External
Moderator
Handbook
All UAL
Awarding Body
Qualifications
–
Levels
1, 2, 3 & 4
This handbook for External
Moderators is designed to provide
guidance in the moderation of
University of the Arts London
Awarding Body qualifications.
UAL Awarding Body is delighted
to be working with its partners in
providing high quality, robust,
quality assured qualfications,
qualfications. and
We
hope this handbook supports you
in your commitment to upholding
our standards.
Introduction
Background
and Context
1.1
Introduction from
the Head of
Academic Standards
At the University of the Arts
London Awarding Body our
policy for the appointment of
External Moderators has always
been that, as one of our
representatives, you should be
an expert in your field. We
believe that the moderation
process should be a positive
and worthwhile experience for
both you as a moderator, and
the centre you visit. Your
dialogue around creative
practice and assessment will
maintain and improve standards
and in turn, enhance the student
experience.
We expect you to carry out
this work with integrity and
honesty, so we will do our best
to support you by offering
regular training and
standardisation sessions. We
will also strive to answer any
queries you have within the
shortest possible time frame.
We hope that you will find this
handbook a useful resource. If
you would like to see additional
content in future versions
please do contact us to let us
know.
Sarah Atkinson
Head of Academic Standards
UAL Awarding Body
2
1.2
The purpose of
moderation
This handbook is designed
to provide guidance on the
systems and procedures
of external moderation for
qualifications awarded by
the University of the Arts
London Awarding Body
(hereafter referred to as
UAL Awarding Body).
External moderation by
representatives of UAL
Awarding Body is designed
to ensure that:
Centres maintain and provide
accurate and consistent
standards of assessment
and grading
Centres maintain and provide
accurate and consistent
standards when awarding
credit and qualifications
The qualification has been
delivered in accordance with
the specification and any
other documentation
provided by UAL Awarding
Body
Certification is agreed in line
with published procedures
Support and guidance is
given to centres to encourage
continuous improvement
A record of centre
performance is maintained.
UAL Awarding Body requires
External Moderators to be
fair and objective and the
external moderation visit should
be supportive and developmental.
Feedback for centres should
identify strengths and highlight
good practice as well as any
areas for improvement.
It is expected that External
Moderators will explain
and discuss any issues that
require formal actions with
the Course Leader.
1.3
Qualifications overview
The qualifications UAL
Awarding Body currently
offers are:
L3 and L4 Diploma in Art and
Design – Foundation Studies
L1 Award and Diploma
in Art, Design & Media
L2 Award and Diploma
in Art & Design
L3 Diploma and Extended
Diploma in Art & Design
L2 Award and Diploma
in Creative Media
Production & Technology
L3 Diploma and Extended
Diploma in Creative Media
Production & Technology
L1 Award and Diploma in
Music, Performing &
Production Arts
L2 Award and Diploma in
Music Performance &
Production
L3 Diploma and Extended
Diploma in Music
Performance & Production
L2 Award and Diploma in
Performing & Production Arts
L3 Diploma and Extended
Diploma in Performing &
Production Arts
L2 Award and Diploma in
Fashion Retail & Business
L3 Diploma and Extended
Diploma in Fashion Retail &
Business
L4 Diploma in Fashion Retail
L4 Diploma in Buying
and Range Planning for
Fashion Retail
L4 Diploma in Visual
Display and Branding
for Fashion Retail
L4 Diploma in Garment
Technology for Fashion Retail
L4 Diploma in Merchandising
for Fashion Retail
L2 and L3 Certificates
and Awards in Drawing
L2 and L3 Certificates
and Awards in Photography
L2 and L3 Certificates
and Awards in Printmaking
L2 and L3 Certificates
and Awards in Animation
The role
of the External
Moderator
2.1
Job description and role
External Moderators, acting on
behalf of UAL Awarding Body,
use the external moderation
process to verify the
achievement of students,
leading to the award of credit
for UAL Awarding Body
accredited qualifications.
External Moderators are
responsible to the Head of
Academic Standards at UAL
Awarding Body. UAL Awarding
Body has produced a full job
description outlining the main
duties and responsibilities
of External Moderators
(appendix II).
For centres with large cohorts,
UAL Awarding Body has a
policy of sending in a team
of External Moderators to view
the sample of student work
and confirm that appropriate
quality assurance mechanisms
are being applied. To ensure
the effectiveness of this
process, UAL Awarding Body
will appoint a Lead Moderator
to coordinate and oversee
the external moderation visit (appendix iii).
2.2
External moderation
procedures
UAL Awarding Body will
publish a job specification
for the post of External
Moderator
Applications for the post of
External Moderator will only
be considered on completion
of the relevant application
form and submission of a CV
UAL Awarding Body will
select suitably qualified
and experienced applicants
for training
Initial training will provide
an introduction to
UAL Awarding Body’s
systems and procedures
External Moderators will be
appointed on an annual basis
to specific centres
External Moderators will
be issued with personlised
itineraries detailing the
centres to which they have
been appointed
Contact procedures and
details will be circulated
to External Moderators
and centres
New External Moderators
will initially be allocated
to an external moderation
team overseen by a Senior
External Moderator
Within the first year of their
appointment, External
Moderators will be required
to attend a qualification
standardisation event
Within the first year of their
appointment, External
Moderators will be observed
and evaluated to provide the
UAL Awarding Body with a
record of performance
(appendix IV). Further
observations on external
moderators will be carried out
on a 3–5 year cycle
Travel and accommodation
for External Moderators will
be arranged by UAL Awarding
Body within agreed financial
limits
The Lead External Moderator
within a team of External
Moderators will be
responsible for overseeing
the external moderation
process including: liaising
with External Moderators
and the centre and producing
the final report.
