examination regulations, assessment and grading
GUIDELINE
COURSE ASSESSMENT
Drafted by
Maintained by
Approved by
Competence assessment guidelines group
Vice rector responsible for the education and teaching process
Veijo Hintsanen, Rector as of 1 August 2012 Valid
Organisation Operations
HAKKY
HAMK
Education
Research and
X development
Shared services AOKK
HAMI Administration
HAKKY = Häme Municipal Federation of Professional Higher Education
HAMK = HAMK University of Applied Sciences
AOKK = Vocational Teacher Education Unit
HAMI = Häme Vocational Institute
X
X
1 (12)
GUIDELINE 2 (12)
SUMMARY
This guideline defines unified principles for competence assessment in HAMK
University of Applied Sciences (HAMK). The guideline describes the assessment of courses, the improvement of grades and the reassessment procedures of grades. This guideline applies to the studies included in
Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees, professional specialisation studies and open studies undertaken at HAMK.
MATRIX OF RESPONSIBILITIES
Responsibilities Responsible party
Definition and description of course assessment
Formative assessment P
F
AF
F
AF
Completion of courses
Competence assessment for the grade
Grading
FV P
P F
AF
F
AF
F
AF
Entering completed courses and grades in the credit record database
Assessment documentation
Grounds for the use of scales
Improvement opportunities
F
F
PR
F
F
AF
Improvement attempts F
AF
E
P
Reassessment F
AF
P Monitoring, evaluation and development
P P F
P = participates in, F = fulfils, PR = proposes, AF = answers for
AF
AF
F
F
AF
P AF
GUIDELINE 3 (12)
CONTENTS
References
Revisions
KEYWORDS education, degree education, grade, grading scale, fail, pass, public access to grades, grade improvement, reassessment
GUIDELINE 4 (12)
COURSE ASSESSMENT
1 Purpose and Scope
This guideline defines the unified principles for competence assessment in
HAMK University of Applied Sciences (HAMK). The guideline describes the assessment of courses, the improvement of grades and the reassessment procedures of grades. This guideline applies to the studies included in
Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees, professional specialisation studies and open studies undertaken at HAMK.
There is a separate guideline governing recognition and accreditation of prior learning or learning acquired elsewhere during studies (RPL). However, skills demonstrations are assessed according to this Course Assessment guideline.
The guideline does not apply to the Professional Teacher Education Unit and
Häme Vocational Institute.
2 Definitions
EQF The European Quality Framework is the European framework of degrees and other competences. Each country joining the European education area compiles its own national framework of degrees and competences based on the
EQF.
NQF
Learning outcomes of courses
The learning outcomes of courses describe shortly and clearly what the students are expected to know, understand and perform to pass the course. The outcomes have to be achievable for the students. The learning outcomes must be open to assessment, and the assessment should accurately measure whether the learning outcome has been achieved or not.
Object of assessment
The National Quality Framework is the national framework of degrees and competencies which is based on the EQF. The NQF describes the level of degrees and competencies nationally.
The objects of assessment are based on the learning outcomes. Assessment is targeted at knowledge, skills and working methods which are described in the learning outcomes of the course.
Criteria for assessment The criteria for assessment describe on which level /how well the student achieves the learning outcomes of the course. The teachers specify criteria for course assessment principally on the scale 1-5. In special cases, the criteria for assessment is specified on the level of pass (S).
Assessment methods The assessment methods describe which methods teachers use to collect reliable data about the student’s competence. In addition to the teacher, the student, peer students and labour market contacts take part in the assessment whenever it is possible.
GUIDELINE 5 (12)
Credit record database Information on the student’s study history is stored in the credit record database. The credit record database is maintained in the Winha Pro system in
HAMK.
Transcript of records ePSP
The transcript of records contains the student’s credits in the order of the structure of the degree. The transcript of records is available in the Winha Pro credit record database.
The ePSP is the student’s personal electronic study plan. In HAMK, the ePSP is in the SoleOPS system.
3 Principles of competence assessment
In HAMK, assessment is based on competencies. The student’s competence consists of knowledge, skills and working methods. Competence assessment also ensures the student’s suitability for the professional field.
