Brunel University Briefing for External Examiners Spring 2013

1. Brunel UniversityBriefing for External ExaminersSpring 2013 Derek Milligan Director of Academic Programme Development

2. Topics • Panels of Examiners • Boards of Examiners •   Mitigating Circumstances Panels •   Regulations

3. Panels and Boards are responsible directly to Senate • Senate Regulation 4 governs Panels of Examiners, Boards of Examiners and Mitigating Circumstances Panels

4. Panels and Boards of ExaminersCombined Purpose To ensure: • Fairness to all students and each student • Rigour of assessment • Robustness of the results and decisions • Maintenance of Standards

5. Assessment Waypoints • Specify assessment tasks and criteria • Approval of tasks and criteria • Students take • Mitigating circumstances • Marking/Grading • Moderation (Internal and External) • Panels of Examiners • Boards of Examiners

6. Panels of Examiners - Purpose • To verify and confirm the marks/grades for each module/block • Not to look at individual students (unless error or additional info presented) • May make specific recommendations to Boards concerning particular assessments • Implement Senate Regulations 4.52-4.66 • Mitigating Circumstances Panels are different – see later

7. Senate Regulation 4.64 • A Panel of Examiners shall not confirm grades/marks for an assessment block until it is satisfied with the integrity and fairness of the assessment(s) leading to the grades/marks. Where the Panel of Examiners has insufficient confidence in the integrity and fairness of the outcomes of an assessment, it shall take appropriate action in order to achieve sufficient confidence. The Panel of Examiners may require the reconsideration by assessors of the grades/marks for the complete cohort of students taking an assessment. Only in exceptional circumstances may the Panel directly adjust the grades/marks for a particular assessment and must then must record the justification and rationale for the adjustment. Grades/marks for an individual student may not be adjusted, unless they have been wrongly recorded or additional information is presented.

8. Role of External Examiners at Panels • Full membership of the PoE (including voting) • Contribute to the collective academic decision-making • Have a distinct influence on the PoE (through their independence and their overview) • EEs are not empowered to change marks or grades – all decisions are made collectively • May ask to inspect any documents involved in the assessment process • See SR4.122 – 4.132

9. Issues for Panels • Potential Assessment Design Errors • Academic Judgment • Moderation effectiveness • Extraordinary factors • Adjustment of Results • Justification of Actions • Recording of Decisions at all stages!

10. Design Errors Potential Locations: • Learning Outcomes Coverage • Element Weightings • Assessment Specification • Sub-element combination method • Assessment Criteria Specification • Marking/Grading strategy • Moderation process

11. Academic Judgement • The vast majority of the collective academic judgement is exercised in PANELS, not in Boards, of Examiners • Boards are more about judgement by academics, rather than academic judgement – but there may be extraordinary academic judgements needed

12. Boards of Examiners - Purpose • To receive confirmed marks/grades from Panels • To consider individual student profile of achievement • To take into account mitigating circumstances and determine appropriate actions • To decide on progression and re-assessment or To recommend to Senate appropriate awards for each student • Implement Senate Regulations 4.52-4.58 and 4.67-4.80 NB Boards now have few powers of discretion within the regulations (compared with the old regulations) – but all decisions must still be justified

13. Role of External Examiners at Boards • Full membership of the BoE (including voting) • Contribute to the collective academic decision-making • Have a distinct influence on the BoE (through their independence and their overview) • EEs are not empowered to change marks or grades/progression/classification unilaterally – all decisions are made collectively • Assure themselves that due process followed and appropriate consideration and decisions have been made by the BoE • See Senate Regulations SR4.122 – 4.132

14. Issues for Boards • Mitigating Circumstances • Academic Judgment • Progression and Re-assessment • Awards • Extraordinary Decisions - Discretion • Justification of Decisions • Recording of Decisions at all stages! • Condonation, Set-Aside & Borderlines (UG pre-2009 only)

15. Board Discretion Potential Locations: • Action re MCs • Treatment of AP(E)L – NB New processes for 2013/4 will obviate need for BoE discretion • Extraordinary situations • Re-assessment (mainly PG) • Condonation/Set-Aside/Promotion across boundaries/Re-assessment (UG Old SR2 only)

16. Mitigating Circumstances Panels • Report to Board of Examiners • Consider MC submissions from students • Have no access to academic results when considering cases • Consider the likely impact on studies/assessment • Accept or reject MCs • Make decisions directly re coursework submission deadlines with MCs • All other accepted MCs -> Board of Examiners • MC Panel will identify serious cases to the BoE • SR4 governs treatment of MCs + see Guidance on MCs

17. Actions re MCs by Boards • See Senate Regulations 4.43 – 4.51 • Essentially, Boards can take any appropriate action it sees fit except: • The marks/grades for individual assessment elements (e.g. exam script, piece of coursework, etc) may not be changed – i.e., the actual level of performance recorded for an individual assessment (confirmed by a PoE) cannot be altered.

18. Grounds for Appeal (SR6) • 6.5       A student may appeal against the decision of a Board of Examiners on any of the following grounds: • a      that there exist circumstances materially affecting the student's performance which were not known to the Board of Examiners when its decision was taken and which it was not reasonably practicable for the student to make known to the Board beforehand; • b      that there were procedural irregularities in the conduct of the examinations and/or assessment procedures, including assessment of coursework, of such a nature as to create a reasonable possibility that the result might have been different had they not occurred; • c      that there is evidence of prejudice, bias or inadequate assessment on the part of one or more Examiners. • 6.6       No appeal shall be allowed on the grounds that, although the decision of the Examiners was properly made, the Board of Examiners is alleged to have erred in its judgement of the academic standard achieved by the student.

