See also annex 13.
22.1 The mark for each individual unit is calculated as the weighted average of the marks for each of its constituent assessments.
22.2 For the purposes of awarding credit for an individual unit, the mark for each unit is rounded to the nearest integer.
22.3 For the purposes of determining progression from year to year or from the taught component to the dissertation stage, the actual unit mark is used to calculate the average year mark or taught component mark (see sections 30-32).
22.4 For the purposes of determining the final programme mark and degree classification in taught modular programmes, the actual unit mark is used to calculate the final programme mark (see sections 33 and 34).
22.5 Programmes may weight the different assessments within a unit and may permit compensation across assessments within a unit, as prescribed within the appropriate unit specifications, unless the assessment has been designated as ‘must-pass’.
22.6 The final unit mark should be displayed as the calculated rounded integer, unless required by a board of examiners for the purposes of calculating the year mark/taught
58
component mark (so to determine progression) or the final programme mark (so to determine degree classification).
22.7 Students should receive the scores for each assessment, as well as their overall rounded unit mark.
The year mark in undergraduate programmes
22.8 For the purposes of determining progression, specifically for the application of 30.12, the overall mark achieved for the year in undergraduate programmes is calculated by averaging the weighted unit marks and rounding the result to the nearest integer.
22.9 Units that are pass/fail do not contribute towards the calculation of the year mark, but must be passed for the purposes of progression / completion.
22.10 The weighting given to the unit mark will correspond to the credit point value of the unit, e.g. the mark for a 20 credit point unit would be a 1/6 of the whole year mark, if the student has to achieve 120 credit points during the year.
See annex 13 for an example of this calculation.
The taught component mark - in taught postgraduate programmes
22.11 For the purposes of determining progression from the taught component to the dissertation stage, specifically the application of 31.12 and classification the overall mark achieved for the taught component is calculated by averaging the weighted unit marks and rounding the result to the nearest integer.
22.12 Units that are pass/fail will not contribute towards the calculation of the taught component mark, but must be passed for the purposes of progression / completion.
22.13 The weighting given to the unit mark will correspond to the credit point value of the unit, e.g. the mark for a 20 credit point unit would be 1/6 of the whole year mark, if the student has to achieve 120 credit points during the year.
See annex 13 for an example of this calculation.
22.14 Progression to the dissertation stage is normally only permitted on the satisfactory completion of the taught component. There is no compensation between the taught component and the dissertation (i.e. a mark in the taught component cannot
compensate for a lower mark in the dissertation, and vice versa). The dissertation may be suspended at the discretion of the relevant Board of Examiners if the result from the taught component is unsatisfactory.
23. Anonymity
23.1 Summative assessments should be marked anonymously unless it is not practicable (e.g. for an oral examination, or in a small cohort), or there is a clear academic benefit that outweighs those of full anonymity, such as providing personalised feedback to students.
23.2 When full anonymity in marking is not possible or judged to be of less benefit in comparison to the provision of personalised feedback to students, then schools and unit directors are responsible for ensuring that marks are awarded in a fair and equitable manner through the use of specific moderation techniques, by a partial level of anonymity combined with specific moderation techniques, and/or review by an external examiner.
23.3 Anonymity must be preserved when marks are considered at school boards of examiners.
59
23.4 Anonymity must be preserved at faculty board of examiners, unless there is good reason to remove the anonymity for an individual student, which is judged to be in the student’s interests. It is at the discretion of the chair of the board whether the removal of anonymity should be applied, on a case by case basis.
23.5 Students will be given a candidate number for retention until they have completed the programme of study.
24. Penalties
For academic misconduct
The University’s Examination Regulations (annex 5) contain full details of the regulations and procedures to be followed in respect of academic misconduct, including plagiarism.
24.1 Information on what constitutes academic misconduct in respect of assessment (including clear definitions of plagiarism, collusion, cheating, impersonation and the use of inadmissible material) should be provided, or referenced by a web link, in school handbooks together with specific information about the consequences of such misconduct. It may be necessary for individual schools to develop additional
guidance on what constitutes academic misconduct, to reflect the relevant academic discipline.
24.2 When recommending a penalty to a Board of Examiners, an appropriately constituted committee/panel will consider the offence and penalty independently of its potential impact on the student’s degree classification. Whether the penalty for offence in question should be reflected in the degree class to be awarded is the judgement of the board. In such cases, Boards of Examiners should take into account any effect on the degree classification that the penalty already has had.
For the late submission of summative coursework
24.3 Students must be made aware of the existence of penalties for not meeting
submission deadlines. These should be clearly specified in writing to students and staff at the beginning of the programme / unit, preferably in the programme / unit handbook.
24.4 Faculties’ policies on the penalties for the late submission of undergraduate summative coursework, should be in accordance with the following:
a) Faculties should adopt an approach to the late submission of coursework within the framework provided and their schools should ensure that the policy is communicated to students at the outset of their studies, stated in student handbooks and re-iterated at the start of teaching of each unit;
b) Schools should ensure that students from other schools or faculties who register for their units are made explicitly aware of the faculty policy on the late
submission of coursework;
c) Coursework that is submitted after a deadline should be subject to some penalty, unless an extension has been agreed by the School, prior to the deadline, or late submission is justified by reason of illness or other validated extenuating
circumstance (see section 27);
d) For work submitted up to 24 hours after the agreed submission deadline, a penalty of 10 marks out of 100 (or 3 marks out of 20) from the actual mark the student would have received applies (e.g. coursework that is marked at 60/100 would become 50/100 or a mark of 10/20 would become 7/20) once the penalty is applied);
60
e) For work submitted seven calendar days after the submission deadline the student will receive a mark of 0, although schools may still require work of a satisfactory standard to be submitted in order for credit to be awarded;
f) Faculties should decide on the rate of reduction, by day or at specific thresholds, for late submissions made after the 24 hour period but within 7 days. In setting the rate by which the mark is reduced the weighting of the assessment may be taken into account;
g) Any penalty applied should be in the form of a mark reduction from the mark the student would have achieved.
For exceeding the size limit in summative coursework
24.5 Faculties’ policies for defining the size limit of summative coursework, by assessment type, and the penalty for exceeding the defined limit, for its taught programmes, should be in accordance with the following:
a) That it includes:
Whether specific forms of coursework are subject to a size limit, and if so:
Whether the size limit is defined by reference to the number of pages (with font size, line spacing, margin size, and page orientation requirements), by a word / character limit or other defined limit.
The penalty where the defined limit is exceeded.
b) Students must be informed in writing, at or before the date of issue of the coursework, the size limit and the penalty for exceeding the limit, if any, which shall accord with the approved unit specification. This information should also be provided on the cover sheet for the submission of the coursework.
c) The policy of the faculty that owns the unit will apply. It is important for students whose home programme is based in a different faculty are made fully aware that the policy applied in the submission of coursework for a unit may be different than the policy of their home faculty.
d) It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that the work complies with the defined size limit prior to submission and to certify the size (word or page length or other defined limit) on the front cover sheet when submitting the work.
e) The student in question must be informed of the decision to apply the penalty for exceeding the defined size limit.
61
F. ARRANGEMENTS AND PROCESSES FOR DETERMINING PROGRESS AND