Competence-based curriculum and assessment are based on the policy of
European higher education. The definition of learning outcomes is based on the legislation of polytechnics/university of applied sciences and the NQF. The learning outcomes of the degree are based on the requirements and forecasts of the world of work. The learning outcomes are described in general and at the degree programme level in the curriculum. They are accurately stated in the learning outcomes of each course. The teacher defines the criteria for competence assessment based on the learning outcomes. The criteria describe how competence is fulfilled in the student’s knowledge, skills and working methods. Targets and methods of assessment are chosen according to the assessment criteria. (Figure1.)
The teacher drafts the implementation plan on the basis of the course’s learning outcomes. The learning outcomes are approved in the curriculum. In the implementation plan, the teacher describes the content of the course, the mode of implementation, the targets of assessment and the assessment criteria.
Information about the student’s competence is collected by the assessment methods defined in the implementation plan. Assessment methods are examinations, learning assignments, project work, client work, exercises, portfolios and learning journals.
The student’s competence is assessed in relation to the learning outcomes of each course. When deciding the grade, the teacher checks to see how well the student has reached the learning outcomes. Student assessment has to be fair, many-sided, reliable and transparent. When making the assessment, the teacher also makes use of the student’s self-assessment, peer-assessment and workplace assessment.
During the learning process, formative feedback and assessment are used in a constructive way according to the learning outcome. Competence assessment encourages and motivates the student to become self-directed and to set targets
GUIDELINE 6 (12) for learning and to monitor progress. Competence assessment must support the student’s professional growth.
GUIDELINE 7 (12)
EQF
NQF
17,25
Government Decree
Learning outcomes of degree
General learning outcomes of degree
Learning out-comes of degree
Programme
Requirements and forecasts of world of work
Curriculum - Courses
Learning outcomes of degree to be defined (general + professional)
Competence areas of the learning outcomes in the course to be chosen
General learning outcomes of degree (max 2-3)
Learning skills
can assess and develop one’s competence and learning habits
can procure, process and assess information critically
can take responsibility of learning and sharing competence in group
Competence in work community
can act as member of work community and promote well being in work community
can act in workplace’s communication and interaction situations
can exploit information and communications technology in professional field
is capable of making personal contacts in world of work and acting in networks
can make resolutions in unforeseeable situations
is capable of supervisory tasks and independent work in tasks of an expert
has skills for entrepreneurship
Professional learning outcomes of degree (max 2-3)
Do not exist on the course in question
Learning outcomes of the course to be defined based on chosen learning outcomes of the degree
Example. Communication in community 3 cr: the learning outcomes is that the student can
communicate target-oriented as a student and as a member of the work community both face-to-face and on the net
recognize own impact and responsibility in work community’s communication and interaction situations
produce oral and written texts according to targets and standards of situation
assess one’s own communication skills and set up development targets for oneself.
Criteria (on which level learning outcomes are realized)
Teacher determines
How to demonstrate assessment criteria, methods and skills demonstrati ons for each grade (1-5)
K5
H4
H3
T2
T1
The student can
produce convincing and versatile written, oral or visual presentation assess own competence in communication and apply feedback to own development
produce convincing and versatile written, oral or visual presentation
assess one’s assignments and recognize one’s strengths and needs for development with relation to the targets
produce conventional written, oral or visual presentation
assess one’s assignments and set up development targets in communication
produce simple written, oral or visual presentation
assess one’s competence in communication as guided and instructed
prepare written,, oral or visual presentation made to pattern
tell about one’s communication competence with the help of instruction and competence and which are the methods to measure it feedback
Figure 1. Framework of competence assessment. Example: Community communication course
GUIDELINE 8 (12)
4 Grading
5 Grading Scales
5.1
Scale 5 - 0
Students will receive grades for courses that they have completed. Grades are determined according to the extent to which students have achieved the learning objectives specified in the course implementation plans. The teachers outline the course objectives and criteria for each grade in the course implementation plans and present these at the beginning of each course.
The teacher will give each student an individual grade even if the studies were carried out in a group or as project assignments.
