coordinator Handover hardcopy or email

(password protected)

Examination Papers to Chief of

Examinations

Week 9

Programme Coordinator Password Protect / Secure Answer

Scheme

Week 9

Chief of Examinations Collects all Examination Papers

and follow up with pending

Examination Papers

Week 10-11

Chief of Examinations Release Examination Timetable Week 11-12

Examination Office Administers Examination As per announced

Exam Timetable

Examination Office Handover answer scripts to

respective Academic Units

Within 1 week after

exam is

administered

Module Leader/Lecturer Marks the examination answer

scripts in accordance with the

answer scheme

2 Weeks after exam

answer scripts are

received

Programme Coordinator Follow up on marking status (If

necessary make alternative

arrangements)

1 Week after

assigning to marker

Programme Coordinator Obtain marked exam papers and

feedback sheets

2 Weeks after

assigning to marker

Programme Coordinator Allocate 3 samples for exam paper

for peer review

1 Week after

receiving marked

exam papers


Programme Coordinator Ensure Peer Reviewers complete

Post Moderation Forms (for

examinations)

1 -2 Weeks after

receiving marked

exam papers

Programme Coordinator Collects all Post Assessment

Moderation Forms and submit to

FAC

1- 2 Weeks after

receiving marked

exam papers

Dean / Head of School Conducts FAC Review 14th – 15th Week

FAC Approved the results 15th Week

Administrative staff/

Lecturer

Enter the marks to system/

marksheet

15th Week


Process 3: Marks Approval and Endorsement


Programme Coordinator Informs Registration and

requests for marks

endorsement

15th Week

Programme Coordinator Sends Post Moderation

Form and FAC Report to

Assessment Committee

Records (both Assessment

+ Exam)

15th Week

Head of Registration Cross check for all non-

active/deferred

students/MC Submissions

15th Week

Head of Registration/

Enrollment Officer

Informs the FAC /

Programme Coordinator of

any errors in enrollment

status which affect the

results

15th Week

Head of Registration Organize Assessment

Committee meeting for

marks endorsement

15th Week

Chair of Assessment

Committee

Conducts Assessment

Committee to Approve the

marks

15th – 16th Week

Chair of Assessment

Committee

Allocate virtual board

/committee for

outstanding issue

clearance

15th – 16th Week

Secretary of the

Assessment Committee

Records the matters,

outstanding issues and

follow-up matters

15th – 16th Week

Head of Registration Approve on Student

Management System

(SMS) for individual mark

release

15th – 16th Week


Annex 2 - Form1: Pre-assessment Moderation: Coursework

Checklist of materials to supply along with this form;

Assessment brief ☐

Assessment rubric/marking criteria ☐

Assessment cover sheet ☐

Module Code

Module Name

Module Leader

Trimester/Year

Faculty

Course Coordinator

Alignment of learning outcomes and assessment components

(to be filled by the module leader)

(En

ter

the

asse

ssm

ent

com

po

ne

nt)

(En

ter

the

asse

ssm

ent

com

po

ne

nt)

(En

ter

the

asse

ssm

ent

com

po

ne

nt)

Expected Learning Outcome 1





Form 1: Pre-assessment Moderation: Coursework (Use one form for each assessment component)


Addressing validity, reliability, fairness and authenticity aspects


Aspects to be met Y/N

Assessment brief reflects the skills and knowledge described in the learning outcomes of the

module; and the evidence to be submitted relates directly to the requirements.

The assessment task mainly constitutes original work previously not provided to the

students

Marking scheme or rubric provides clear criteria for marking (rubric or marking criteria provides

sufficient evidence for competency to be determined, and assessment decisions can be justified)

and are in alignment with the Grade Level Descriptors of Villa College.

Assessment brief provides clear instructions to students (requirements, how to submit?, deadline,

word limit, coversheet, etc)

The assessment elements provide all students (including differently abled students) the chance to

demonstrate performance, skills and knowledge.

Mechanisms are in place to provide objective assessment feedback

Systems are in place that ensure the evidence submitted by the student is their own work

Internal Moderation

(to be filled by the moderator and the module leader)

Internal moderator comments Module Leader's response

Internal moderation completed:

Signed: Date:


Annex 3 - Form 2: Pre-assessment Moderation: Examinations


Examinations paper ☐

Answer scheme ☐

Module Code

Module Name

Module Leader

Trimester/Year

Faculty

Course Coordinator

Administrative Aspects and Content Coverage



The question paper is complete with all accompanying documents such as formula sheets.

The cover page has all relevant details: faculty name; semester details; date; module name; module

code; duration of exam; and instructions for candidates; additional materials required and

permitted.

