Managing Assessment Boards Why are we here – UMF Review Phase 2

1. Managing Assessment BoardsWhy are we here – UMF Review Phase 2

2. Contributors • Overview – Julie Hargreaves • Key Principles – Marie Ward • The Role of the Chair – Peter Steer • Administrative processes – Brenda Williams / Anne Hogarth • The Regulatory Framework – Wayne Turnbull • Feedback session – Monica Mason

3. Welcome

4. Key Principles

5. Internal Drivers • Fairness to the student body as a whole, as well as fairness to individual students in light of their contextual circumstances • Consistency of treatment for students • Maintenance of agreed academic standards • Transparency of procedures and outcomes

6. Internal drivers Consider students with regard to: • Mitigating circumstances • penalties for academic impropriety • Progression / awards / classifications • Identify issues of principle for further consideration and referral as appropriate • Fully record all decisions • Notification of outcomes to students and other sources as appropriate.

7. External Drivers • QAA – Codes of Practice • HEFCE – funding relationship / student completions • Office of the Independent Adjudicator • Collaborative partner relationships • Professional accreditation / recognition of standards

8. External Drivers • Legal responsibilities – anti-discrimination, confidentiality, Data Protection etc • Timely & efficient processing of business • License to practice issues • Duty of care to: • students • the wider community

9. Recording and dissemination of decisions / outcomes. • All assessment related procedures must be conducted in a timely and efficient manner, with due consideration to the student’s status. • Students should be notified of the outcome(s) as above • Decisions reached must be fully substantiated, clear, unambiguous and auditable [with reference to published minutes of each stage of the process as appropriate] • Decisions should always refer to the relevant element of the appropriate regulatory framework - particularly where the Board has exercised discretion

10. The minutes must transparently confirm that the regulations have been followed • Minutes must be presented in such a way that they can be read and understood de novo • Students have a right of access to all information on them held by the University - including minutes of any meetings which relate to them. Such information may later be used in internal / external proceedings

11. The role of the Chair

12. Overall principles • Equity for students, which depends on full and accurate information coupled with informed discussion • Transparent decision-making coupled with clear documentation of decisions and reasons for decisions, where discretion has been applied

13. Overall principles • Peer decision-making where all Board members may input on all aspects • Being quorate matters, including the attendance of external examiners • Consistency both within the meeting over all students and over time is an important part of an effective process.

14. Key Challenges • The role of the external examiner; one among equals? power of veto? can change individual marks? can change borderline marks without changing the rest? • International students; can they be given special dispensation for lack of language skills? • Getting agreement on difficult areas; are votes to be encouraged? are they necessary? • The use of Chair’s action

15. Link Tutors • Link tutors do not have to be at all assessment boards but attendance at least one per academic year is part of the job • Link Tutors advise on UMF regulations and check for quoracy (see Link Tutor Guide role 10) • If you cannot attend all assessment boards it is useful to select the most important one(s)

16. Link Tutors • Link tutors do not duplicate the role of the external examiner or an internal moderator • The link tutor role at assessment boards is generally similar to that of a University representative on internal boards • Active but low key participation in the board is useful, asking for points of clarification, offering suggestions

17. Link Tutors • Link Tutors do have a particular role if validation requirements, for instance UMF regulations, are not being followed • In the above case the Link Tutor has to right to intervene until the issue is resolved • The point above may require the Link Tutor to have UMF and validation documents to hand

18. Any Questions? • The points made under the heading of key challenges reflect some of the differences in viewpoint that are found across the sector. • What are your experiences? • They also indicate the need for as much consistency in approach over time as possible

19. Administrative processes

20. Session outline • Overview of the student life cycle and management information system (Oracle) • The relationship between LJMU and its Partners in preparing for the assessment process

21. The Student Lifecycle • Programme Set-up • Admission • Enrolment • Module Registration • Ongoing Assessment Activities • Progression • Reports • Awards & Graduation

22. Programme Set-up • Validation documents • Offerings • Calendars

23. Admission • Valid programme? • Patterns of study correct? • Student acceptance received? • Correct Calendar? • Correct Offering?

24. Enrolment / Registration • Confirmation / Roll-forward • Log arrival • Core & Option units confirmed • Check number of credits registered • Completion year and period confirmed

25. Ongoing Assessment Activities • Assessment • Coursework submission • Mark entry • Mark aggregration • PMCs, Extensions, Waivers • School Investigatory Panels • Information to MAB(s) • Advanced Standing

26. Unit Attempt Outcomes • Student Attempted Final Assessment Grade Mark • and Failed F Actual Mark or 0 • Competency Failure XF Actual Mark or 0 • PMC submitted, mark less than 40 DF Actual Mark • Confirmed Academic misconduct & penalty XF Actual Mark • Student NOT Attempted Final Assessment • No PMC submitted NCF Leave Blank • Submitted PMC, deferral approved by MAB NCDF Leave Blank • No Mark Awarded for Module Pass or Fail module P or F Leave Blank (including dummy sandwich modules)

27. Progression • Module Assessment Boards • Moderate module marks • Determine requirements for Referral • Programme Assessment Boards • Examine individual assessment profiles • Make decisions on: • Level Completion • Award Completion / Fallback Awards • Compensation • Trailing • Does not change marks

28. Working Together – LJMU and Partners • Communication • Keeping LJMU informed – changes at programme level, modular level – impact on Assessment boards • Relevant documentation – supporting changes

29. Working Together • Data accuracy – incorrect data in, results in incorrect data out • Data format – has to be manageable – n.b. name formats, use of LJMU OSS numbers

30. Working Together • Link tutor role – transfer of information • Link administrator? • Suggestions for improvement or items of good practice?

31. The Regulatory Framework UMF regulation and assessment board discretion

32. Mark finalisation PMC consideration Determining re-assessment requirements Applying penalties Complete mark list Full record of outcomes Record of nature and timing of all re-assessment activity Clearly worded outcome (sanction or escalation) MAB activities / outcomes

33. Review student profiles Awards Applying penalties Determine progression / completion status with a record of all decisions regarding compensation credit, trailing, re-registration Full list of awards (inc fallback) Clearly worded outcome (sanction or escalation) PAB activities / outcomes

34. MAB Receives PMC Committee recommendations Verify no prior mitigation for evidenced claims Either defer in the event of failure Or refer case to PAB where impact judged ‘severe’ PAB PMCs considered when reviewing student profiles / determining awards Module marks may not be altered Students should not benefit from secondary mitigation Opportunity to review inconsistencies in practice between MABs PMC consideration

35. MAB role in ‘facilitating progression’ • MABs determine nature and timing of referral / deferral requirements, noting that: • Student may be required to ‘re-attend’ • The form of referred/deferred assessment may vary from the initial assessment • Referred mark ‘capped’ at minimum pass threshold • Failed modules at levels 0, 1 & 2 ‘normally’ referred in the same academic year as failure • Failed modules at levels 3 & M ‘normally’ referred when the module is ‘next scheduled to be assessed’

36. PAB role in ‘facilitating progression’ • Progression ‘with trailing’ may be permitted • Students may be permitted to re-register upon a module which has been failed (both initial and referral attempts) • Compensation of failure in light of good overall performance is permitted: • Module mark in range 30-39 • Qualifying level mark => 45% • Max 20% of credit per level

37. Awards & Classification • PAB judges whether a student has attained required credits for their target award • Classification of honours degrees determined by PAB, based upon the Award Mark and upon ‘Academic Judgement’ in the case of borderline candidates • ‘very close’ to higher band (‘normally within 1%) • majority of L3 credits in higher band (‘exit velocity’) • C7.6 • Alternative exits