2.3
Support for External
Moderators
UAL Awarding Body will provide
all new and existing moderators
with access to the relevant
policy documents. On allocation
of a centre or centres, External
Moderators will be provided
with:
Contact details for centres
and co-moderators if
applicable
Previous moderator report
for the allocated qualification
Report form for completion.
We advise all External
Moderators to familiarise
themselves with the current
process for external
moderation. This and other
materials to support external
moderation can be downloaded
from our website:
www.arts.ac.uk/awarding
2.4
Standardisation events
Within the first year of their
appointment, External
Moderators will be required to
attend a qualification
standardisation event. Only in
exceptional circumstances, and
only if allocated to an external
moderation team, will
new External Moderators
be allowed to ‘miss’ a first
standardisation event.
External Moderators will
be expected to attend a
standardisation event once
every two years.
training during a two-year
period. They are encouraged to
attend on an annual basis.
Standardisation events are
primarily for the assurance of
External Moderator standards.
However, where possible UAL
Awarding Body will also open
up the event to centre delivery
staff as a means of extending
good practice and supporting
centre development.
2.5
Conferences and
regional meetings
External Moderators are
encouraged to attend annual
qualification specific training,
conferences and celebratory
events. These provide an
opportunity to share information
on good practice, new
approaches, updates to
education policy and funding
arrangements.
In addition, UAL Awarding
Body hosts an annual meeting
for all moderators, which
provides an opportunity to meet
as a group, discuss roles, and
ensure a consistent approach is
taken to communications and
the advice and guidance given
to centres.
External Moderators will not be
permitted to continue in post
unless they have attended a
standardisation event and/or
3
External
moderation
3.1
The external
moderation visit
The external moderation visit
will be carried out on the date
chosen by, and agreed in
advance, with the centre. Prior
to the visit, the External
Moderator will contact the
relevant Course Leader to
confirm:
The date of the visit
The names of people in the
external moderation team
(if applicable)
The expected time of arrival
– normally 10.00am
The schedule for the day
(appendix V)
Any other requirements
Proposed grades.
On the day of the external
moderation visit, the External
Moderator will:
Confirm that Candidate
Authentication Forms
have been completed for
each student
Ensure that the Results Sheet
has been completed via the
online UAL Centre Portal and
is available
to sign off
Review the centre’s approach
to internal assessment,
confirming it conforms to
good practice as outlined
in Section 3.5
Identify the sample, unless
it has been agreed in advance
as outlined in Section 3.3
View the assignment or
project where it has been set
by the centre, or the project
proposal determined by each
student in the sample
4
Review all available and
admissible evidence for each
candidate in the sample, to
ensure that grading and
awarding reflect the evidence
produced for the assessment
Determine if agreed standards
have been met or not
Where standards have not
been met and internal
assessment decisions are
considered to be incorrect,
the External Moderator will
ask the centre to regrade
parts of the cohort, or the
entire cohort
The External Moderator will
not change individual grades
Extend the sample by 5%
if further evidence is required
to confirm that agreed
standards are being met
Confirm provisional grades
with the centre where agreed
standards have been met
Identify action to be taken
where agreed standards have
not been met
Suggest recommendations
that can be implemented by
centres at their own discretion
Provide additional feedback
to the centre, identifying
areas for improvement or
of good practice
Agree the content of the
written report.
Candidate results will be
entered online and endorsed by
the External Moderator. Specific
details of this process will be
made available in a separate
document and published online.
3.2
External
moderation report
The External Moderator will
write a report outlining
their observations and
recommendations and/or
actions and submit this to
UAL Awarding Body within
10 days of the visit.
Report forms require External
Moderators to comment on
the evidence produced for
assessment, assessment
methodology, areas of good
practice and any recommendations
that should be considered by
the centre. The report should
only contain information
discussed with the centre in the
feedback session at the end of
the visit.
Further advice and prompts
for the completion of report
forms can be found in section
7 and on the UAL Awarding
Body website:
www.arts.ac.uk/awarding
A copy of the External
Moderator report will
be sent to the centre’s Quality
contact and the Course Leader.
Centres may provide a
response to the external
moderation report to
UAL Awarding Body.
Recommendations and
actions to be taken by a centre
should be completed within
an agreed time frame.
3.3
The sample
The sample for UAL Awarding
Body qualifications is usually
set at 10% of the cohort. This
figure ensures that a sufficient
number of sets of assessment
evidence, covering all disciplines
and/or pathways and a range of
internal assessors, are externally
moderated. Where a cohort is
below 50 students, a minimum
sample of six is acceptable.
The External Moderator will
always select the sample.
Discussion with the course
representative should confirm
that any reasonable adjustments
have been notified and agreed
with UAL Awarding Body.
In some instances, where
a centre is considered to be
low-risk, additional arrangements
relating to the sample will apply.
These are outlined in Section 3.4.
On the day of the external
moderation visit, the External
Moderator will choose the
sample that they wish to see,
ensuring that it contains:
Grades in all categories
(Pass, Merit and Distinction)
where a qualification is
graded
Sufficient examples of the
Referral category, to establish
the Pass/Referral boundary
A range of disciplines,
reflecting the range of the
qualification experience
covered at the centre
Assessment evidence
assessed by a range of
internal assessors.
If, after reviewing the initial
sample, the External Moderator
is uncertain that agreed
standards are being applied
to assessment and grading
decisions, they must extend the
sample by a further 5% of
candidates. If they are still
uncertain that agreed standards
are being applied to assessment
and grading decisions after
extending the sample, the
External Moderator must use
the procedures set out in
section 4.2.
Centres must make all possible
efforts to facilitate external
moderation. Work must be
appropriately displayed and/or
presented and clearly labelled.
3.4
Risk-based approach
to assessment
UAL Awarding Body takes a
risk-based approach to external
moderation. This involves
tracking and monitoring external
moderation reports in order to
make decisions about the risk
posed by a particular centre in
relation to assessment.
