Brunel University
Briefing for External Examiners
Spring 2013
Derek Milligan
Director of Academic Programme Development
Topics




Panels of Examiners
Boards of Examiners
Mitigating Circumstances Panels
Regulations
Panels and Boards are responsible
directly to Senate

Senate Regulation 4 governs Panels of
Examiners, Boards of Examiners and
Mitigating Circumstances Panels
Panels and Boards of Examiners
Combined Purpose
To ensure:
 Fairness to all students and each
student
 Rigour of assessment
 Robustness of the results and
decisions
 Maintenance of Standards
Assessment Waypoints
Specify assessment tasks and criteria
 Approval of tasks and criteria
 Students take
 Mitigating circumstances
 Marking/Grading
 Moderation (Internal and External)
 Panels of Examiners
 Boards of Examiners

Panels of Examiners - Purpose





To verify and confirm the marks/grades for each
module/block
Not to look at individual students (unless error or
additional info presented)
May make specific recommendations to Boards
concerning particular assessments
Implement Senate Regulations 4.52-4.66
Mitigating Circumstances Panels are different
– see later
Senate Regulation 4.64

A Panel of Examiners shall not confirm grades/marks for an
assessment block until it is satisfied with the integrity and fairness of
the assessment(s) leading to the grades/marks. Where the Panel of
Examiners has insufficient confidence in the integrity and fairness of
the outcomes of an assessment, it shall take appropriate action in
order to achieve sufficient confidence. The Panel of Examiners may
require the reconsideration by assessors of the grades/marks for the
complete cohort of students taking an assessment. Only in
exceptional circumstances may the Panel directly adjust the
grades/marks for a particular assessment and must then must
record the justification and rationale for the adjustment.
Grades/marks for an individual student may not be adjusted, unless
they have been wrongly recorded or additional information is
presented.
Role of External Examiners at Panels






Full membership of the PoE (including voting)
Contribute to the collective academic decision-making
Have a distinct influence on the PoE (through their
independence and their overview)
EEs are not empowered to change marks or grades – all
decisions are made collectively
May ask to inspect any documents involved in the
assessment process
See SR4.122 – 4.132
Issues for Panels







Potential Assessment Design Errors
Academic Judgment
Moderation effectiveness
Extraordinary factors
Adjustment of Results
Justification of Actions
Recording of Decisions at all stages!
Design Errors
Potential Locations:
 Learning Outcomes Coverage
 Element Weightings
 Assessment Specification
 Sub-element combination method
 Assessment Criteria Specification
 Marking/Grading strategy
 Moderation process
Academic Judgement

The vast majority of the collective
academic judgement is exercised in
PANELS, not in Boards, of Examiners

Boards are more about judgement by
academics, rather than academic
judgement – but there may be
extraordinary academic judgements
needed
Boards of Examiners - Purpose





To receive confirmed marks/grades from Panels
To consider individual student profile of achievement
To take into account mitigating circumstances and
determine appropriate actions
To decide on progression and re-assessment
or
To recommend to Senate appropriate awards for each
student
Implement Senate Regulations 4.52-4.58 and 4.67-4.80
NB Boards now have few powers of discretion within the
regulations (compared with the old regulations) – but all
decisions must still be justified
Role of External Examiners at Boards






Full membership of the BoE (including voting)
Contribute to the collective academic decision-making
Have a distinct influence on the BoE (through their
independence and their overview)
EEs are not empowered to change marks or
grades/progression/classification unilaterally – all
decisions are made collectively
Assure themselves that due process followed and
appropriate consideration and decisions have been
made by the BoE
See Senate Regulations SR4.122 – 4.132
Issues for Boards








Mitigating Circumstances
Academic Judgment
Progression and Re-assessment
Awards
Extraordinary Decisions - Discretion
Justification of Decisions
Recording of Decisions at all stages!
Condonation, Set-Aside & Borderlines (UG pre-2009
only)
Board Discretion
Potential Locations:
 Action re MCs
 Treatment of AP(E)L – NB New processes for
2013/4 will obviate need for BoE discretion
 Extraordinary situations
 Re-assessment (mainly PG)

