1 / 15

Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2013/14

Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2013/14. Stewart Smith-Langridge Annette Cooke Governance Services 20 November 2013. Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2013/14. Updated Regulations approved annually

lamont
Download Presentation

Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2013/14

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2013/14 Stewart Smith-Langridge Annette Cooke Governance Services 20 November 2013

  2. Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes 2013/14 Updated Regulations approved annually - 2014/15 proposals undergoing consultation at www.governance.salford.ac.uk/page/consultations Students sign up to each year’s Regulations Supplementary procedures supporting the regulations, e.g. Assessment and Feedback/ PMCs/ Boards of Examiners/ External Examining, are contained within the online Academic Handbook Other than approved general or specific exceptions, the regulations apply to all taught students and are paramount

  3. Assessed Work All written examinations at Levels 5, 6 and 7 levels are marked anonymously (Regulation 8.2.2) All the above are subject to moderation (Regulation 8.2.3 and Assessment and Feedback for Taught Awards Policy) As part of the moderation process, external examiners cannot negotiate individual marks There is currently no requirement for coursework to be marked anonymously

  4. Assessment Marking Scales • All elements of assessment are mark out of 100 and recorded as a % mark, unless graded Pass/Fail • Level 7 (pass = 50%) Levels 3-6 (pass = 40%) outstanding 90% – 100% outstanding excellent 80% – 89% excellent very good 70% – 79% very good Good 60% – 69% good satisfactory 50% – 59% fair unsatisfactory 40% – 49% adequate Inadequate 30% – 39% unsatisfactory Poor 20% – 29% poor very poor 10% – 19% very poor extremely poor 0% – 9% extremely poor

  5. Assessment Modules normally have one or two components of assessment which determine module mark A student is normally allowed: a) one initial attempt to take a module (with attendance) and b) one opportunity to be reassessed in components of failed module(s) and, subject to certain conditions/exceptions, c) one final opportunity to retake a module (with attendance) without any further reassessment Assessments are set at specific times (e.g. exams in examinations period) and must be passed before progression to next level/stage (i.e. at end of each UG academic year or at end of PgDip stage on Masters degree programme) Modules reassessed or retaken are capped at pass mark

  6. Non-submission and the final component Regulation 8.8.2: A student who has failed a module and has been given a component mark or grade of NS (“Non-submission”) in the final assessed component of that module shall be permitted one reassessment opportunity only in the failed component(s) and shall not be permitted to retake the module.

  7. Module Mark Calculation Method A Where the module mark is calculated as the weighted average of the component marks according to the weightings stated in the module specification This is the method most commonly used throughout the University Method B Where the module includes one or more graded (pass/fail) component that must be passed in order to pass the module Module marks are capped at 39% (UG) or 49% (PGT) if any graded component is failed Reassessed module mark can be higher than pass mark (using weighted average of component marks at first attempt)

  8. Penalties for Late Submission • Revised penalties for shorter period of late submission introduced in 2012/13 (after feedback from External Examiners): • Up to 1 working day late - penalty of 5 marks (not %) • Up to 2 working days late - penalty of 10 marks • Up to 3 working days late - penalty of 15 marks • Up to 4 working days late - penalty of 20 marks • More than 4 working days late, assessment becomes a non- • submission (and cannot be submitted/marked) • In the case of late submission, if the original mark awarded was a pass, the penalised mark cannot go below pass mark • If original mark awarded was a fail, no further penalty is applied • for late submission

  9. Personal Mitigating Circumstances (PMCs) There are three categories of PMC request that can be considered: Absence Non submission Late submission PMCs must be submitted within 10 working days of the assessment and are usually considered within 3 working days of submission. The Board of Examiners must decide on the action to implement in the case of an accepted PMC: 1. Absence – offer replacement attempt 2. Non submission - offer replacement attempt 3. Late submission – remove late submission penalties

  10. Compensation can only be given if as a consequence all credits can be accumulated to complete the level. • Failed module(s) must be fully eligible for compensation • Two types of compensation – Automatic and Discretionary • Automatic compensation for undergraduates (ARTP 9.2.4): • Failed module(s) must not exceed 20 credits • Failed module mark(s) must be at least 30% • A mark of at least 20% has been achieved for the final component • No graded components have been failed in the failed module(s) • Modules worth at least 120 credits have been taken • Modules worth at least 100 credits at that level have been passed • A level mark of at least 40% has been achieved • No component of failed module(s) has mark of 0% or grade of Fail as a penalty for academic misconduct Compensation

  11. Automatic compensation for postgraduates (ARTP 9.2.5): Up to 30 credits of PgDip stage (not Project Stage) Module mark of at least 45% in failed module Level mark of 50% Other criteria similar to UG Discretionary compensation Undergraduate students may also be considered for discretionary compensation however different criteria apply which are described in the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes (Regulations 9.2.6/7). Students must have met learning outcomes for the programme to be awarded discretionary compensation. To be discontinued from 2014/15. Compensation

  12. Degree Classification Standard Honours degree programme mark is derived from: 25% of level 5 mark + 75% of Level 6 mark Class of degree: 68.5% First 59.0% Upper second 49.5% Lower second 40.0% Third No discretion for students close to the next classification boundary. For degrees conferred from 2014/15 programme mark will use best 100 credits from each of levels 5 and 6 and retain 25:75 weighting ratio.

  13. Awards with Merit and Distinction Foundation Degrees Programme mark derived from best 100 credits at each of Levels 4 and 5, weighted 25:75 Mark of at least 68.5% = FD with Distinction Mark of at least 59.0% = FD with Merit Postgraduate Diploma Programme mark derived from 120 credits at Level 7 Programme Mark of at least 70% = PgDip with Distinction Programme Mark of at least 60.0% = PgDip with Merit Masters Degree Programme mark derived from 180 credits at Level 7 Programme Mark AND Project Stage Mark of at least 70% = Masters with Distinction Programme Mark of at least 60% AND Project Stage Mark = Masters with Merit

  14. Academic Misconduct Cases are considered by a School Academic Misconduct Panel or, in the most serious cases, the Disciplinary Panel. All suspected cases will be investigated and, if proven, one of the following penalties will be applied: A mark of 0 (or grade of fail) is awarded for the component of assessment A mark of 0 (or grade of fail) is awarded for the module A mark of 0 (or grade of fail) is awarded for the module and marks for all other modules at that level are kept at minimum pass mark/grade Additional penalties may be imposed in accordance with relevant Procedure(s)

  15. An appeal can only be considered valid on one or more of the • following grounds: • that relevant evidence is available which was not submitted in accordance with the personal mitigating circumstances procedure but for which there is reasonable or good cause for that omission; • that there has been a significant procedural error on the part of the Board of Examiners or a failure to correctly apply the relevant academic regulations; • that the Board of Examiners has acted in a way which is manifestly unreasonable. Academic Appeals

More Related