External moderation can place
a high administrative burden on
centres. Through a process
of risk management, UAL
Awarding Body is keen to
reduce this burden for centres
with very large cohorts who
prove that they have robust
systems and processes in
place to internally assess and
verify student work. With the
agreement of UAL Awarding
Body, the External Moderator
may pre-select the sample
to reduce the administrative
burden on such centres.
The approach taken will vary
from qualification to qualification,
and will take account of whether
a qualification is considered
to be ‘high stakes’ or ‘low
stakes’. Qualifications designed
for progression to the next level
are considered to be ‘high
stakes’, whilst those that
provide enrichment are
considered to be ‘low stakes’.
All full-time progression
qualifications are considered to
be ‘high stakes’. At the point of
external moderation the centre
should make all work available
and External Moderators should
follow the sampling process
outlined in Section 3.3.
It is recognised that different
centres use different
methodologies and
nomenclature specific to
their culture. UAL Awarding
Body’s Centre Handbooks for
qualifications outline some
examples of good practice for
the internal moderation of units.
However, all centres are
required to ensure that their
methodologies are suitably
robust as outlined in the UAL
Awarding Body Guidance for
Good Practice in Assessment
and Internal Verification
(appendix VII).
3.5
Internally assessed units
In addition to moderating
assessment and grading
decisions for externally
moderated units, External
Moderators are required to
confirm that the internal
assessment methodology
for internally assessed units
is rigorous and ensures
assessment decisions are
fair, valid, consistent and free
from bias. Practically, this
means that centres should
provide External Moderators
with:
An outline of the structure
of the course assessment
and standardisation process
(internal verification)
Examples of assessment
and standardisation records
sufficient to enable the
External Moderator to confirm
that the methodology is
working in practice.
5
Additional
assessment
information
4.1
Referral
If a centre identifies a student’s
failure to meet assessment
criteria following assessment
and internal moderation, the
centre must refer the student.
Centres must discuss the unit
assessment criteria that they
have failed to meet with the
student, and provide them with
opportunities to work toward
meeting those assessment
criteria within a suitable period
of time.
Candidates are only allowed
one opportunity to redeem
a referral in each unit.
Records of all referrals
will be recorded on the
results sheet and discussed
with the External Moderator
A relevant course tutor will
agree with the student a time
framed action plan for the
submission of additional
work required to meet the
assessment criteria. Centres
will notify UAL Awarding Body
of the final date for the
submission of further evidence.
The final date for submission
of the required work will be
determined by the centre.
The centre will assess the
student’s re-submitted work
against the assessment criteria.
If the centre’s previous
assessment decisions have
been agreed as meeting
national standards then
no additional visit from an
External Moderator is necessary.
6
However, where there have
been large numbers of referred
students or other reasonable
concerns, UAL Awarding Body
reserves the right to arrange
another visit by an External
Moderator. The cost of any
additional visit will be borne
by the centre.
4.2
Failure to apply
assessment and grading
criteria to agreed
standards
If the centre’s proposed
assessment decisions are
found by the External
Moderator/Moderation team
not to meet agreed standards
then the following procedure
will apply:
If a small subset of the
sample is in question,
(e.g. a specific unit) then the
centre team will be required
to re-assess and re-submit
assessment decisions to
the External Moderator/
Moderation team for
confirmation on the day
of the moderation visit
If the External Moderator/
Moderation team is able to
confirm that the re-submitted
decisions are now in line with
the assessment criteria, the
grades can be authorised
If the re-submitted decisions
are still not in line with the
assessment criteria, the
grades for the entire cohort
cannot be authorised. A
second visit, within a
reasonable time scale,
will then be made by a Senior
External Moderator/
Moderation team. The cost of
this additional visit will be met
by the Centre. If a resolution
cannot be reached the centre
may appeal against the
assessment decision
Where incorrect assessment
occurs across the entire
cohort, or there is substantial
inconsistency in the
assessment decisions
(e.g. across all units), then
the External Moderator/
Moderation team will
recommend that the centre
team re-assess across the
entire cohort. If this cannot
be done on the day then
the centre and the External
Moderator/Moderation
team will arrange a mutually
convenient time for a second
moderation visit. The cost
of this additional visit will
be met by the centre
If the External Moderator
is able to confirm that the
re-submitted decisions
are now in line with national
standards then the cohort’s
grades can be authorised
If the re-submitted decisions
are still not in line with the
assessment criteria then
the grades for the entire
cohort cannot be authorised.
A further visit, within a
reasonable time scale, will
then be made by
a Senior External Moderator/
Moderation team. The cost
of this additional visit will
be met by the centre. If a
resolution still cannot be
reached, the centre may
appeal against the external
assessment decision.
4.3
Reasonable adjustments
A reasonable adjustment is any
action that helps reduce the
effect of a disability or difficulty
that places the candidate at a
substantial disadvantage in the
assessment situation.
Reasonable adjustments are
approved before the assessment
activity takes place; they
constitute an arrangement to
give the candidate access to the
qualification.
It is the responsibility of centres
to ensure that appropriate
adjustments are made for
candidates during the learning
process, and UAL Awarding
Body will ensure that candidates
are given appropriate adjustments
to the assessment process to
give them an equal opportunity.
All adjustments must be deemed
reasonable and not give the
candidate an unfair advantage
There are two types of
reasonable adjustment:
An adjustment that is centre-devised
An adjustment that UAL Awarding Body must approve.
Full details of both types of
adjustment can be found in the
reasonable adjustments policy
online.
Where a centre applies to UAL
Awarding Body for approval, a
reasonable adjustments form
must be completed. Supporting
evidence will be required in all
cases. Evidence could include
medical reports from doctors,
psychiatrists, educational
psychologists, specialist
teachers, or funding agencies.
