University Assessment Handbook
University
Assessment Handbook
This handbook covers both Undergraduate and
Taught Postgraduate Courses and is intended
for use by all University staff, including collaborative partners, academic and administrative staff
University Assessment Handbook
This Handbook is published as an online document, located on the Policy and Regulations webpage.
Contents
1. Introduction ..................................................................................................... 2
2. The Assessment Process ............................................................................... 3
2.1
Purpose and principles of assessment ..............................................................3
2.2
Assessment and Equality and Diversity.............................................................3
2.3
Assessment Strategies .........................................................................................4
2.3.1 Assessment Design .................................................................................... 4
2.3.2 Relationship between Assessment Tasks and Learning Outcomes ...5
2.3.3 External Examiner oversight of assessment tasks ................................ 6
2.3.4 Communication of Assessment Arrangements to Students .................7
2.4
Assessment and work-based learning ...............................................................7
2.5
Validation of assessment .....................................................................................7
2.6
Continuous Monitoring of assessment ...............................................................7
2.7
Information on assessment for students ............................................................8
2.8
Extensions, extenuating circumstances and leave of absence .....................8
2.8.1 Coursework Extensions .............................................................................8
2.8.2 Extenuating Circumstances .......................................................................8
2.8.3 Leave of absence ........................................................................................ 8
2.9
Submission of coursework ...................................................................................9
2.10 Receipt of coursework ..........................................................................................9
2.11 Anonymous Marking .............................................................................................9
2.12 Language of Assessment.....................................................................................9
2.13 Examinations and in-class tests ........................................................................10
2.14 Marking Student Work ........................................................................................10
2.14.1 The Percentage Mark Scheme ............................................................... 10
2.14.2 Assessment Criteria and Performance Descriptors............................. 10
2.14.3 Honours Degree classifications .............................................................. 10
2.15 Feedback on Student Work ...............................................................................10
2.15.1 Principles of providing Feedback to students on their work ...............10
2.15.2 Methods of providing feedback to students ..........................................11
2.15.3 Providing Feedback to students on examinations ............................... 12
2.15.4 Providing Feedback to students on group work ...................................12
2.16 Internal moderation ............................................................................................12
2.16.1 Principles of internal moderation ............................................................ 12
2.16.2 Second marking......................................................................................... 13
2.16.3 Organisation of moderation of marked assessments .......................... 13
2.16.4 Process for internal moderation .............................................................. 14
2.16.5 Dissertations/projects ...............................................................................14
2.16.6 Marking of re-assessments (Re-sits) ..................................................... 15
2.17 Entering grades through e:Vision .....................................................................15
2.18 Assessment Boards ............................................................................................15
2.19 Fair Marking Arrangements ...............................................................................16
2.20 Retention of assessments ..................................................................................17
3. Staff development on assessment ................................................................ 17
4. Appendix 1 – University Performance Descriptors ........................................ 17
Page 1 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
1. Introduction
The assessment of students is an issue of central concern to everyone in higher education. In
particular the University of Wolverhampton wishes to ensure that students will benefit from
assessment which goes beyond the simple testing of factual knowledge. We wish to support
approaches which involve students in the kinds of activities that are: valuable in the long term; help
them to develop; provide them with guidance and feedback; and enable them to learn how to assess
themselves as future professionals.
The Quality Assurance Agency recognises the centrality of assessment in higher education in its
formulation of the section of the QAA Code of Practice Chapter B6: Assessment of Students and
Recognition of Prior Learning and in Chapter B3 Learning and Teaching. Professional bodies also draw
attention to the necessity of developing appropriate, reliable and valid assessment strategies so that
students can demonstrate their readiness for practice. The current University Learning, Teaching and
Assessment Strategy (2012-17) also stresses the importance of the progression of innovation and
consolidation in assessment.
Purpose, structure and format
The purpose of this Handbook is to provide:
 an outline of the key features of the University’s assessment framework for all University
staff including collaborative partners, academic and administrative staff.
The structure of the Handbook follows the life cycle of the assessment process:







Creating an assessment strategy and policy
Designing assessment activities and assessment briefs for students
Marking assessments
Giving feedback to students on assessment activity
Moderating assessments both internally and externally
Confirming assessment results at Assessment Boards
Publishing results and appeals against assessment decisions.
This Handbook is available as an on-line document only. It is published on the University Policy and
Regulations webpage.
Information regarding assessment design can be provided by the College of Learning & Teaching
(colt@wlv.ac.uk).
The Course Guide contains all of the essential information needed to understand how the course
operates. It specifies the modules required to be taken, and any other additional requirements, which
must be satisfied for the award of the qualification. A Course Guide should be written or agreed by the
Course Leader and made available to every student on the course via the Course Guide webpages.
