Senate

 

Subject:          Assessment of students

 

Origin:            Learning and Teaching Committee; Programme Quality Team

 

As part of its work in preparation for the forthcoming QAA institutional audit, the Audit Steering Group (ASG) on 16 August 2007 considered the revised version of Section 6 of the QAA Code of Practice, Assessment of students.  The ASG drew the attention of the PQ Team to a number of issues arising from its discussions, with proposals for action.

 

Areas under discussion included double/second marking and moderation, as defined in the QAA Code.  The ASG reviewed the current description of University assessment procedures as set out in our Academic Quality Procedures Handbook and proposed a number of amendments

(a)   to address the fact that the University’s current procedures on double marking/internal moderation only covered examination scripts, and

(b)   to bring the explanation of University procedures in line with the QAA definitions. 

 

The amendments agreed by the Programme Quality Team and recommended to LTC were amended by LTC.  The revised version of the procedures now recommended to Senate by LTC is set out below. 

 

The relevant QAA definitions appear at the end of the document.

 

 

Academic Quality Procedures Handbook Section 3

 

3.6              Assessment process

 

Current version

(vii)   Examination scripts are double-marked by selective sampling based on the following criteria:

·         Borderline cases

·         Students showing widely fluctuating marks within scripts

·         Other unusual cases

·         Papers marked by probationary staff

·         Exemplars clearly demonstrating performance within a given class

Anonymous marking of examination scripts is practised University-wide. Scripts are identified only by ID number and desk number until marks are transferred to the student record. Departments may specify that coursework for named modules will be marked anonymously. This shall be clearly announced to students. It is expected that staff will not take steps to break anonymity until the marking and double marking process has been completed. There is no University requirement for blind marking (where a second examiner marks a piece of work without seeing the marks and comments made by the first examiner). For any module contributing to the award of a degree assessed by coursework alone, a sample of the work must be seen by the External Examiner. Coursework moderation requirements are under review.

 

Proposed revision as amended by LTC

 

(vii)  All examination scripts are subject to internal moderation: i.e. a sample of scripts is scrutinised by a second internal examiner to check that the assessment criteria have been applied consistently (and where applicable that the marking scheme has been followed) and the outcomes of the assessment are fair and reliable.  The sample should include examples of scripts from across the mark range and borderline cases. 

 

(viii)  All projects and dissertations are subject to double/second marking: i.e. every piece of work is independently assessed by more than one internal examiner.  Each marker keeps a record of all marks awarded, together with his/her rationale for awarding each mark.  In some cases, second markers have sight of the first marker’s marks and/or comments.  Where this is not the case (sometimes called ‘double blind marking’), marking sheets may be used to ensure that the marks given by the first marker do not influence the second marker’s judgement.  The two markers subsequently confer to arrive at a set of agreed marks.

 

(ix)  Pieces of coursework, other than project reports or dissertations, that contribute 50% or more of the overall mark for the module, are subject to internal moderation by selective sampling (cf examination scripts).  This applies whether the module is assessed by a mixture of written examination and coursework, or by coursework alone.

 

(x)  In cases where there is a difference between the marks of different internal examiners that cannot be resolved between them, the opinion of a third internal examiner should be sought.

 

(xi)  The involvement of external programme assessors and external examiners in the assessment process is explained in the ‘Code of practice for external examining for taught undergraduate and postgraduate programmes’.  This includes a requirement that they see a sample of work for modules assessed by coursework alone.

 

(xii)  All examination scripts are anonymously marked: i.e. the scripts are identified only by student ID number and desk number and the identity of students is not revealed to the markers.  Departments may at their discretion determine that coursework for named modules will also be marked anonymously: this will be made clear to the students concerned. 

 

Former (viii) becomes (xiii) et seq

 

 

Relevant QAA definitions (QAA Code of Practice, Section 6 - Assessment of Students, September 2006)

 

Anonymous marking: The identity of students is not revealed to markers and/or to the assessment panel or examination board. There may be a point towards the end of the assessment process where anonymity ends.

Double/second marking (also referred to as 'internal verification'): Student work is independently assessed by more than one marker. Each marker normally keeps a record of all marks awarded, together with his/her rationale for awarding each mark. In some cases, second markers have the first marker's comments and/or marks/grades. Where this is not the case, the use of marking sheets or similar procedures for written work is sometimes used to ensure that the marks given by the first marker do not influence the second marker's judgement. Markers' notes enable discussions to take place, after initial marking, about the reasons for individuals' decisions if there is a significant difference between the markers' judgements. It is useful to define 'significant' in this respect.

Moderation: A process intended to assure that an assessment outcome is fair and reliable and that assessment criteria have been applied consistently. Forms of moderation include:

Sampling is most commonly used in the process of moderation (see above). It normally involves internal or external examiners scrutinising a sample of work from a student cohort. Sampling may be based on the desirability of checking borderline marks of any kind, or to test that assessment criteria have been applied consistently across the assessment of students in the cohort.