Senate

Subject: Condonement of Marginal Failure

Origin Learning and Teaching Committee 10 November 2005 – Unconfirmed Minutes

The Committee considered a report on the operation of the use of the new condonement provisions in 2004/05, which had been prepared at the request of Senate.

It was reported that a total of 125 students had benefited from condonement over the course of the main summer and SAP Programme Boards. The report showed significant diversity of practice in the way that condonement had been applied. Some departments seemed to have used it excessively, in some cases condoning an overall level of performance from individual students substantially below that required in programme regulations, whilst others had not used it at all; some departments were known to have taken a positive decision not to use it. In some cases, the reasons for exercising condonement had not been indicated in the Programme Board report as required in the new regulation.

Some suggestions were made in the report as to how the situation might be better managed in future to avoid such a high level of inconsistency in the way that condonement was being applied across the University. The Committee was anxious not to regulate it in a formulaic way, since the primary purpose of condonement had been to give examiners a measure of discretion that was previously lacking to deal with individual cases of marginal failure where the outcome for the student otherwise seemed unjust in the light of their overall performance.

It was proposed that there should be a delay in reporting to Senate to provide an opportunity for consultation with departments about their experience of working with the new condonement provisions in 2004/05 and about how condonement should be handled in the future. It was agreed to invite the Academic Registry to prepare a briefer version of the report for the purpose of the consultation, which should remind departments why condonement was introduced, and ask departments, broadly, to indicate

(i) if they wished the condonement provisions to remain in place

(ii) and if so how matters might be managed to ensure a higher level of consistency in the way the provisions were applied across the University.

It was agreed that Senate meanwhile should receive a brief update on these actions.

Author – Robert Bowyer

Date – November 2005