The Module Guide is created from information made available in the validated Module Specification
Template (located via the e: Vision ‘Modules and Courses’ menu item, selecting ‘Module Proposal’ and
then ‘Module Specification QASD Archive’ and entering the module code). The Module Guide
publishes the assessment rules for the module. A Module Guide should be written or agreed by the
Page 2 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
Module Leader by 2 weeks before the commencement of the teaching of the module and made
available to every student on the module via the University Virtual Learning Environment (WOLF).
Guidance on the creation and update of on-line Module Guides is available through the e:Vision
‘Module and Courses’ page. A video walkthrough is available detailing the processes required.
Clear assignment/assessment briefs must be developed by each Module Leader / Team which
identifies demonstrable links between the assessment task required, the module learning outcomes
and assessment criteria as outlined in the Module Guide. These assignment/assessment briefs can be
separate from the Module Guide and should be available to every student on the module via the
University Virtual Learning Environment (WOLF).
All assessments are sent to external examiners for consideration prior to publication to students.
(Refer to External Examiner Handbook, section 2.3.2 and 2.3.3 and section 2.3.3 below)
2.
The Assessment Process
2.1
Purpose and principles of assessment
In higher education, 'assessment' describes any process that appraises an individual's knowledge,
understanding, abilities or skills.
Assessment should:






allow students to demonstrate that they have met the learning outcomes of their course
and modules;
be explicit, valid and reliable;
be an integral part of course and module design;
enable students to reflect on their performance, following timely, meaningful and useful
feedback;
encourage students to identify their strengths and weaknesses so that the level of
achievement can be measured and recorded for the purposes of completing their award,
and where appropriate for classification;
be clear and explicit to all stakeholders and the criteria to be used in grading assessment will
be published to all.
The University recognises and assesses students’ prior learning through its Recognition of Prior
Learning (RPL) processes.
2.2
Assessment and Equality and Diversity
All assessments should assess students’ abilities fairly, with full reference to the protected
characteristics set out in the Equality Act 2010 and research findings from the Disparities in Student
Attainment (DISA) project. The University is committed to inclusivity in assessment, wherever
possible, whilst acknowledging that some particular arrangements may still be required by some
students with disabilities to overcome any remaining disadvantages – as reflected in the University’s
academic regulations:
“If a student is unable through disability or injury to be assessed by the normal methods
specified in the Module Guide or Award Regulations, the Student Enabling Centre will
Page 3 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
review and determine an alternative appropriate method of assessment in consultation
with Course/Module Leaders.”
The University has also incorporated best practice guidance from the Quality Assurance Agency Code
of Practice – Chapter 4: Enabling Student Development and Achievement whereby the university
supports the development and maintenance of an inclusive environment which:
“anticipates the varied requirements of students, for example because of a declared disability,
specific cultural background, mode of study or age. Where possible, equity of access is
achieved through inclusive design but, in some circumstances, arrangements are made to
enable access for individuals.”
Students with disabilities will not be exempt from academic assessment. If, however, a student is
unable to complete any particular form of academic assessment due to his/her impairment, an
alternative, but equivalent, academic assessment should be completed. This alternative academic
assessment must still test the learning outcomes for which the original assessment was designed.
The Module Leader should ensure that assessment is conducted within an inclusive and supportive
environment for students with a wide range of sensory, physical or specific learning difficulties.
Special Exam Arrangements are offered to students with a recognised condition or impairment.
Module Leaders should be aware of this process and the information held on the Tutor Awareness
Sheet (TAS).
All staff should be aware of the University’s Dyslexia Assessment Policy – including the procedure for
considerate marking arrangements and guidance on feedback.
2.3
Assessment Strategies
Module specifications should provide explicit details of the assessment appropriate to the level,
credit rating and learning outcomes, including the assessment task and form of assessment (type,
word count or equivalent), and which assessments count towards the module marks and their
weighting. All assessment tasks must be clearly mapped to specified learning outcomes.
Assessments tasks for each module will be designed to enable students demonstrate their
achievement of the module learning outcomes.
Where a course and/or module forms part of the qualifications regime of a Professional and
Statutory and Regulatory Body (PSRB), clear information should be given in the course specification
and course guide about the specific assessment requirements which must be met for progression
towards a professional qualification, including those modules which must be passed and the level at
which the course, or any part of it, must be passed in order to meet the requirements of the PSRB.
Any PSRB requirements identified at module level must be reiterated within the relevant module
guide.
The effectiveness of assessment strategies will be monitored by course teams as part of the
continuous improvement monitoring process and periodic review.