4.4
Special consideration
Special consideration can be
applied after an assessment if
there was a reason the
candidate may have been
disadvantaged during the
assessment. These are
instances that could not have
been predicted, or were outside
of the candidate’s control,
which may have impacted upon
their performance. Examples of
special consideration are
temporary illness, injury,
indisposition or those who
suffer adverse circumstances at
the time of the assessment.
Special consideration may result
in a small post-assessment
adjustment to the grade of a
candidate. The size of the
adjustment will depend on the
circumstances during the
assessment but will always be a
minor adjustment so as not to
jeopardise the standard. Further
details regarding eligibility
criteria for special consideration
are listed in the special
considerations policy online.
Special consideration must be
applied for no later than
two-weeks after the
assessment, via the submission
of a special consideration
application form and
accompanied by supporting
evidence where appropriate.
4.5
Aegrotat award
Aegrotat awards may be
awarded in exceptional
circumstances, which may
include chronic incapacitating
illness or death. Aegrotat
awards should only be
considered where there is
no prospect of the student
ever being able to be reassessed.
Centres who wish to apply for
an aegrotat award on behalf of a
student, must do so in writing
giving a full explanation for their
request.
The timings of such requests
will be dependent on the
qualification but must be
made before any formal claim
for certification is made.
Aegrotat awards can only be
made if the student has
generated sufficient evidence
of achievement upon which to
base the aegrotat assessment
decision. In cases where
an aegrotat award is made,
the maximum grade achievable
is a Pass.
of the Arts London website
and type ‘safeguarding’ into
the search panel:
www.arts.ac.uk
4.7
Policies and procedures
There are a series if policies,
guidance documents and forms
that complement this handbook
and should be read alongside it.
These can be found via the
main policy directory on the
UAL Awarding Body website:
www.arts.ac.uk/awarding
4.8
External assessment
To meet DfE requirements for
inclusion in Performance Tables
for 2016/17, Level 3 Music
Performance and Production
and Level 3 Fashion Business
and Retail require an element of
external assessment.
Please refer to the qualification
specification documents and
the UAL Awarding Body website
for further guidance:
www.arts.ac.uk/awarding
4.6
Awareness of
safeguarding
UAL Awarding Body recognises
that it has a responsibility to
safeguard the wellbeing of
children, young persons and
vulnerable adults engaged in
the learning of our qualifications.
We do so by adhering to the
University of the Arts London
Safeguarding Policy, which has
been developed in collaboration
with the NSPCC to comply with
statutory duties. For further
information, please visit the
main University
7
Allocation and
remuneration
of External
Moderatorsw
5.1
Allocations
UAL Awarding Body approved
centres are each allocated one
or more External Moderator, to
undertake a minimum of one
on-site moderation visit per year.
Centres are normally allocated
the same moderator(s) for a
three year period although
moderators’ contracts are
renewed annually.
Each year, External Moderators
are requested to confirm their
availability for the peak
moderation period (April to
July). This is undertaken via the
online UAL Centre Portal and
detailed guidance is provided.
At the same time, External
Moderators complete and
submit a signed conflict of
interest declaration. If a
Moderator is employed by a
UAL Awarding Body approved
centre, the name of the centre
must be included in the
declaration. Similarly, any
centres that could be viewed as
potential competitors to a
centre at which a Moderator is
employed should be identified.
Simultaneously, centres notify
UAL Awarding Body of the
dates of their exhibitions and
when candidate work will be
available to moderate.
8
The UAL Awarding Body Quality
and Operations team then
matches moderator availability
and expertise against these
dates - taking in to account
conflicts of interests - and
allocates one or more
moderators to each centre.
The provisional list of visits is
made available to Moderators
via the online UAL Centre Portal
in March. Moderators have the
opportunity to accept the
proposed visits, or by
exception, decline visits if their
availability has changed since
their original submission.
Once confirmed, Moderators
are able to view, download and
print a detailed itinerary to take
with them on their visits. This
provides centre contact details,
the size of sample to be
moderated, specialist pathways,
and if applicable, contact details
of other External Moderators
attending the same visit.
5.2
Travel and
accommodation booking
All travel and accommodation
bookings are confirmed well in
advance of the external
moderation visit taking place.
The cost will be met by UAL
Awarding Body in line with
agreed financial limits.
5.3
Remuneration
and claims
The fee for undertaking External
Moderation duties includes
the activity attached to the
visit and the completion and
submission of the moderation
report. The parameters for
the remuneration of External
Moderators are defined in the
UAL Awarding Body notes for
the allocation and remuneration
of External Moderators to UAL
Awarding Body Centres
document (appendix VI).
Guidance on claiming fees and
expenses can be found in the
policy directory available online.
All claim forms and documentation
to support external moderation
can be found on the UAL
Awarding Body website:
www.arts.ac.uk/awarding
Contacts
6.1
Contacts at UAL
Awarding Body
Name
Role
Responsibility
Contact details
Sarah Atkinson
Head of Academic Standards
Management of Senior External
Moderators, External Moderator
team, External Moderator
observations and advice and
guidance for all UAL Awarding
Body qualifications
s.j.atkinson@arts.ac.uk
Andy Sankey
Chief Examiner — Music and
Media
Management of External
Moderation team, advice and
guidance for Music and Media
and qualifications
a.sankey@arts.ac.uk
Marc Mollica
Chief Examiner — Performing
Arts
Management of External
Moderation team, advice and
guidance for Performing Arts
qualifications
m.mollica@arts.ac.uk
Martin Vella
Chief Examiner — Art & Design
Management of External
Moderation team, advice and
guidance for Art and Design
qualifications
m.vella@arts.ac.uk
Sue Cook
Chief Examiner — Foundation
Studies — Art & Design
Management of External
Moderation team, advice and
guidance for Foundation
Studies — Art and Design
sue.cook@arts.ac.uk
All administrative support
moderation.awarding@arts.ac.uk
Quality and
Operations team
All External Moderators will be allocated a Senior External Moderator to contact for advice and guidance.