The instructions to candidates are clearly specified and unambiguous.

Mark allocations are clearly indicated.

The paper adequately covers the learning outcomes of the module.

The weighting and spread of content are appropriate.

Questions are free from bias, for example, gender.

Marking scheme or rubric provides clear criteria for marking and are in alignment with the Grade

Level Descriptors of Villa College.

Form 2: Pre-assessment Moderation: Examinations (Use one form for each exam)


Mapping to Cognitive Levels


Cognitive Levels

LOW MEDIUM HIGH

Item/

Question Topic Remember Understand Apply Analyse Evaluate Create

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Etc

Total

marks

Internal Moderation




Signed: Date:


Notes guiding the cognitive levels mapping:

BLOOM’S REVISED TAXONOMY

Taxonomy is a method of classifying questions based on the various cognitive levels. Because of its

six levels of thinking, Bloom’s revised taxonomy can provide a framework that incorporates low to

high-level thinking activities.

CREATING, EVALUATING, ANALYSING AND APPLYING would be considered as the higher levels of

cognition, whereas UNDERSTANDING AND REMEMBERING would be considered as the lower levels

of cognition. See detail explanation below.

CREATE

(Putting together ideas or elements to develop

an original idea or engage in creative thinking)

assemble, construct, create, design, develop, formulate,

write, generate, plan, produce

EVALUATE

(Judging the value of ideas, materials and

methods by developing and applying standards

and criteria)

appraise, argue, defend, judge, select, support, value,

evaluate critique, judge, justify, recommend

ANALYSE

(Breaking information down into its component

elements)

appraise, compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate,

discriminate, distinguish, examine, experiment, question,

test, differentiate, organise, attribute

APPLY

(Using strategies, concepts, principles and

theories in new situations)

Choose, demonstrate, dramatize, employ, illustrate,

interpret, operate, schedule, sketch, solve, use, write,

execute, implement

UNDERSTAND

(Understanding of given information)

Classify, describe, discuss, explain, identify, locate, recognize,

report, select, translate, paraphrase, interpret, exemplify,

classify, summarise, infer, compare, explain

REMEMBER

(Recall or recognition of specific information)

define, duplicate, list, memorize, recall, repeat, reproduce,

state, recognise, recall


Annex 4 - Form 3: Post-marking Moderation


Assessment samples ☐

Completed marks list ☐

Evidence of student feedback ☐

Module Code

Module Name

Module Leader

Trimester/Year

Faculty

Course Coordinator

Administrative Aspects and Content Coverage



The marking corresponds to the detailed marking criteria and marking scheme [If marking provided

are consistently harsh or lenient and if this has not been addressed through sample re-marking,

scaling may be required.]

Where the same assessment component is marked by different markers, there is consistency

between the markers and marks are agreed. [If NOT agreed, reconciliation exercise should be carried

out.]

The total marks are accurate and appropriate

The feedback is helpful and sufficient

Internal Moderation




Signed: Date:

Form 3: Post-marking Moderation (Use one form for each assessment component)


Annex 5- Guidelines for Reasonable Adjustment

These guidelines can be used by the Faculty Assessment Committee in determining Reasonable

Adjustments

Altered Assessing Conditions

Type of Adjustment Examples of Why Adjustment is Necessary

Alternative Examination Venue

Use of a private, distraction-reduced room or

a distraction-reduced room with a few other

students.

Student for whom isolation is required

due to a medical condition.

Student uses accommodations that

would distract others (e.g., speech-

recognition software, use of a scribe).

Auxiliary Aids

Use of laptops, scribes, readers, real-time

captioning or sign language interpreter.

Student with severe visual impairments,

spinal cord injury or limited mobility of

hand/arm and may need a scribe to

write exam answers.

Student with hearing impairment may

need a sign language interpreter or

real-time captioner to access oral

instructions or oral exam materials.

Extended Time

Amount of time authorized is determined on

an individual basis considering the nature and

severity of the impairment as verified in the

student’s documentation and the

accommodations used in the examination

process.

Student who needs to use a variety of

devices, methods, or scribes for reading

or recording responses to exams

require additional time to transfer

answers or process material.

Student with visual impairment who

reads or records the exam in enlarged

print may need extra time.

Student with chronic illness or mental

health disorder where symptoms of

disability or side effects of medications

result in lowered stamina or cognitive

slowing may need added time.


Type of Adjustment Examples of Why Adjustment is Necessary

Student with a learning disability whose

reading lacks automaticity in rate and

fluency may require additional time.