2.3.1
Assessment Design
For general guidance and support regarding assessment in learning and teaching, please contact the
College of Learning & Teaching (colt@wlv.ac.uk).
Page 4 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
Assessment design is the responsibility of the Module Leader / Team. The mode of summative
assessment for each module (e.g. coursework or essay) is approved at validation and cannot be
changed without going through a modification or revalidation procedure. See 2.5 and 2.6 for further
information about how to validate, modify or revalidate a course or module.
The actual content of the assessment can be changed by the module team at each iteration of the
module and will be clearly outlined for the student in the assignment/assessment brief. There
should be a maximum of two points of summative assessment in any one 20 credit module.
(Academic Regulations, A.3.9 & A.3.10) The range of assessment tasks should be appropriate to the
learning outcomes and the learning and teaching activities for the module and course.
The use of diagnostic and formative assessments, which do not contribute to the final student mark,
is good practice and module teams are required to incorporate such assessments into their module
as appropriate. These forms of assessment help students understand the levels of demand of higher
education, their own strengths and weaknesses and help them assess their own progress towards
their ultimate aim. Additionally, it will identify those students at risk of failure so that supportive
action can be taken.
Opportunities for students to plagiarise, self-plagiarise or commit other forms of academic
misconduct should be reduced as far as possible through positive curriculum design; clear, updated,
personalised assignment/assessment briefs and innovative forms of assessment.
For further information on University policy and procedures relating to academic misconduct
reference the following:



2.3.2
Policy on Maintaining Academic Integrity (June 2015)
Regulations and Procedure for Academic Misconduct (June 2015)
Procedure for the Management of a Viva in Cases of Suspected Academic Misconduct (June
2015)
Relationship between Assessment Tasks and Learning Outcomes
The award of credit and qualification is based on the achievement of the intended learning
outcomes. Learning outcomes are devised at module level and at each academic level and interim
award point of the course. Course specific learning outcomes specify the knowledge and skills
appropriate to the field of study and identify the ways in which these will be developed by the
students over the different levels of the course. (University policy: a course may have a maximum of
6 intended learning outcomes and learning outcomes must be defined at each exit and/or award
point.) Module learning outcomes describe what students will be able to do by the end of the
module and are tested through the appropriate assessment task(s). (University Regulations state
that a module must include a maximum of 4 learning outcomes (A.3.8).)
Assessment will be aligned with the module learning outcomes so that in order to pass the module,
level or course, students will have to demonstrate that they have achieved the intended learning
outcomes. The University acknowledges the diversity of assessment practice between and within
different subjects, recognising that this is necessary to enable students to demonstrate their
knowledge, understanding and achievement of the learning outcomes of each module, level or
course. Therefore within each course, there will be a balance and a blend of assessment tasks to
test the range of learning outcomes at each level of the course. Assessment techniques adopted will
be appropriate to the teaching and learning methods and provide the students with the opportunity
Page 5 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
to demonstrate achievement relating to the learning outcomes. Learning outcomes should be
reviewed to ensure that they:




are described in terms of what the student will be able to do at the end of the module or
level of the course being described;
are specific and measurable;
have been devised taking into account the appropriate subject benchmark statements;
are set at the appropriate level for the module/course.
Guidance on writing learning outcomes is available from the College of Learning & Teaching
(colt@wlv.ac.uk).
Students who achieve a marginal fail grade (0-39%) at levels 3-6 have a right to re-sit the
assessment. (D.3.11 – Academic Regulations) Module Leaders must ensure that arrangements for
the re-sit of assessments are in place and discussed with the External Examiner.
Verification of assessment, both draft assessment and re-assessment (re-sit) tasks for each module
should be produced simultaneously by the Module Leader to ensure that assessment at each
opportunity is equitable.
A review of assessment tasks should ensure tasks:
 meet the requirements detailed within the module specifications;
 measure the intended learning outcomes;
 promote learning and are appropriate to the student profile and level;
 are clear;
 have an appropriate method of assessment and specific assessment criteria;
 conform to the expectations of external examiners as set out in the External Examiners
Handbook.
2.3.3 External Examiner oversight of assessment tasks
All assessment and reassessment briefs for each academic year should be submitted to the relevant
External Examiner. Every assessment task that contributes to an award is subject to External
Examiner moderation. This ensures the maintenance of standards both internally and in comparison
with similar courses delivered at other institutions.
Assessment briefs sent to external examiners should be accompanied by:


a copy of the relevant module specification;
clear guidance notes, for example, of the assessor’s expectations in respect of the
assignment/assessment brief and marking criterion.