9
Checklist
7.1
Checklist
This external moderation
checklist is relevant to all UAL
Awarding Body qualifications,
and is shared with UAL centres
and UAL External Moderators.
The aim of this list is to act
as a reminder for some of
the key activities associated
No.
10
with external moderation and
the certification process. It
should be used in conjunction
with the Centre Handbook
specific to the qualification
being delivered and assessed.
Please note the highlighted
areas for action by External
Moderators below.
Activity
Who
When
1
Submit registrations to UAL Awarding Body via the
online UAL Centre Portal.
Centre
October
2
Submit preferred external moderation dates to UAL
Awarding Body.
Centre
December
3
External Moderators contact centres to confirm
the arrangements for the external moderation visits.
Lead External Moderator to contact External
Moderator(s) in their team(s).
External Moderators
Minimum of four weeks
before each external
moderation visit
4
Allocate all visits to the appropriate External Moderators.
UAL Awarding Body Quality and
Operations team
January and February
5
Confirm or decline proposed external moderation visits
via the online portal Quartzweb. Once completed a
personalised itinerary will be available to view and
download which summarises all visits.
UAL Awarding Body Quality and
Operations team
March
6
Publish details of confirmed external moderation visits to
centres.
UAL Awarding Body Quality and
Operations team
March
7
External Moderators to confirm bookings for travel and
accommodation
External Moderators
Minimum of four weeks
before each visit
8
Centre to prepare student work for external moderation
visit as outlined in the Centre Handbook
Centre
By date of visit
9
Endorse candidate results via the online UAL Centre
Portal.
External Moderators
On day of visit or maximum five
working days post visit
10
External Moderators complete report and submit via the
online UAL Centre Portal.
External Moderators
Within 10 days of visit
11
Process candidates’ results and issue certificates to
centres.
UAL Awarding Body Quality and
Operations team
Following External Moderator
endorsement
Completing
the Report
Form
Reports should be completed
in the third person and grammar
and spelling should be corrected
before submitting them to UAL
Awarding Body. External
Moderators are advised to
complete the reports using
typeface Arial or Calibri, with a
minimum font size of 11.
Part 1
Candidate sample
The candidate sample must be
at least 10% of the cohort. The
candidate sample may be
extended by an additional 5% if
it is necessary to clarify the
accuracy of grading decisions.
Candidates in the sample
should be identified only by
their Unique Learner Number
(ULN) which can be retrieved
from the Course Leader.
Part 2
Candidate authentication
forms
Indicate either YES/NO to
confirm that Candidate
Authentication Forms were
made available at the point of
external moderation. If the
response is no this must be an
action for the following year.
Part 3
Profile of assessment
evidence
This section should be used to
report on the general strengths
of the candidate evidence in
relation to unit aims and
assessment criteria. External
Moderators should write an
introduction to the course to
place the report in context this
should note the following:
Number of candidates in
the cohort
Number of candidates in
the sample
How the course is delivered
- across specialist areas
or pathways
List the pathways and select
a representative sample as %
of each area (10-15% of each)
Number and % of D / M / P /
R/W/F
Any special consideration
or reasonable adjustment
should be supported by the
correct UAL paperwork.
External Moderators should
use sub-headings for this
section of the report and
comment on any areas of
strength or good practice and
any areas for development or
improvement, it is important
to note differences between
specialist areas or pathways.
External Moderators may
identify but not name
candidates as examples by
using the ULN.
Within the subheadings outlined
in the grade criteria for the
qualification and level being
assessed, External Moderators
should select the appropriate
definition to comment on from
the following examples:
Context
Quality of project proposals
Word-processed
Articulate
Comprehensive
Level of challenge enabling
students to meet higher
criteria
Critical and contextual
references
Relevance and depth of
bibliography
Harvard referencing
Planning and evaluation.
Research
Thoroughness
Appropriateness
Relevance
Integration throughout the
project
Contextual understanding
Impact on practice
Primary and secondary
Extended research.
Problem Solving
Breadth of experimentation
Recording methodology
Practical and technical
challenge
Investigation and decision
making
Initiative and ability to adapt
to unforeseen challenges
Measurement of impact
Intention, content and
theoretical challenge.
Planning and production
Ability to work effectively
within a timeframe
Effectiveness in collaboration
Accessing resources
Documentation of planning
and production
Self-direction.
Practical skills
Level and application of skills
across all pathways
Access to resources
Consistency of technical
support
Range of available materials
Supportive teaching practices
for technical skills
Ambition and quality of
outcomes.
Evaluation and reflection
Regularity of ongoing
reflection
Recording methodology
Inclusion of peer and
self-assessment
Level of visual analysis
Level of written analysis
Self-awareness and
perception
Quality of final evaluative
statement.
Presentation
Quality of exhibition, display
or performance of work
Professionalism of
presentation
Strategies explored and
considered within constraints
Organisation and presentation
of supporting work
Clarity of communication
to the audience
Independence in realisation.
11
Completing
the Report
Form
Part 4
Assessment methodology
This section should be used to
confirm that the centre’s
assessment methodology
conforms to good practice.
If the assessment methodologies
are unsound, the External
Moderator should provide a
commentary on those aspects,
which require re-design or
strengthening. These should be
noted as actions and a date for
completion agreed with the
centre.
External Moderators should use
this section to confirm, through
discussion with the assessment
team and examination of
relevant records, that:
Assessment paperwork is fit
for purpose, assessment
judgments clearly relate
evidence to the criteria and
feedback is relevant and
constructive
Assessment methodology for
internally assessed units is
rigorous and ensures
assessment decisions are
fair, valid and free from bias.