Students have the right to know how assessment criteria are applied to their performance. They are also entitled to review the assessment of their written or otherwise recorded work.
The teacher must award grades no later than one calendar month after the course completion date indicated in the course implementation plan. Grades are entered in the credit record database. Students who have not completed all assignments included in the course to an acceptable standard within this period of time will be awarded grade 0. Grade 0 indicates that the student’s performance or work is unfinished and the course is uncompleted. The student is responsible for completing the course. Assessment documentation used as a basis for grading must be retained by the degree programme office for a period of one year from the course completion date.
Students must complete the courses according to the schedule that is indicated in the implementation plan. Partial completions are valid one year from the course completion date. Students, who do not conform to this, must complete the course according to new implementation.
Each teacher is responsible for assessing their own courses and entering partials completions of courses in the credit record database.
The teacher responsible for the entire course compiles the assessments, gives the overall course grade and enters the grade in the credit record database.
The thesis supervisor enters the grades of each part of the thesis in the credit record database. The student affairs secretary enters the overall thesis grade in the credit record database.
Procedures for situations where students have prior learning that they wish to have recognised as part of their degree are included in the guideline governing identification and recognition of prior learning or learning acquired elsewhere during studies (RPL).
HAMK applies two grading scales.
As a general rule, grading is based on a numerical scale from 5 to 0 as follows:
GUIDELINE 9 (12)
5 (excellent)
4 - 3 (good)
2 - 1 (satisfactory)
0 (fail)
The scale used for grading course units is the same, but it may be divided into quarter grades (such as 3-, 3, 3+ and 3½).
5.2
Scale H - 0
The pass/fail scale is used in certain separately determined cases as follows:
H (approved)
0 (fail)
All courses within the Professional Growth module will be assessed on the
Approved (H) - Fail (0) scale. The criteria for acceptable performance of these courses are jointly determined in HAMK implementation plans.
Preparatory studies (e.g. Swedish, English and mathematics preparatory studies) will be assessed on the Approved (H) - Fail (0) scale.
For justifiable reason, courses included in optional studies may also be graded using the Approved (H) - Fail (0) scale, if it is not possible to award a numerical grade. This procedure must be submitted for prior approval to the
E&R Director of education. Students will be informed accordingly at the beginning of such courses when dealing with the implementation plan.
5.3
Thesis assessment
The thesis process has been divided into parts. The credits of each completed part will be assessed as determined in the Thesis Guide. They are assessed on the Approved (H) - Fail (0) scale.
The completed thesis is graded on 5 - 0 scale.
The maturity test is graded on H - 0 scales.
Further instructions for assessment of theses are included in Thesis Guides.
5.4
Assessment of work placement
Work placement included in a degree is assessed using the Approved (H) -
Fail (0) scale. Further instructions for assessment of work placement are included in the guideline governing work placements included in higher education degree.
6 Public access to grades
Legislation on the openness of government activities and data protection defines access to grades. Written verbal assessments concerning studies completed by students must not be made publicly accessible nor distributed generally on the information network. Partials completions of courses may be put on the course website. Students can access their own credits on ePSP.
GUIDELINE 10 (12)
7 Improvement of failed grades and passed grades
Improvement of both failed and passed grades is based on the course implementation plans. The basis of competence assessment is the implementation plan. In the implementation plan, the course teacher sets three retake dates to improve a failed grade. Opportunities of retakes must be offered within one year of the course assessment date. These dates must be scheduled realistically, so that the student has the opportunity to receive information about assessment and sufficient time to prepare for the next retake. Not all retake dates may be scheduled during a single semester.
7.1
Improving failed grades
Improvement of failed grades may either relate to entire courses or failed parts of courses. Students are entitled to two retakes to improve a failed grade within one year of the course completion date. Students who fail to achieve a pass grade in their retakes will have to restart the course.
If a student registers for a retake and then wishes to cancel it, this must be done at least four days before the retake date. If a student fails to cancel registration, it is classified as one retake, unless the student produces a valid sick leave certificate.