The External Examiner will be asked to comment on the suitability of the assessment briefs with
regards to the module specification, level of work expected and in relation to the standard of the
tasks in comparison with similar courses at other institutions. S/he is also asked to comment on the
clarity of the task and on the guidance provided to the students.
The University requires all summative assessment tasks at all levels (coursework and examinations)
to be forwarded to the allocated external examiner to confirm the appropriateness of the tasks
Page 6 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
before the assessments are presented to the students. For further details refer to the External
Examiners Handbook (section 2.3.2).
2.3.4 Communication of Assessment Arrangements to Students
Module Leader/ Teams must ensure that students are provided with the assignment/assessment
brief for each assessment task, well in advance of any submission date, and normally at the start of
the module. The assignment/assessment brief will indicate clearly how marks for individual pieces
of work will be apportioned, and will include the assessment criteria, submission dates and
arrangements for submission, and the dates on which feedback will be returned to students. A
schedule of formal, timed examinations, which will show the date and time and location of each
examination, will be published centrally.
Students should be made aware of the purpose of different assessment tasks and how they link to
the learning outcomes of the module. Where appropriate, Module Leader/Teams will also provide
students with written details of specific assessment outcomes or other criteria which must be met to
fulfil any requirements of PSRBs. This information will be published in the relevant Module Guide.
2.4
Assessment and work-based learning
In line with the University Work–based and Placement Learning Guidelines, where assessment of
Work-based and Placement Learning is conducted ‘off-campus’ by employers / work-based
placement providers/mentors, procedures should be in place to ensure that those involved in
assessment are competent, understand their role, have undertaken appropriate training and have
relevant qualifications and experience
Where work-based learning forms part of the course and students are assessed on placements,
students will be informed by the Course/Module Leaders of the person who will assess their work
during the placement and, where appropriate, how those marks will contribute to their summative
assessment and/or their progression.
2.5
Validation of assessment
See The Validation, Approval, Accreditation and Deletion of Provision (Policy and Practice) guidelines
for further information on initial validation/approval processes.
Also refer to The Modification of Existing Provision guidelines for further information on processes
for the modification to approved module assessments.
2.6
Continuous Monitoring of assessment
As a part of continuous monitoring, Course/Module teams are required to review and evaluate the
effectiveness of assessments, looking to identify opportunities for improvement which is then reported
in the course journal. In doing this evaluation the following sources of information should be used.







comments of internal moderators/second markers;
External Examiner reports;
all forms of student feedback such as group discussions and mid-module evaluations;
student module evaluation questionnaires;
previous course journal reporting;
profiles of grades awarded;
submitted assessments.
Page 7 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
Any revisions to assessment regimes have to be approved through the Faculty’s modifications
process, normally in the year preceding the delivery of the module and allow time for changes to the
assessment pattern to be made on SITS and in Module Guides.
2.7
Information on assessment for students
During the time of their studies, students will receive or be informed about assessment through:
2.8
•
Module guides are completed in e:Vision and are automatically made available within each
module WOLF topic. The module guide will include information on assessments such as an
outline of each assessment task and weighting, the learning outcomes that each task is
intended to demonstrate, the assessment/marking criteria to be used along with
arrangements for the submission of work and hand-in date.
•
Structured feedback indicating graded performance against assessment criteria and narrative
comments.
•
Guidelines for the creation and updating of Module Guides
•
A Course Guide which contains specific details about their award and the modules available
to study
•
Student Assessment Handbook (via the student e:Vision ‘Programmes and Modules’ menu
item)
•
Undergraduate Student Guide
•
Postgraduate Student Guide
•
University Academic Regulations
•
Examination Regulations for Students
•
Examination timetables
Extensions, extenuating circumstances and leave of absence
2.8.1 Coursework Extensions
The University allows students to seek the option to apply for a short term extension of up to five
working days in certain circumstances. Students are advised to visit their e:Vision student
homepage for further details of this process, including how and when to apply. Following
assessment of the claim made students will be notified by email if the extension has been approved
along with a revised submission date.
2.8.2 Extenuating Circumstances
In instances where a five-day extension is not appropriate but where personal circumstances have
impacted adversely on a student’s ability to undertake assessment, students can apply for
extenuating circumstances to be taken into consideration. Claims for extenuating circumstances are
also submitted by the student via the student’s e:Vision account on or before the assessment date
and evidence to support the claim must be submitted to their Student Centre. If accepted, then it
enables the student to take the assessment at the next available opportunity without penalty.
2.8.3 Leave of absence
In more extreme cases of potential prolonged absence students can consider a temporary leave of
absence. This will temporarily suspend a student’s study a semester at a time (and up to a maximum
of four semesters or 2 academic years taking into account periods of leave due to statutory childcare
(Refer to Academic Regulations C.4.8)). Students apply for leave of absence via their e:Vision
Page 8 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
account and students are advised to seek advice from their Personal Tutor, the Student Centre or
the Students’ Union, particularly regarding financial implications before taking this step.