This should include a
description of the centre
assessment process e.g.
team, blind marking, cross
pathway marking etc.
Assessment, internal
verification and standardisation
processes are suitably robust
(centres should provide the
External Moderator with
examples of assessment and
Internal Verification paperwork
for internally assessed units)
Assessment and Internal
Verification documentation
clearly evidences the decision
making process in ‘borderline
candidates’
12
Assessors refer to the
UAL Awarding Body
exemplification matrices at
the relevant level to ensure
consistency of grading
decisions
Referred students are given
clear feedback and time
frame for re-submission
Grading decisions across all
pathways are consistent
The External Moderator is
able to confirm that assessment
decisions made by the centre
are consistent with national
standards.
Part 6
Recommendations
This section should be used to
outline any recommendations
that should be considered by
the centre, including areas for
development based on the
findings of the external
moderation visit above. The
External Moderator should
acknowledge any
recommendations from the
previous years report that have
been acted on and any resulting
improvements.
The External Moderator should
also note examples of good
practice and any recommendations.
Recommendations are for
guidance only and can be
carried out at the discretion
of the centre.
Part 5
Part 7
This section should be used to
provide a brief summary of your
conclusions identifying areas of
good practice as appropriate
e.g.
If the responses to any of the
above sections require actions
to be taken by the centre or UAL
Awarding Body, the External
Moderator should complete this
section.
General commentary
Use of handouts in
introducing the final unit
Students are clear in their
understanding of criteria and
expectations as evidenced
in self-assessment
Opportunities for tutorials,
group critiques and peer
review
Employer engagement
Quality of project proposals
Range of topics
Breadth and depth of
research in informing project
development
Level of investigation and
experimentation
Quality of centre
documentation
Student progression
Overall quality of work
by pathway.
Action plan
Actions should be agreed,
signed and dated by the centre
representative at the time of
the external moderation visit.
The centre should retain one
copy of the action plan and
one copy should be included
in the report sent to UAL
Awarding Body.
Actions are essential measures
for improving centre standards
for assessment and must be
carried out by the agreed date.
The External Moderator must
acknowledge that any previous
actions placed on the centre
have been completed.
Before sending the report to
UAL Awarding Body the
External Moderator should
ensure that they have
completed the details and
information on the front
cover sheet. This needs to
include the following:
The level of the qualification
The full qualification title
Details of the pathways
moderated
The name of the
Course Leader.
Appendix I
Glossary
Aegrotat award
Centre
An award made in exceptional
circumstances where there is
no prospect of the student ever
being able to be reassessed.
An organisation or consortium
accountable to an awarding
body for the assessment
arrangements leading to
a qualification or units.
Appeal
Certificate
A process through which
an awarding body may be
challenged on the outcome
of an enquiry about results
or, where appropriate, other
procedural decisions affecting
a centre or individual.
Assessment
The process of making
judgements about the extent
to which a candidate’s work
meets the assessment criteria
for a qualification or unit.
The record of attainment in a
unit or qualification issued by
the awarding body.
External Moderator
An individual appointed by
the awarding body to ensure
accurate and consistent
standards of assessment
across centres and over time.
Presiding over the decision /
discussion / mediation
Qualification
An award made to a student
for the achievement of the
specified combination of
credits.
Quartz
The online UAL Centre Portal.
Reasonable adjustment
Adjustments made to an
assessment for a qualification
before the activity takes place.
They help reduce the effect of a
disability or difficulty that places
the candidate at a substantial
disadvantage in the assessment
situation.
The requirements that
candidates need to meet in
order to successfully complete
the learning outcomes for a
unit or qualification.
Records details of candidates
sampled for the external
moderation and a commentary
on the conduct of the internal
assessment and grading
methodology at each centre.
Authentication
Internal assessment
Special consideration
Assessment criteria
Confirmation that evidence
was produced by the candidate
who is putting it forward for
assessment (in the form of
a declaration of authenticity
by the candidate).
Candidate
A person who is registered
with an awarding body for
a qualification or unit.
Assessment where candidate’s
work is assessed wholly within
the candidate’s centre, subject
where appropriate to external
moderation.
Internal verifier
Individual(s) appointed by the
centre to ensure accurate and
consistent standards of
assessment across assessors.
A process to ensure that
the assessment criteria for a
qualification or unit are applied
consistently by assessors.
Standardisation can be carried
out within centres, (internal
moderation) as well as by
awarding bodies across
their centres.
Unit
The smallest part of a
qualification that is capable
of certification in its own right.
Results sheet
Electronic record of
achievement indicating
candidates’ achievement.
Results are entered online via
the online UAL Centre Portal
and endorsed by the External
Moderator responsible for
moderating that particular
cohort.
External moderation
final visit report form
Standardisation of
assessment
Consideration given to a
student who has temporarily
experienced an illness or injury,
or some other event outside of
the student’s control, which has
had, or is reasonably likely to
have had, a material effect on
that their ability to take an
assessment or demonstrate his
or her level of attainment in an
assessment.
13
Appendix II
Job description
Overall purpose of the role:
To act on behalf of the
University of the Arts London
Awarding Body (UAL Awarding
Body) to:
Verify, through the process
of external moderation, the
achievement of students
leading to the award of credit
for UAL Awarding Body
accredited provision
Ensure the quality and
consistency of standards
within and across centres
offering UAL Awarding Body
accredited provision
Support the continuous
improvement of UAL
Awarding Body
accredited provision.