Breaks Student who is taking prescription

medications to alleviate pain, or has

diabetes may need breaks during an

exam for ingestion of food or water.

Student with traumatic brain injury may

require short breaks to refocus.

Student with a physical disorder may

require movement to relieve muscle

strain and tension.

Assistive Technology

Hardware & Software Student with visual impairment may use

text recognition program that converts

printed text to voice in order to listen to

examination questions.

Student who has restricted use of hands or

student with a learning disability may use a

computer with speech-recognition software

to write (dictate) exams.


The table below provides the responsibilities in providing RA for students

Exam Adjustments Responsibilities

Alternative Examination

Arrangment:

Private or semi-private

distraction-reduced room

Requested by student to Examination Office once approval

letter is received by the student.

Examination Office to arrange the examination venue and exam

start/end time and inform the student and programme

coordinator.

Exam Laptops ("scrubbed"

laptop)

Requested by student once approval letter is received by the

student.

Arranged by the Examinations Office based on the FAC approval

and informed to student.

Auxiliary Aids

Scribes, readers, ASL

interpreters, real-time

captioning

Requested by student once approval letter is received.

Arranged by the Examinations Office and informed to student.

Extended Times and Breaks Adjustment Letter of approval will specify additional time for

exams or breaks. Student is expected to take exam within

specified conditions.

Assistive Technology

Hardware & Software

Requested by student once approval letter is received.

Arranged by the Examinations Office.


Annex 6 - Assignment Coverpage


Annex 7 - Villa College Grading Scale and Grade Level Descriptors

The Villa College Grade Level Descriptors are general statements that describe student

performance at each of the College’s grade levels. They aim to:

a) Communicate to students and staff what our grades represent in terms of standards of

performance.

o Students can refer to these descriptors prospectively when working on assessments

to understand what is expected of them, and retrospectively after having received

a mark for an assessment or in a subject to understand how their performance has

been assessed and graded.

o Staff can refer to these descriptors prospectively when designing assessment tasks

and marking criteria and when marking assessments, including using them as a basis

for crafting marking rubrics, and retrospectively when undertaking benchmarking

and review of marking and grading.

b) Provide a frame of reference for moderation of assessment activities, especially within

teaching teams, to ensure that assessment practice across the University is appropriate,

consistent and fair.


Grading Scale

Grade Notation Marks (%) Grade Point

High Distinction HD 85-100

4.00

Distinction DN 75-84

3.00

Credit CR 65-74

2.00

Pass PP 50-64

1.00

Fail FF 0-49 0.00

Fail Hurdle FH NA 0.00

Satisfactory (Pass where no grade is

given)

SA NA NA

Unsatisfactory (Fail where no grade is

given)

US NA NA

In Progress IP NA

Credit Transfer1 CT NA

Authorised Withdrawal WD NA

Withdrawn Fail WF 0.00

Continuing Class CC NA

Audit AU NA

Results not yet available NR NA

1Grade point averages (GPA's) from other institutions do not transfer to Villa College.


Grade Level Descriptors for Undergraduate Programmes

Grade Mark (%) Descriptors for Undergraduate Programmes

High

Distinction

(HD)

85-100 A high distinction grade (HD) is awarded for performance that provides evidence of an outstanding level of attainment of the relevant subject learning outcomes, demonstrating the attributes of a distinction grade plus (as applicable):

• consistent evidence of deep and critical understanding

• substantial originality and insight in identifying, generating and communicating competing arguments, perspectives or problem-solving approaches

• critical evaluation of problems, their solutions and their

implications

• use of quantitative analysis of data as the basis for deep and thoughtful judgments, drawing insightful, carefully qualified conclusions from this work

• creativity in application as appropriate to the discipline

• eloquent and sophisticated communication of information

and ideas in terms of the conventions of the discipline

• consistent application of appropriate skills, techniques and methods with outstanding levels of precision and accuracy

• all or almost all answers correct, very few or none

incorrect

Distinction (D) 75-84 A distinction grade (D) is awarded for performance that provides evidence of a

superior level of attainment of the relevant subject learning outcomes,

demonstrating the attributes of a credit grade plus (as applicable):

• evidence of integration and evaluation of critical ideas,

principles, concepts and/or theories

• distinctive insight and ability in applying relevant skills,

techniques, methods and/or concepts

• demonstration of frequent originality in defining and

analysing issues or problems and providing solutions

• fluent and thorough communication of information and

ideas in terms of the conventions of the discipline

• frequent application of appropriate skills, techniques and

methods with superior levels of precision and accuracy

• most answers correct, few incorrect


Credit (C) 65-74 A credit grade (C) is awarded for performance that provides evidence of a high level of attainment of the relevant subject learning outcomes, demonstrating the attributes of a pass grade plus (as applicable):