Condonation/Set-Aside/Promotion across
boundaries/Re-assessment (UG Old SR2 only)
Mitigating Circumstances Panels









Report to Board of Examiners
Consider MC submissions from students
Have no access to academic results when considering
cases
Consider the likely impact on studies/assessment
Accept or reject MCs
Make decisions directly re coursework submission
deadlines with MCs
All other accepted MCs -> Board of Examiners
MC Panel will identify serious cases to the BoE
SR4 governs treatment of MCs + see Guidance on MCs
Actions re MCs by Boards



See Senate Regulations 4.43 – 4.51
Essentially, Boards can take any appropriate
action it sees fit except:
The marks/grades for individual assessment
elements (e.g. exam script, piece of coursework,
etc) may not be changed – i.e., the actual level
of performance recorded for an individual
assessment (confirmed by a PoE) cannot be
altered.
Grounds for Appeal (SR6)

6.5
A student may appeal against the decision of a Board of
Examiners on any of the following grounds:

a
that there exist circumstances materially affecting the student's
performance which were not known to the Board of Examiners when
its decision was taken and which it was not reasonably practicable for
the student to make known to the Board beforehand;
b
that there were procedural irregularities in the conduct of the
examinations and/or assessment procedures, including assessment
of coursework, of such a nature as to create a reasonable possibility
that the result might have been different had they not occurred;
c
that there is evidence of prejudice, bias or inadequate
assessment on the part of one or more Examiners.



6.6
No appeal shall be allowed on the grounds that, although the
decision of the Examiners was properly made, the Board of
Examiners is alleged to have erred in its judgement of the academic
standard achieved by the student.
Documentation

For all summative assessment there should be a
complete documented audit trail for all
assessments –



all the way from specification of an individual piece of
assessment and its checking
through marking and moderation
to Panel and Board decisions
Senate Regulations
Undergraduate Programmes & Awards
 SR2 (2009 onwards)
 SR2 (pre-2009 entry, very few students now)
Postgraduate Programmes & Awards
 SR3 (2006 onwards)
 SR3 (pre-2006 entry, very few students now)
Assessment in Taught Programmes
 SR4 (combined)
Old UG (pre-2009) Regulations


Progression and Awards based on % average +
gaining of 360 credits
Compensatory mechanisms





Condonation (at BoE discretrion)
Set-aside (at BoE discretion)
Best 100 credits
Trailing allowed
No limit but much BoE discretion on volume of
re-assessment
Current Regulations (SR2/3)








Transparency of Standards of Awards
Equity of Treatment
University Grade Descriptors are Primary Standards
Reference
Grades are primary performance measure
Defined minimum grade profile requirements for awards
Credit is not “awarded” – credit is solely a
volume/weighting metric
“Core” assessments can be defined (must be passed)
Reassessment volume right = limit (no UG BoE
discretion, but some at PGT currently)
Current UG (2009) Regulations







De-modularised Regulations (Assessment Blocks &
Study Blocks)
17-point grade scale (A*,A+,A,A-,…F) with % mark
equivalence defined
Progression and (Threshold) Award based on Grade
Profile over defined volume of Credit
Classification based on combination of GPA + volume in
class
No compensation/condonation mechanisms
No Trailing allowed (Except for some cases of MCs and
with individual Senate approval)
Integration of Sandwich placements into degree
UG Integration of Sandwich
Placements (SR2 2009-, 2.46-48)