14
Main duties and
responsibilities:
1.Carry out the process of
external moderation for a
specified qualification
2.Visit centres as stipulated
on work profile / agreement
3.Ensure that UAL Awarding
Body accredited units are
delivered in accordance
with the approved
specifications
4.Sample assessment activity
and evidence to ensure the
consistency of award
of credit
5.Actively contribute to
UAL Awarding Body
standardisation activity
and attend external
moderator standardisation
meetings arranged by UAL
Awarding Body
6.Monitor and report on
internal moderation for the
centres/qualifications for
which they are responsible
7.Attend induction and
training as required by the
UAL Awarding Body
8.Produce and submit
robust and timely
moderation reports to UAL
Awarding Body
9.Verify the award of credit
to students by signing off
relevant documentation
10.Respond promptly to
requests from UAL
Awarding Body for
information relating to
moderation activity
11.Provide critical advice to
centres in order to support
the continuous improvement
of UAL Awarding Body
accredited provision and
not bring UAL Awarding
Body into disrepute
12.Work closely and
collaboratively with the
Head of Academic
Standards, Chief Examiners
and other UAL Awarding
Body staff.
Appendix III
Role of the
Lead Moderator
For centres with large cohorts,
UAL Awarding Body has a
policy of sending in a team
of External Moderators to view
the sample of student work and
confirm that appropriate internal
quality assurance mechanisms
are being applied.
In order to ensure that this
team of External Moderators
functions effectively, UAL
Awarding Body appoints
a Lead Moderator who will
carry out further functions in
addition to those of the team
members and external
moderators working on their
own within a centre.
The main duties and
responsibilities of the Lead
Moderator are:
Communicating with the
Course Leader at the centre
being externally moderated to
confirm final arrangements for
the external moderation visit,
including the start and finish
times and the agenda for the
day
Liaising with and coordinating
the team of External
Moderators to ensure
consistency in the operation
of moderation across
the course
Becoming familiar with the
centre to be externally
moderated, its internal
assessment /verification
arrangements, the delivery of
the course and any relevant
background information and
to communicate this to the
External Moderation team
Seeking guidance from
the UAL Awarding Body Chief
Examiners and Senior Quality
Officer regarding any issues
of concern
Coordinating and writing
the final External Moderation
Report and submitting this to
UAL Awarding Body
Signing off the grades
proposed by the centre
Summarising the findings of
the External Moderation visit
and feeding these back to the
course leader and course
delivery team.
Role of the
Senior Moderator
Senior External Moderators
(SEM) are appointed to assist
the Chief Examiners in providing
a consistent approach to quality
assurance for centres. In
addition to external moderation
activity, the SEM will carry
out allocated duties as
set out below:
Be part of a senior team
which sets the tone for all
UAL Awarding Body external
moderators, representing the
UAL Awarding Body approach
and ethos
Provide support and
guidance to UAL Awarding
Body External Moderators
to ensure consistency of
approach and to resolve
any issues
Support the Chief Examiner
in the delivery of annual Chief
Examiner Reports for a
specified qualification
Carry out observations
of External Moderators
and complete reports on
their performance
Read and review external
moderation reports
completed by UAL External
Moderators and approve
their release to centres
Carry out advisory visits to
UAL Awarding Body centres
Participate in and / or lead
qualification specific events
such as standardisation
events, qualification training
meetings etc.
15
Appendix IV
External Moderator
Observation Report
Aim
To provide UAL Awarding
Body with a record of External
Moderator performance.
The criteria for observation
and evaluation of External
Moderator performance
are related to the External
Moderator job description
and person specification.
Name of External Moderator:
Date of observation:
Centre at which observation took place:
Qualification externally moderated:
The External Moderator can
demonstrate the ability to apply
assessment and grading criteria
to agreed standards
The External Moderator can
demonstrate the ability to effectively
communicate judgements
The External Moderator can
demonstrate the ability to work
effectively with others
Recommendation
Lead EM
Team EM
Solo EM
Additional comments:
Name of Observer:
Signature of observer:
Date:
16
Appendix V
External Moderation visit: sample contact letter and schedule
Dear name of Course Leader/centre contact
Name of institute – name and level of qualification
I am writing to confirm arrangements for the forthcoming
name of course moderation visit, and I am attaching a
proposed schedule for the day.
External moderation visit contact
Letter and schedule – date
To ensure that the assessment process is sound and that
the standard meets the UAL Awarding Body assessment
criteria for level of course, I will be moderating a sample of
completed and formatively assessed assignments for the
name of course – unit number.
The sample size for the qualification will be 10% of the cohort
(or a minimum of six) and the actual candidates decided in
discussion with you on the day of moderation, to ensure that
a representative range is included.
Contact: name
Moderation team: name(s)
Please have available: schemes of work, assignment briefs,
list of assessors, completed assessment sheets, internal
verification and tracking documentation for all units
and completed final results sheets with student ULNs.
Please refer to section 1.6 of the centre handbook and
ensure that all students complete and present a statement
of authenticity with their work.
The moderation team will be myself and insert name (if
applicable), cc’d.
AM
10.00am – Arrival and meeting with Course Leader to
discuss sample
• Qualification delivery model
• Size of cohort
• Scheme of work
• Sample assignments and related support materials
• Assessment methodology and IV
• Achievement and marking
• Select sample
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any queries.
10.30am – External moderation team to view sample
I look forward to seeing you on confirm date of visit.
12.30 – Lunch break
Best wishes,
PM
1.30pm – External moderation team to complete sample
I will also need to see evidence of the tracking, monitoring,
assessment and internal verification of the non-graded units.
Please ensure that schemes of work, assignment briefs and
assessment tracking for unit numbers are made available. It
is not necessary to present student work for these preceding
units.
Your name and contact details
3.30pm – External moderation team to discuss and agree
feedback to Course Leader and team
4.00pm – F
eedback to Course Leader and team/sign-off
Grade Confirmation Form
17
Appendix VI
Parameters for
the allocation and
remuneration of External
Moderators to UAL
Awarding Body centres
Allocation
An External Moderator can
be allocated to a centre
for up to three years but is
contracted annually
An External Moderator can
be re-allocated, subject to
an acceptable standard of
performance, every three
years to ensure clarity of
judgements and to extend
experience across a range of
centres.