• evidence of learning that goes beyond replication of content knowledge or skills

• demonstration of solid understanding of fundamental

concepts in the field of study

• demonstration of the ability to apply these concepts in a

variety of contexts

• use of convincing arguments with appropriate coherent

and logical reasoning

• clear communication of information and ideas in terms of

the conventions of the discipline

• regular application of appropriate skills, techniques and

methods with high levels of precision and accuracy

• many answers correct, some incorrect

Pass (P) 50-64 A pass grade (P) is awarded for performance that provides evidence of a satisfactory level attainment of the relevant subject learning outcomes, demonstrating (as applicable):

• knowledge, understanding and application of fundamental

concepts of the field of study

• use of routine arguments with acceptable reasoning

• adequate communication of information and ideas in

terms of the conventions of the discipline

• ability to apply appropriate skills, techniques and methods

with satisfactory levels of precision and accuracy

• a combination of correct and incorrect answers

Fail (F) <50 A fail grade (F) is given for performance that does not provide sufficient

evidence of attainment of the relevant subject learning outcomes.

Fail Hurdle (FH) A technical fail (TF) grade is given when minimum performance level

requirements for at least one hurdle assessment item in the subject as a

whole has not been met despite the student achieving at least 50 marks.

Satisfactory (S) A satisfactory grade (S) is awarded for performance that demonstrates a

satisfactory level of attainment of the relevant subject learning outcomes

where no grade is given.

Unsatisfactory (U) An unsatisfactory grade (U) is awarded for performance that demonstrates an

unsatisfactory level of attainment of the relevant subject learning outcomes


In Progress (IP) In Progress. This grade is granted when a student has not completed all assessments

for a module and the deferred assessments are approved. When the student receive

a final grade, it replaces the “IP” grade. An “IP” grade can usually only be carried for

one semester.

Credit Transfer (CT) Credit transfer/Cross credit/Advanced standing - credit from another programme of study accepted.

Authorized

Withdrawal (WD)

Withdrawal on, or prior to, the census date. This has no effect on GPA as the grade is

NOT counted as a fail.

Withdrawn Fail

(WF)

Withdrawal after the census date. In calculating GPA, this is counted as a fail.


Continuing Class

(CC)

Classes scheduled over consecutive semesters.

Audit (AU) The grade of AU is awarded for courses taken for audit.

Results not yet

available (NR)

Results not yet available.

Nb: Grade level descriptors for undergraduate programmes are adopted from Macquarie University’s scheme of Grade Level Descriptors


Grade Level Descriptors for Postgraduate Programmes

Grade Mark (%) Descriptors for Undergraduate Programmes

High Distinction (HD)

85-100 Conceptual Domain

The exploration, interpretation and critical analysis of the issues under study are

expressed fluently and have been synthesised to form a cohesive argument which

engages critically and convincingly with relevant theoretical perspectives. There is

sustained and coherent transformation of alternative viewpoints in developing

argument.

Literature Domain

An extensive range of relevant literature, including appropriate primary sources, has

been synthesised in the critical analysis and discussion of ideas including evidence of

critical engagement with the literature, including with relevant theory.

Contextual Domain

There is an extensive and creative synthesis of a full range of relevant contextual

factors which is supported by a critical discussion of the contextual significance of

each one.

Research Domain

The student can plan for and execute a small scale enquiry in a systematic and

reflexive manner. Methodological and epistemological issues have been thoroughly

explored and decisions convincingly justified. There is outstanding evidence of critical

analysis and evaluation of research outcomes.

Ethical Domain

There is a reflective understanding of a comprehensive range of ethical issues

associated with the area of study. There is a sensitive and critical engagement with an

appropriate ethical framework for the interpretation of ideas and/or practice. There is

evidence of a creative exploration of relevant problematics arising in relation to

ethical dilemmas or decisions.

Distinction (D) 75-84 Conceptual Domain


expressed fluently and coherently and have been synthesised to form a cohesive

argument. The student engages critically with relevant and contrasting theoretical

perspectives.

Literature Domain

An extensive range of relevant and appropriate literature has been skilfully utilised in

the critical analysis and discussion of ideas, including evidence of excellent critical

engagement with the literature.

Contextual Domain

There is an extensive awareness and understanding of a wide range of significant

contextual factors which is supported by a critical discussion of the contextual

significance of each one.

Research Domain


reflexive manner. Methodological and epistemological issues have been explored and

decisions fully justified. There is extensive evidence of critical analysis and evaluation

of research outcomes.

