UEL’s Assessment and Feedback Policy

1. UEL’s Assessment and Feedback Policy David Rowley Associate Dean, School of Health, Sport and Bioscience Academic Practice and Student Experience

2. Context

3. Context

4. Assessment + Engagement Policy • Introduction • Assessment Design • Assessment, Moderation and Marking • Management of Assessment • Feedback • Disability • Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body Exemptions

5. 1. Introduction The Policy applies to ALL UEL programmes within the UEL Academic Framework Principles of assessment: • based on learning outcomes • integral to programme design • fair and free from bias • valid, transparent and reliable • timely and incremental • demanding yet manageable + efficient • consistent

6. 2. Assessment Design -effective design ensures:

7. Assessment Design -effective design ensures:

8. Assessment criteria • Assessment criteria are helpful to students in that they enable the students to better understand what is expected of them • Assessment criteria are helpful to staff/ external examiners in that they are also clear on what is expected and they help to ensure consistency in marking • Try to avoid subjective terms such as ‘good’ or ‘poor’ when writing your criteria • Carefully constructed criteria can also encourage staff to use the full range of marks available.

9. 3. Assessment, Moderation & Marking

10. Assessment, Moderation + Marking

11. Assessment, Moderation + Marking – key issues

12. Assessment, Moderation + Marking

13. Assessment, Moderation + Marking

14. Assessment, Moderation + MarkingResolving differences between markers

15. Changing marks • If, as a result of moderation, marks for pieces of work in the sample moderated are changed, then it becomes necessary to remark the whole group. • It is also necessary to second mark every submission for work where the assessment cannot be done anonymously e.g presentations, project work etc.

16. Assessment, Moderation + MarkingExternal Moderation: External Examiners are sent

17. 4. Management of assessment

18. Management of assessment

19. Management of assessment

20. Management of assessment

21. Submission and deadlines • Deadlines should not be set outside of normal university working hours to ensure support is available in the event of submission problems • Students who submit after the deadline but within 24 hours can have their work marked. In such cases you should deduct 5 marks as a penalty for late submission from the achieved mark (assuming marking is /100). • Work submitted more than 24 hours late should not be marked, however if it is within 7 days it should be retained in case the student is granted extenuation.

22. 5. Feedback

23. 5. Feedback

24. 6. Disability

25. Disability

26. 7. Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body Exemptions Exemptions require written approval of the Chair of University Learning and Teaching Committee

27. 8. Appendices • Glossary and Supporting Information • Second Marking • Assessment Criteria • Roles and Responsibilities • Assessment Tariff and Equivalences • Guidelines: Electronic submission, marking and feedback of coursework • Using assessment to enhance learning

29. UEL’s Assessment and Feedback Policy http://www.uel.ac.uk/qa/AssessmentPolicy.htm

30. Academic Integrity at UEL • The AI Policy ensures consistency of treatment and equality of experience for all students at UEL • Our responsibility to protect the credibility of the qualifications • The AI Policy is supported by policies on standard referencing and use of Turnitin + Academic Misconduct Regulations • Turnitin utilised as a text matching tool not a plagiarism detector • Identifying plagiarism is an issue of academic judgement, not a Turnitin percentage – no percentage is acceptable

31. Cite Them Right UEL’s Standard Referencing System is Cite Them Right (Harvard) or APA for students studying programmes in the School of Psychology.

32. Defining Academic Misconduct UEL defines academic misconduct as any behaviour: “likely to confer an unfair advantage in assessment, whether by advantaging the alleged offender or disadvantaging (deliberately or unconsciously) another or others” (UEL Manual of General Regulations, 2010, Part 8 Academic Misconduct, 8.2.1)

33. Most common types of Academic Misconduct Plagiarism: The submission of material (written, visual or oral), originally produced by another person or persons or oneself, without due acknowledgement, so that the work could be assumed to be the student's own … includes incorporation of significant extracts or elements taken from the work of (an)other(s) or oneself, without acknowledgement or reference

34. Most common types of Academic Misconduct Collusion: The submission of work produced in collaboration for an assignment based on the assessment of individual work.

35. Process for dealing with cases of suspected misconduct • New Regulations being considered by Academic Board in September 2014 Overview: • First and non-serious suspected offences dealt with at School level • Subsequent or serious (grossly dishonest) suspected offences dealt with centrally • Academic Misconduct Panels consider cases where necessary

36. Policies and Regulations • Academic Integrity • Use of Turnitin • Standard Referencing http://www.uel.ac.uk/qa/policies/policies/

37. Key Contacts: School Responsible Officers: • ADIDr Abel Ugba • ACE TBC • Cass Debbie Brearley • HSB Deidre O’Kelly • Law + Business Ian Porton/Delia Langstone+Carol Luckett • Psychology Ian Wells & Susy Ajith • Social Sciences TBC

38. Key Contacts: Academic Misconduct Officer: Dee Bozacigurbuz academicmisconduct@uel.ac.uk