19. Documentation • For all summative assessment there should be a complete documented audit trail for all assessments – • all the way from specification of an individual piece of assessment and its checking • through marking and moderation • to Panel and Board decisions

20. Senate Regulations Undergraduate Programmes & Awards • SR2 (2009 onwards) • SR2 (pre-2009 entry, very few students now) Postgraduate Programmes & Awards • SR3 (2006 onwards) • SR3 (pre-2006 entry, very few students now) Assessment in Taught Programmes • SR4 (combined)

21. Old UG (pre-2009) Regulations • Progression and Awards based on % average + gaining of 360 credits • Compensatory mechanisms • Condonation (at BoE discretrion) • Set-aside (at BoE discretion) • Best 100 credits • Trailing allowed • No limit but much BoE discretion on volume of re-assessment

22. Current Regulations (SR2/3) • Transparency of Standards of Awards • Equity of Treatment • University Grade Descriptors are Primary Standards Reference • Grades are primary performance measure • Defined minimum grade profile requirements for awards • Credit is not “awarded” – credit is solely a volume/weighting metric • “Core” assessments can be defined (must be passed) • Reassessment volume right = limit (no UG BoE discretion, but some at PGT currently)

23. Current UG (2009) Regulations • De-modularised Regulations (Assessment Blocks & Study Blocks) • 17-point grade scale (A*,A+,A,A-,…F) with % mark equivalence defined • Progression and (Threshold) Award based on Grade Profile over defined volume of Credit • Classification based on combination of GPA + volume in class • No compensation/condonation mechanisms • No Trailing allowed (Except for some cases of MCs and with individual Senate approval) • Integration of Sandwich placements into degree

24. UG Integration of Sandwich Placements (SR2 2009-, 2.46-48) • Special award name (defined in the Programme Specification) available for sandwich students who have passed (D-) the placement assessment. • For this special award the placement module grade is included in the Level 2 grade profile for award. • Percentage contribution to Level 2 of the placement module is defined in the Programme Specification. • All students who have failed the placement module (or who choose not to have it included in the award grade profile) are eligible for the standard (non-sandwich) award. • 2012/13 is first year of awards with integrated sandwich placements

25. UG Grade Scale

26. Current PGT (2006) Regulations • Progression and (Threshold) Award based on Grade Profile over defined volume of Credit • Masters Pass, Merit, Distinction Classifications • Classification based on minimum grade profile for class • No compensation/condonation mechanisms • SR3 for 2013/4 onwards will provide alignment with current SR2 • De-modularised Regulations (assessment & study blocks) • Finer grade scale • Use of GPA for Classification

27. PGT Classification • Masters Distinction minimum profile: 120 cr A (incl Dissertation) + 30 cr B + 30 cr C • Masters Merit minimum profile : 120 cr B (incl Dissertation) + 60 cr C • Masters Pass minimum profile : 120 cr C (incl Dissertation) + 60 cr D • PGDip minimum profile : 60 cr C + 60 cr D • PGCert minimum profile : 30 cr C + 30 cr D

28. Old UG (pre-2009) Classification • L3:L2 weighting 2:1 • % Average over best 100 credits at L2 & L3 + 360 credits awarded • 3rd: 40% average • 2.2: 50% average • 2.1: 60% average • 1st: 70% average • Variable Bordelines • Condonation and set-aside used to award credit when module not passed – at BoE discretion • Please note that very few, if any, of Bachelors awards at 2012/13 BoEs will be under these regulations

29. Current UG (2009-) Classification • L3:L2 weighting 2:1 as before • Two-stage classification decision • Test 1 – limits of sub-threshold credit volume (determines eligibility for 3rd) • Test 2 – Minimum GPA + In-class Volume (determines classification) • Please note that almost all Bachelors awards at 2012/2013 BoEs will be under these regulations

30. Current UG Classification – Test 1

31. Current UG Classification – Test 2

32. Classification Example 1 • Level 2 Profile (20 cr blocks): BB-CC+DE (E non-core) • Level 2 GPA: 12+11+9+10+6+3/6= 8.5 • Level 3 Profile (20 cr blocks): AA-BB-CD • Level 3 GPA: 15+14+12+11+9+6/6= 11.16 Test 1: • No core credit below D- = 0  • Grade F credit = 0  • Non-core credit in E band = 20 at Level 2 => maximum class = 2.1 Test 2: • Overall weighted GPA = (8.5+(11.16x2)) /3= 10.27 Consider for 2.1 with weighted GPA = 10.27 • Needs 50% in 2.1 Class to get a 2.1 • Proportion of weighted grade B- or better = 1/3 at L2 and 2/3 at L3 = (1/3 +2/3 +2/3)/3 = 55.55% => Classification is 2.1

33. Classification Example 2 • Level 2 Profile (20 cr blocks): BB-CC+DE (E non-core) • Level 2 GPA: 12+11+9+10+6+3/6= 8.5 • Level 3 Profile (20 cr blocks): ABCDDD • Level 3 GPA: 15+12+9+6+6+6/6= 9.0 Test 1: • No core credit below D- = 0  • Grade F credit = 0  • Non-core credit in E band = 20 at Level 2 => maximum class = 2.1 Test 2: • Overall weighted GPA = (8.5+(9.0x2)) /3= 8.83 Consider for 2.1 with weighted GPA = 8.83 • Needs 58% in 2.1 Class to get a 2.1 • Proportion of weighted grade B- or better = 1/3 at L2 and 1/3 at L3 = (1/3 +1/3 +1/3)/3 = 33.33% => 2.1 not achieved Consider for 2.2 with weighted GPA = 8.83 • Needs 33% in 2.2 Class to get a 2.2 • Proportion of weighted grade C- or better = 2/3 at L2 and 1/2 at L3 = (2/3 +(1/2 +1/2))/3 = 55.55% => Classification is 2.2