2.9
Submission of coursework
All written coursework must be submitted to the location specified in the Module Guide. It is the
module leader’s responsibility to notify students of how and where all types of assessed work should
be submitted. Students are provided with access to a personalised bar-coded cover sheet through
the Student’s e:Vision page, that must be attached to each assessment submitted to the Student
Centre.
If modules permit the electronic submission of coursework, module leaders are responsible for
providing detailed instructions on how the submission should be made. Students are responsible for
ensuring that they submit their assessments on time and to the correct location. For example, if the
module requires online submission via PebblePad, students must ensure they submit by the deadline
date/time and to the correct PebblePad gateway.
Exam scripts are collected and processed in accordance with the University’s examination rules.
2.10
Receipt of coursework
All assessments submitted will be given a receipt. It is the student’s responsibility to keep receipts for
submitted assignment/assessments.
Assignment/assessments submitted to a specified location will be held securely. Internal examiners
will be required to collect assignment/assessments from the point at which they were submitted
and must ensure that assignment/assessments are held securely at all times.
For electronic submission, within WOLF, the student will receive an automated message confirming
receipt. However, if electronic submission is conducted in another format e.g. email, then it is the
module leader’s responsibility to arrange for receipts to be issued and for a record to be kept.
2.11
Anonymous Marking
Anonymous marking is the process undertaken to avoid the possibility of bias entering the marking
process. To this end, wherever possible, the identity of students should not be apparent to markers
and work should only be identified by student number. Where the method of assessment does not
allow anonymous marking, (e.g. dissertations, presentations, oral examinations, practical
examinations), alternative methods of marking to mitigate the possible effect of bias will be clearly
explained to the student.
For some types of assessment it may be impractical either to second mark or mark anonymously;
methods by which students may be protected from unfair or biased assessment in these situations
will be made explicit by the Course/Module Leader in the assessment brief.
2.12
Language of Assessment
All teaching and assessment of modules within courses leading to an academic award of the
University will be in the English language apart from the following exceptions:

foreign language modules
Page 9 of 17
University Assessment Handbook

modules provided and assessed by another University associated with a student exchange
and approved by the Faculty Quality Enhancement Committee.
In such cases, identified above, the University will ensure that those staff teaching and assessing
students will have the subject knowledge and expertise in the language used, and shall ensure that
appropriately qualified external examiners are appointed. Any assessment undertaken using a
language other than English, as detailed in the exceptions above, shall be recorded on the student’s
transcript.
2.13
Examinations and in-class tests
University guidance is available on each of the following areas:
Examinations
Examinations: Instructions to Invigilators
Examination Regulations for Students
Guidelines for the Quality Assurance of Summative Computer Assisted Assessment
2.14
Marking Student Work
2.14.1 The Percentage Mark Scheme
All undergraduate and taught postgraduate coursework and examination assessments and overall
module scores are marked on a Percentage Scale (1-100%) as detailed in the University’s Academic
Regulations: Section D: The Management of Student Assessment.
The University turn around period for marking and feedback on assessments is four working weeks.
2.14.2 Assessment Criteria and Performance Descriptors
All assessments given to students must be linked explicitly to the learning outcomes. Assessment
criteria must be provided for each assignment/assessment, to clarify the assessment task. The
University has provided performance descriptors for Levels 3-7 to assist student understanding,
marking and feedback (Appendix 1).
2.14.3 Honours Degree classifications
SITS has been programmed with award regulations and will calculate for finalists the award achieved
and the classification where appropriate. This information is presented to Award Boards, which
confer awards and recommend retrieval or retakes of modules. For classification algorithm see
Undergraduate Academic Regulations.
There is an Award Predictor in e:Vision for students to access from the ‘Programmes and Modules’
page in the box titled ‘Module Results’. The link is called ‘Predict my award’ and students can enter
the results they expect to achieve and view what classification of degree they would receive. Staff
also have access to the award predictor from the e:Vision ‘Modules and Courses’ page.
2.15 Feedback on Student Work
2.15.1 Principles of providing Feedback to students on their work
All course/module teams must have a clear, consistent feedback policy. Feedback on assigned work
is an integral part of the assessment and has several purposes:

To help students to understand how others have interpreted their work against the set
criteria;
Page 10 of 17
University Assessment Handbook


To motivate students to continue to learn;
To enable students to identify areas for development and reflect on their progress.