7.2
Improving passed grades
Improvement of passed grades always relates to the entire courses, not partial course completion. Students may try to improve the grade of a successfully completed course once. It is not possible to improve a passed grade that has been achieved after a failed grade. A failed attempt to improve a grade does not affect the existing grade.
A passed thesis grade may not be improved.
8 Reassessment procedures
Students dissatisfied with a grade for a course included in a Bachelor’s or
Master’s degree, specialisation studies or open studies may request reassessment.
Students not satisfied with their course grades may request reassessment from the teacher concerned. Such requests may be made orally or in writing within
14 days of being informed of a grade (i.e. one date after of assessment entered in the credit records database).
The teacher deals the request without delay. A student not satisfied with the teacher’s reply may appeal to HAMK’s Board of Examiners. Such an appeal must be made within 14 days of being informed of the teacher’s reply concerning the reassessment request.
Appeals are to be addressed to the Board of Examiners, Registry Office, P.O.
Box 230 (Visamäentie 35 A), 13101 Hämeenlinna. An appeal is deemed to have been received on time when the registered date of receipt is within 14 days of the teacher’s reply.
GUIDELINE 11 (12)
A written appeal must indicate at least the student’s requirements, including reasons, course name and code of course, the student’s name, degree programme and contact details required to deal with the issue.
The Board of Examiners will deal with appeals without delay. Board members may not participate in dealing with appeals concerning courses that they have assessed.
The Board of Examiners will base its decisions on statutes, HAMK’s
Guidelines, the relevant curriculum and the assessment documentation at issue. The board will submit the final minutes of the meeting to the relevant parties. Decisions made by the Board are final.
The minutes of the meeting are sent for information of the Rector, Vice
Rector, E&R Director of Education and Administrative Secretary. The documents are filed by the Administrative Secretary.
The chair of the Board of Examiners makes sure that the decision and the changed grade are entered in the credit record database.
9 Dishonesty in course completion
Each case of student’s dishonesty or plagiarism in course completion or in the thesis will lead to failure of the performance and to disciplinary measures. The disciplinary measures are determined in HAMK’s Degree Regulations.
10 Monitoring, evaluation and development
The assessment and grading process as well as compliance with this Guideline is monitored on the basis of the following criteria:
Award of grades within the specified time frame
Handling data related to grades and assessment according to the Act on the
Openness of Government Activities and the Data Protection Act
Number of appeals and related decisions by the Board of Examiners
Feedback from students and teachers according to HAMK Quality assurance system.
The E&R Directors of education and the Coordinators of education are responsible for monitoring, evaluation and exploitation of it. The Vice rector is responsible of appropriateness of assessment procedures.
References This guideline refers to the following documents:
Polytechnics Act (351/2003) and Government Decree on Polytechnics
(352/2003) and amendments
Administrative Procedure Act (434/2003)
HAMK’s Degree Regulations
Revisions
GUIDELINE 12 (12)
Guideline on recognition and accreditation of prior learning or learning acquired elsewhere during studies (RPL)
Guideline on planning, implementation and assessment of study units
Guideline on personal study plan
Guideline on work placements included in higher education degrees completed at Universities of Applied Sciences
Guideline on workplace studies included in production-oriented
Bachelor’s degrees in technology at HAMK
Thesis Guide (Bachelor and Master)
Guideline on the Board of Examiners (available in Finnish)
Student feedback system guideline (available in Finnish)
The right to make decisions concerning studies is defined in:
HAKKY Administrative Regulations
Regulations of HAMK University of Applied Sciences
Version Date
4 1 April 2005
10 March 2005
5
6
7
26 May 2008
17 May 2011
15 May 2012
Description
Decision-making responsibilities revised according to
HAMK’s Regulations. The education and teaching process is managed by the Vice Rector. Exemptions from language studies are granted by the Vice Rector based on proposals by the Director of the Language Centre. A new form has been created for this purpose.
The Board of Examiners is appointed by HAMK’s Board.
Logo changed.
Credit transfer removed from the heading, topic moved to another Guideline and completely revised.
Definitions (terms defined). Specified competence assessment and use of grading scales
Responsibilities of vice rector, E&R director of education and coordinator of education updated. Dishonesty in course completion added.