Length of working day
The normal External
Moderator working day
is six hours, of which
approximately one hour
should be spent receiving
guidance from the Course
Leader on the location and
format of the evidence and
the proposed grades (if
allocated). External
Moderators should also
spend this time reporting
judgments and conclusions,
and double-checking
evidence where necessary.
Full-time course workload
On average, External
Moderators are expected to
review the evidence of three
externally moderated units
per hour. This takes into
account that some sets of
evidence will require more
time and others less
An External Moderator for
one of the large qualifications
should therefore be able to
moderate up to 15 sets of
evidence in a day.
18
Short courses workload
For stand-alone units,
External Moderators are
expected to review an
average of four sets of
evidence for an Award (two
units) or three sets of
evidence for a Certificate
(four units) per hour
External Moderators should
be able to moderate up to 20
sets of evidence per day for a
stand-alone award, and up to
15 sets of evidence per day
for a stand-alone Certificate
For units embedded in a
‘host’ qualification, External
Moderators are expected to
review an average of three
sets of evidence for an Award
and two sets of evidence for a
Certificate per hour
External Moderators for
an embedded Award should
be able to moderate up to 15
sets of evidence per day, or
up to 12 sets of evidence per
day for an embedded
Certificate.
Sample size
The normal size of a sample
for external moderation
is 10%, although this may
be extended by 5% if External
Moderators are unclear if
agreed standards are being
met
A ratio between registrations
at a centre and the number
of External Moderators
required can therefore be
established, e.g. a 10%
sample from a centre with
100 Foundation Diploma in
Art & Design candidates
would be 10 requiring one
External Moderator for one
day.
Remuneration
The fee for undertaking
External Moderation duties
includes the activity of
moderation and the
production of a report within
the parameters set by the
Awarding Body
When External Moderators
work in teams, the Lead
External Moderator will be
remunerated at a higher rate
for coordinating the activities
of the team. The report
should be based on
contributions from all
members of the team
An External Moderator
attending a centre to
moderate two qualifications
on the same day is required
to produce separate reports
e.g. Foundation Diploma in
Art & Design and Short
course Drawing, and will
receive payment for
both qualifications.
Definitions of actions and
recommendations
Actions
Advice given by an external
moderator to a centre
Essential measures for
improving centre delivery,
to meet quality assurance
standards for assessment
processes and for the
continuing validation of
UAL Awarding Body
Actions to be taken within
a period of time agreed
between UAL Awarding Body
and the centre; this would
usually be prior to the final
assessment of the next
completing cohort.
Recommendations
Guidance given by an
External Moderator to
a centre
Desirable measures for
continuing improvement
to centre delivery, quality
assurance standards and
assessment processes
Recommendations to be
carried out at the discretion
of the centre in discussion
with UAL Awarding Body.
Appendix VII
Guidance for good
practice on assessment
and internal verification
Formative assessment
A formative assessment tutorial
supported by verbal and written
feedback on achievement and
areas for improvement should
be given at least once during
the delivery of a unit or units.
This gives the tutor an
opportunity to monitor the
progress of a student and to
ensure that actions are taken
to address any areas of concern
prior to project deadlines.
Self-assessment and peer
assessment
Evaluation and reflection should
be an ongoing part of the
student learning experience.
Centres should also encourage
students to self-assess against
the assessment criteria prior
to a formative or summative
assessment. The process
of self-assessment reinforces
an understanding of how
assessment decisions are
arrived at and enables students
to identify their own strengths
and areas for improvement.
Assessment for nongraded units
Initial assessment should
be undertaken by the one or
more members of the teaching
team. Ideally each student
should receive a one-to-one
assessment tutorial to provide
them with an opportunity to
present and explain their work
and achievements. Verbal and
written feedback against the
assessment criteria should be
given, with tutorial notes and
action plans noted. Indicative
grading feedback may be used.
Any borderline decisions should
be discussed and agreed
with another member of the
course team.
Summative assessment
for graded units
Internal standardisation
To ensure parity of grading
decisions the teaching team
should agree benchmarks for
Pass, Merit and Distinction
across disciplines before
assessing the whole cohort.
Internal verification
To check the accuracy of
individual assessment decisions
the Internal Verifier should
select a sample of at least
10% of the assessed cohort.
The sample should represent
grading decisions across all
levels and disciplines. In
addition, all disputed and
borderline decisions should
be seen and agreed by the
Internal Verifier.
Referrals
The criteria where a student
has failed to reach the required
level should be made clear.
Students should receive written
feedback and guidance against
the criteria on what they must
do to achieve a Pass. Ideally the
student should also be given
the opportunity to attend a
tutorial. An appropriate date
for re-submission should be
given – students are allowed
only one opportunity to
resubmit. On re-submission
referred students are always
capped at Pass.
The initial summative
assessment should be
undertaken independently
by one or more members
of the teaching team.
Blind marking and double
marking are recommended.
Student work should always
be assessed against the unit
assessment and grading
criteria. Once assessment is
complete, the team should meet
to discuss and agree decisions.
Minutes of discussion on
borderline, disputed and
subsequently agreed grades
should be recorded and
presented to the external
moderator. Where assessors
have recorded different grades
and no agreement is reached
these submissions should
be added to the internal
verification sample.
19
Want to find out more?
Contact:
UAL Awarding Body
272 High Holborn
London
WC1V 7EY
Tel: 0207 514 9851
Email: moderation.awarding@arts.ac.uk
UALawardingbody
UALawardingbody
Version 5.5
arts.ac.uk/awarding