Ethical Domain

There is a reflective understanding of a broad range of ethical issues associated with

the area of study. There is a sensitive and critical engagement with an appropriate

ethical framework for the interpretation of ideas and/or practice. There is evidence of


a full exploration of relevant problematics arising in relation to ethical dilemmas or

decisions.

Credit (C) 65-74 Conceptual Domain


expressed confidently and coherently and form the basis of the development of a

cohesive argument. The student engages with relevant theoretical perspectives.

Literature Domain

A wide range of relevant and appropriate literature has been utilised in analysis and

discussion of ideas. A number of examples of good critical engagement with that

literature are apparent.

Contextual Domain

There is good awareness and understanding of the relevant contextual factors

supported by a critical discussion of how these are significant to the area of study.

Research Domain


reflexive manner. The main methodological and epistemological issues have been

identified and discussed. There is good critical analysis and evaluation of research

outcomes.

Ethical Domain

There is an awareness of a range of ethical issues associated with the area of study

and sensitive engagement with an appropriate ethical framework for the

interpretation of ideas and/or practice. There is a clear exploration of some of the

problematics arising in relation to ethical dilemmas or decisions.

Pass (P) 50-64 Conceptual Domain

The exploration and interpretation of relevant ideas and perspectives are presented

in an organised way.

Critical analysis has been attempted successfully. There is some development of

argument.

Literature Domain

A range of relevant literature has been used to give some analysis and discussion of

ideas. Some examples of critical engagement are apparent.

Contextual Domain

There is some awareness and understanding of relevant contextual factors apparent

and some discussion around the significance of these upon the area of study.

Research Domain

The student can plan for and execute a small scale enquiry, in places demonstrating a

systematic and reflexive approach. There is some identification and explanation of

methodological and epistemological issues around the research process. There is

some analysis and evaluation of research outcomes.

Ethical Domain

There is an awareness of some of the ethical issues associated with the area of study.

There is reference to an appropriate ethical framework for the interpretation of ideas

and/or practice. There is some evidence of identification of some of the problematics

arising in relation to ethical dilemmas or decisions.

Fail (F) <50 Conceptual Domain

Presentation of content lacks coherence and there is a degree of irrelevance and/or

inaccuracy.

Little or no evidence of critical analysis and/or evaluation is present.

Attempts to synthesise ideas into an argument is unsuccessful or inadequate.

Literature Domain


Reference to irrelevant literature and/or use of a narrow range of sources.

Inappropriate sources used, for example non-academic or out of date. Little or no

engagement with theory from literature

Contextual Domain

There is limited awareness and understanding of the range of contextual factors that

are relevant to the area of study and/or little awareness of the contextual

significance.

Research Domain

The student has not demonstrated that they are able to plan for and execute a small

scale enquiry in a systematic manner. There is little identification of methodological

and epistemological issues around the research process. There is inadequate analysis

of the research outcomes.

Ethical Domain

There is little or no awareness of some of the ethical issues associated with the area

of study. There is no reference to an appropriate ethical framework for the

interpretation of ideas and/or practice. There is little or no identification of the

problematics arising in relation to ethical dilemmas or decisions.

Fail Hurdle (FH) A technical fail (TF) grade is given when minimum performance level

requirements for at least one hurdle assessment item in the subject as a

whole has not been met despite the student achieving at least 50 marks.

Satisfactory (S) A satisfactory grade (S) is awarded for performance that demonstrates a

satisfactory level of attainment of the relevant subject learning outcomes


Unsatisfactory (U) An unsatisfactory grade (U) is awarded for performance that demonstrates an

unsatisfactory level of attainment of the relevant subject learning outcomes


In Progress (IP) In Progress. This grade is granted when a student has not completed all assessments

for a module and the deferred assessments are approved. When the student receive

a final grade, it replaces the “IP” grade. An “IP” grade can usually only be carried for

one semester.

Credit Transfer

(CT) Credit transfer/Cross credit/Advanced standing - credit from another programme of

study accepted.

Authorized

Withdrawal (WD) Withdrawal on, or prior to, the census date. This has no effect on GPA as the grade is

NOT counted as a fail.

Withdrawn Fail

(WF) Withdrawal after the census date. In calculating GPA, this is counted as a fail.

Continuing Class

(CC) Classes scheduled over consecutive semesters.

Audit (AU) The grade of AU is awarded for courses taken for audit.

Results not yet

available (NR) Results not yet available.

Nb: Grade level descriptors for postgraduate programmes are adopted from UWE Bristol.

procedure on assessment and...

Documents