Providing effective feedback and feed forward on assessments is an integral part of the learning
process. To be effective, feedback to students should be fast, focussed, relevant to the published
learning outcomes and assessment criteria for the task, developmental and personal to each
student. Feedback should be available for all assigned work, whether or not the work carries a mark.
The nature, extent and timing of feedback on each assigned activity should be clearly indicated in
the module handbook.
In order to achieve the purposes above, feedback should be structured to:





Show how the work has been judged against the given criteria;
Identify areas for improvement;
Show how the assigned work is linked to future assessments;
Make suggestions for improvements;
Be provided in a timely way so that the students can apply the learning to their next
assessment activity; and timely in meeting the requirements of the Student Charter.
The University’s expected turnaround period for feedback on assessments is four University working
weeks*. Feedback can be provided either in hard copy or electronically as appropriate and as per
instructions to students.
* University Working weeks are those where the University is normally open – and so does not include Bank Holiday periods or
closures at Christmas and Easter.
2.15.2 Methods of providing feedback to students
Feedback can take many forms and it is important that students fully appreciate when feedback is
being given unless it is individual and face to face.






Face to face – allows the tutor to provide feed forward information and can be personalised
and focused on improvements.
Generic feedback – allows the tutor to provide early feedback to the group without waiting
for confirmed marks. Allows for the identification of common issues to be shared with the
whole group. Can be automated and is a very speedy way of providing feedback. The
disadvantage is that it is impersonal and does not provide information on how individual
marks have been determined.
Annotations on the assessment – allow the tutor to provide individual feedback and can
focus on both feedback and feed forward by illustrating individual errors. Students,
however, may not always be able to interpret how individual marks have been determined.
Audio feedback - tutor can dictate information whilst marking. Can be quicker than written
annotations; may need technical support in distributing files to the students.
Automated feedback – the assignment/assessment is computer marked through an OMR
system, this doesn’t require input from the tutor so is quick to use and is instantaneous,
however, it is impersonal and students may need more advice.
Electronic feedback to students posted on WOLF
Ideally work should have been moderated and, where appropriate second marked, before being
returned to the students. However, in order to expedite the achievements of the Student Charter
Page 11 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
requirements to provide feedback within four working weeks, generic feedback may be provided
and marks may be published, although it must be emphasised to the students that these are
unconfirmed marks. It is expected that all markers will make annotations on the
assignment/assessments and complete the assignment/assessments submission form. Following
the return of the assignment/assessments, module leaders should make arrangements within their
teams to provide “surgery” sessions for individual students within a two-week timeframe from the
date of the return of the work.
2.15.3 Providing Feedback to students on examinations
It is not normal practice to provide individual feedback on examinations. However, students are
entitled to request feedback on their performance and this should be made available on request.
Where possible it is recommended that a Module Leader provides group feedback which could be
managed through the module WOLF topic.
2.15.4 Providing Feedback to students on group work
In the case of group based assessment multiple copies of front sheets should be made available
electronically, as every group member is entitled to personal assessment feedback.
2.16
Internal moderation
Although the primary purpose of the guidance for Internal Moderation is to explain how marked work
has to be moderated, attention is drawn to the good practice of ensuring the assessments for each
module are comparable.
These guidance notes represent threshold expectations and Faculty supplementary information
must, as a minimum, demonstrate the achievement of this threshold. All references to internal
moderation refer to undergraduate and taught postgraduate provision, including taught modules
within Professional Doctorate courses and in general any credit-bearing assessment. These
guidelines govern all provision where the University is responsible for quality assurance, there is no
separate statement regarding internal moderation of collaborative or accredited provision.
2.16.1 Principles of internal moderation
This is the process by which an individual or group preferably not involved in the setting or grading
of an assessment task confirms:
i.
that the task being set and the criteria being used to determine grade differences are at an
appropriate standard for the level concerned and that the task tests what it intends to test
and
ii.
that the grades given to students for completing the task have been awarded consistently by
the assessor or assessors.
Moderation does not change the grades of individual students. If moderators identify anomalies in
the grading of work, then the grades of the whole cohort should be modified.
Normally moderation of completed assignment/assessments is based on a sample of the graded
work and is used as a means of assuring students, assessment boards and other interested parties
that the standards expected of and achieved by students are appropriate, reliable and consistent.
Moderation can also be used to share good practice among colleagues.
Page 12 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
2.16.2 Second marking
Second marking involves a second or third marker reading and grading course work and/or
examinations.
Second marking can:
i.
Provide a second (or third) perspective and commentary on the assignment/assessments
submitted by individual students.
ii.
Benchmark standards among two or more assessors before a whole set of
assignment/assessments is graded. Often this will be done by the assessors grading a small
number of assessments to establish that all the assessors are grading to the same standard
and interpreting the assessment criteria in the same way.
iii.