Special award name (defined in the Programme Specification)
available for sandwich students who have passed (D-) the
placement assessment.
For this special award the placement module grade is included in
the Level 2 grade profile for award.
Percentage contribution to Level 2 of the placement module is
defined in the Programme Specification.
All students who have failed the placement module (or who choose
not to have it included in the award grade profile) are eligible for the
standard (non-sandwich) award.
2012/13 is first year of awards with integrated sandwich
placements
UG Grade Scale
Indicative
Mark Band
Degree
Class
Equivalent
Grade
Grade Point
90 and above
1
A*
17
80-89
1
A+
16
73-79
1
A
15
70-72
1
A-
14
68-69
2.1
B+
13
63-67
2.1
B
12
60-62
2.1
B-
11
58-59
2.2
C+
10
53-57
2.2
C
9
50-52
2.2
C-
8
48-49
3
D+
7
43-47
3
D
6
40-42
3
D-
5
38-39
Fail
E+
4
33-37
Fail
E
3
30-32
Fail
E-
2
29 and below
Fail
F
1
Current PGT (2006)
Regulations





Progression and (Threshold) Award based on Grade
Profile over defined volume of Credit
Masters Pass, Merit, Distinction Classifications
Classification based on minimum grade profile for class
No compensation/condonation mechanisms
SR3 for 2013/4 onwards will provide alignment with
current SR2



De-modularised Regulations (assessment & study blocks)
Finer grade scale
Use of GPA for Classification
PGT Classification





Masters Distinction minimum profile:
120 cr A (incl Dissertation) + 30 cr B + 30 cr C
Masters Merit minimum profile :
120 cr B (incl Dissertation) + 60 cr C
Masters Pass minimum profile :
120 cr C (incl Dissertation) + 60 cr D
PGDip minimum profile : 60 cr C + 60 cr D
PGCert minimum profile : 30 cr C + 30 cr D
Old UG (pre-2009) Classification


L3:L2 weighting 2:1
% Average over best 100 credits at L2 & L3 + 360
credits awarded







3rd: 40% average
2.2: 50% average
2.1: 60% average
1st: 70% average
Variable Bordelines
Condonation and set-aside used to award credit when
module not passed – at BoE discretion
Please note that very few, if any, of Bachelors awards at
2012/13 BoEs will be under these regulations
Current UG (2009-) Classification





L3:L2 weighting 2:1 as before
Two-stage classification decision
Test 1 – limits of sub-threshold credit volume
(determines eligibility for 3rd)
Test 2 – Minimum GPA + In-class Volume
(determines classification)
Please note that almost all Bachelors awards at
2012/2013 BoEs will be under these regulations
Current UG Classification – Test 1
Maximum credit volume of
assessment blocks
containing core
assessments below D-
Maximum (non-weighted) credit volume of noncore Grade Band E (E+,E,E-)
Maximum credit volume of
non-core Grade F
Level 2
Level 3
Level 2 + 3
Level 2
Level 3
1st
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.1
0
20
0
20
0
0
2.2
0
40
20
40
0
0
3rd
0
40
40
60
0
0
Current UG Classification – Test 2
Class
1st
Volume of grades
(weighted) in Class or
better
2.1
2.2
3rd
Minimum weighted GPA
At least 33% of grades
(weighted) in Class or
better
14.5
11.5
8.5
NA
At least 41% of grades
(weighted) in Class or
better
13.5
10.5
7.5
NA
At least 50% of grades
(weighted) in Class or
better
12.5
9.5
6.5
NA
At least 58% of grades
(weighted) in Class or
better
11.5
8.5
5.5
NA
At least 66% of grades
(weighted) in Class or
better
10.5
7.5
4.5
NA
At least 72% of grades
(weighted) in Class or
better
NA
NA
NA
3.3
Classification Example 1

Level 2 Profile (20 cr blocks): BB-CC+DE (E noncore)



Level 2 GPA: 12+11+9+10+6+3/6= 8.5
Level 3 Profile (20 cr blocks): AA-BB-CD
Level 3 GPA: 15+14+12+11+9+6/6= 11.16
Test 1:

No core credit below D- = 0 

Grade F credit = 0 

Non-core credit in E band = 20 at Level 2
=> maximum class = 2.1
Test 2:

Overall weighted GPA = (8.5+(11.16x2)) /3=
10.27
Consider for 2.1 with weighted GPA = 10.27

Needs 50% in 2.1 Class to get a 2.1

Proportion of weighted grade B- or better =
1/3 at L2 and 2/3 at L3 = (1/3 +2/3 +2/3)/3 =
55.55%
=> Classification is 2.1
Gra
de
Gra
de
Poin
t
A*
17
A+
16
A
15
A-
14
B+
13
B
12
B-
11
C+
10
C
9
C-
8
D+
7
D
6
D-
5
E+
4
E
3
E-
2
F
1
Maximum credit
volume of
assessment
blocks
containing
core
assessments
below D-
Maximum (non-weighted) credit
volume of non-core Grade
Band E (E+,E,E-)
Maximum credit
volume of non-core
Grade F
Level
2
Level
3
Level
2+3
Level
2
Level
3
1st
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.1
0
20
0
20
0
0
2.2
0
40
20
40
0
0
3rd
0
40
40
60
0
0
Class
1st
Volume of grades
(weighted) in Class
or better
2.1
2.2
3rd
Minimum weighted GPA
At least 33% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
14.5
11.5
8.5
NA
At least 41% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
13.5
10.5
7.5
NA
At least 50% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
12.5
9.5
6.5
NA
At least 58% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
11.5
8.5
5.5
NA
At least 66% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
10.5
7.5
4.5
NA
At least 72% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
NA
NA
NA
3.3
Classification Example 2




Level 2 Profile (20 cr blocks): BB-CC+DE (E noncore)
Gra
de
Level 2 GPA: 12+11+9+10+6+3/6= 8.5
Level 3 Profile (20 cr blocks): ABCDDD
Level 3 GPA: 15+12+9+6+6+6/6= 9.0
Gra
de
Poin
t
A*
17
A+
16
A
15
A-
14
B+
13
B
12
B-
11
C+
10
C
9
C-
8
D+
7
D
6
Test 1:

No core credit below D- = 0 

Grade F credit = 0 

Non-core credit in E band = 20 at Level 2
=> maximum class = 2.1
Test 2:

Overall weighted GPA = (8.5+(9.0x2)) /3= 8.83
Consider for 2.1 with weighted GPA = 8.83

Needs 58% in 2.1 Class to get a 2.1

Proportion of weighted grade B- or better =
1/3 at L2 and 1/3 at L3 = (1/3 +1/3 +1/3)/3 = 33.33%
=> 2.1 not achieved
Consider for 2.2 with weighted GPA = 8.83

Needs 33% in 2.2 Class to get a 2.2

Proportion of weighted grade C- or better =
2/3 at L2 and 1/2 at L3 = (2/3 +(1/2 +1/2))/3 = 55.55%
=> Classification is 2.2
D-
5
E+
4
E
3
E-
2
F
1
Maximum credit
volume of
assessment
blocks
containing
core
assessments
below D-
Maximum (non-weighted) credit
volume of non-core Grade
Band E (E+,E,E-)
Maximum credit
volume of non-core
Grade F
Level
2
Level
3
Level
2+3
Level
2
Level
3
1st
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.1
0
20
0
20
0
0
2.2
0
40
20
40
0
0
3rd
0
40
40
60
0
0
Class
1st
Volume of grades
(weighted) in Class
or better
2.1
2.2
3rd
Minimum weighted GPA
At least 33% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
14.5
11.5
8.5
NA
At least 41% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
13.5
10.5
7.5
NA
At least 50% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
12.5
9.5
6.5
NA
At least 58% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
11.5
8.5
5.5
NA
At least 66% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
10.5
7.5
4.5
NA
At least 72% of
grades (weighted) in
Class or better
NA
NA
NA
3.3