Confirm that individual assessors have awarded grades consistently by having a second
assessor ‘looking at’ and commenting on individual assignments. Unlike moderation, this
process may involve individual grades being modified.
If there are differences between assessors about the grade to be awarded to a student’s assignment,
then the difference should be resolved by re-considering how the assessment criteria have been
applied to the work, not by calculating the mean of the different grades.
Second marking can be ‘closed’ or ‘open’. When undertaking ‘closed’ marking the second marker
does not have access to the grades or comments of the first marker. In ‘open’ marking the second
marker sees the first marker’s grades and comments.
Unless being used to benchmark standards, second marking should normally be applied to all the
students in a group, not a sample. However, there may be a (small) number of cases in which the
first assessor wants a second opinion.
Second marking can both help inter-assessor reliability and offer students additional observations on
the quality and standards of their work. It is a complement to, not a replacement for, internal or
external moderation.
External examiners are not second markers.
2.16.3 Organisation of moderation of marked assessments
Before the start of teaching, module leader/team identifies those responsible for the marking and
moderation of all the module's assessment elements and components. In cases where the whole
module is taught by a single member of staff arrangements are made across the Course to ensure
appropriate arrangements are in place for moderation purposes.
Before teaching starts, module leader/team produce a schedule which includes dates of all
assessments, marking, moderation and web mark entry deadlines and dates for dispatch of
assessment sample/s to the external examiner/s.
The above arrangements are normally overseen by the Course / Module Leader or nominee.
Page 13 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
2.16.4 Process for internal moderation
Faculties should base the selection of the sample for internal moderation on the following
arrangements. The recommendations set out below apply to all forms of assessment contributing
wholly or in part to the award of credits.
Normally moderation of completed assignment/assessments is based on a sample of the graded
work and moderators have access to all the grades awarded for the module, not just the sample
grades. The University minimum sample size is whichever is the largest of at least 10% of the graded
assessments or six assessments. However, for small modules, it may be appropriate to moderate
most or all of the completed assessments.
The sample selection process must be agreed by the moderation team and be both transparent and
objective.
The chosen sample must reflect the range of marks awarded by each marker across each iteration
and cohort.
In cases where marking of assessments takes place in a 'live' situation, for example, oral
presentations, drama and dance ‘performances’, the assessment is moderated in one of the
following ways:
 two members of the module team are present
 the assessment is recorded on video or appropriate recording medium for internal
moderation at a later point
 another method specific to the subject/module and determined by subject staff.
Faculties must publish clear statements as to how assessments of this type will be moderated in the
relevant subject guide and/or module guide/s.
Samples of assessments undertaken in these conditions must be made available to the external
examiner/s.
Faculties must have evidence of moderation available for scrutiny by the external examiner and to
ensure that the process can be verified.
2.16.5 Dissertations/projects
Dissertations/projects are independently marked by two members of staff. They are not necessarily
subject to further internal moderation but are moderated by External Examiners.
Students are required to submit two copies of their dissertation/project.
Faculties must have an agreed method of resolving differences between grades awarded by the
moderation team and this process must be a) transparent and b) communicated to students. In
cases where the two markers disagree on the grade to be awarded, the matter is normally resolved
by the two members of staff concerned. Where it is not possible to reach agreement, a third
marker’s view may be sought. In very difficult cases, the matter may be referred to the subject
leader/co-ordinator. External examiners must not be asked to resolve disagreements of this kind.
Page 14 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
2.16.6 Marking and moderation of re-assessments (Re-sits)
Processes for the marking of re-assessment (re-sit) work should reflect those carried out for all
assessment at first attempt.
The internal moderation of resits and third attempt assessments is not required if the module has
been subject to internal moderation and scrutiny from the external examiner at the first sit.
All re-assessment (re-sit) work must be made available for the External Examiner on request and
their input into this process should be discussed and agreed at the time of the Module Results
Assessment Board.
2.17
Entering grades through e:Vision
The assessment pattern for each module is recorded in SITS in accordance with that approved at
initial validation. Any changes required to the assessment pattern requires a request for
modification submitted through the task in e:Vision and approved through the formal quality
process managed by the Faculty Quality Enhancement Committee.
Module Leaders are asked to check each module assessment pattern from their e:Vision account
prior to module delivery and report any discrepancies to their Faculty Quality Officer.
Module Leaders are responsible for entering grades through e:Vision. An online e:Vision Web Mark
entry manual is available from the teaching page of e:Vision. Once all items of work have been
entered, SITS is programmed to calculate the final overall module grade and will automatically work
out if the student has passed or failed the module overall and the right to reassessment.
University policy is to publish grades, requirements for re-assessment (re-sit) and recommendations
from Progression and Award Boards to students through e:Vision. Grades must not be published on
notice boards.
For finalists, a letter confirming the award conferred and a finalist transcript is sent to the student’s
home address.
2.18 Assessment Boards
(Refer to the University Academic Regulations, Section E)
E.1.2 The University operates a two-tiered Assessment Board structure.
E.1.3 The Module Results Board is responsible for a cognate set of modules.
Modules in this set will normally belong to more than one Subject. The
Board carries full responsibility for considering the performance of students, individual
modules, module groups and confirming module results.
E.1.4 Progression and Award Boards are responsible for confirming that
University regulations have been correctly applied in determining the qualification and
classification of finalists and a student’s right to continue study.
There is provision within the structure for courses, which need to satisfy the requirements of
Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies, to establish Boards which can meet more often and
operate differently.
Page 15 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
For details of the Assessment Boards’ composition and terms of reference and the role and duties of
External examiners, see the External Examiner Handbook and University Academic Regulations:
Section E Assessment Boards.
2.19
Fair Marking Arrangements
The University is committed to transparent and fair marking arrangements that also reflect and
protect the integrity of academic judgement as outlined in 2.11 above.
If a student is concerned that an assessment grade is lower than expected:
The student should see the relevant tutor (or their personal tutor) to review the feedback provided.
This process would be expected to resolve most immediate concerns. If, as part of this process, it
becomes clear that there has been a problem with marking, such as questions being missed or
grades being miscalculated, these should be resolved immediately. The module leader should check
that a similar problem has not occurred with other work and should be assured through the internal
moderation processes that this is an isolated issue.
While a student may not question “academic judgement”, the University operates a formal
academic appeals process by which any student may appeal the decision of the relevant Award
Board:
Advice from the Students’ Union: http://www.wolvesunion.org/advice/academic/appeals/
“You cannot appeal against the academic judgement of the University. This means that you can’t question
your grades or another University decision simply because you feel you could have done better or you are
disappointed by the result. This is because the academic staff are the experts, and the University has
internal and external moderation procedures to ensure your assessment is marked fairly. If you do not
agree with a decision of an Award Board, the University’s regulations allow you to appeal within twenty
working days of that decision providing you have grounds to do so…”
The University Procedure for Academic Appeals applies only to the decisions of Assessment Boards
of the University. The University has no powers to review assessment which is considered
externally.
A student has the right to appeal against the decision of an Assessment Board if there is evidence of
one or more of the following:





The published grades are incorrect.
There has been a material irregularity in the assessment process which casts reasonable
doubt on the validity of the result.
Performance in assessment was affected by exceptional factors which could not (for valid
reasons) be notified to the Award Board prior to its meeting.
There has been an error in the application of University regulations in a decision of the
Award Board relation to continuation, progression, completion or conferment.
There has been a material error in the calculation of an award classification.
Students who believe that they have evidence on which to base an appeal are advised to seek advice
from the Student’s Union Welfare and Advice Centre (http://www.wolvesunion.org/advice/).
Page 16 of 17
University Assessment Handbook
2.20
Retention of assessments
The following is an extract from the University’s Document Retention Schedule. Please refer to the
full online document for further details of references made below.
Description of record
Retention/format
Reason/notes
Exam scripts
9 months post publication of
confirmed results (retain
sample see 5.10)
Internal and External appeals
processes
Feedback on assessed work
(including assessment of
placements)
9 months post publication of
confirmed results
Internal and External appeals
processes
Assessed work (student
assignments)
9 months post publication of
confirmed results QAA
sample 10% (or
representative sample for
small groups) retained for
CAY + 1 year, or longer as
required by professional
bodies
QAA
Assessment results (grades –
module level)
Permanently - SITS
Verification
Marking verification (internal
moderation)
9 months post publication of
confirmed results
Appeals/evidence of moderation
3. Staff development on assessment
Further advice and guidance on assessment is available from:
• The College of Learning & Teaching
• The Student Enabling Centre
• The Higher Education Academy
4. University Performance Descriptors - Appendix 1
University Performance Descriptors (updated September 2015) Levels 3 – 6 and Level 7. Please note
that these are generic descriptors which apply mainly, though not exclusively, to written academic
work. The relevant performance descriptors for the appropriate level should appear in the module
guide. Any further module-specific assessment criteria, such as number of words, should be clearly
stated in the assignment brief.
VERSION
APPROVED DATE
REVIEW DATE
Page 17 of 17
4
September 2015
July 2016
OWNER
Assistant Academic Registrar (Quality Management)
APPROVED BY
UQEC & ratified by Academic Board