Quality Handbook Section 16C - Common Assessment Regulations for Taught Postgraduate Degrees - Requirements

2.1 The regulations will be reviewed and updated periodically in line with developments in University policy and practice. There may be differences in regulations as they apply to different cohorts of students registered for the same award. Every effort will be made to inform students about proposed changes. Changes will not normally be introduced for implementation in the current year of study but would take effect in the following academic year.

2.2 Changes to the regulations are made after appropriate consultation. At University level, proposed changes will be discussed with staff who will be given the opportunity to comment on such changes. Students and external examiners will also have an opportunity to comment. Proposed changes may be modified in the light of feedback.

2.3 At course level, students and external examiners should be consulted on any proposed changes to the assessment regime which may affect progression and award requirements. Students must be kept fully informed as to any changes to the regime which affects them.

2.4 Where changes affect the material information provided to current and prospective students, the University will ensure appropriate and timely communication of these changes in line with Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) guidance.

2.5 The above processes apply to all award bearing courses.

3.1 All elements and sub-elements are marked according to the University’s postgraduate grade based assessment scheme – see appendix 1.

4.1 All award and module results (including referral results) are considered and agreed upon by a board. The terms of reference and operating principles of the board are articulated in the Quality Handbook Section 15: Assessment

4.2 All of the assessed grades contributing to a module or an award remain provisional until confirmed by a board.

5.1 The grade(s) awarded to the summative assessment piece(s), is/are used to determine whether or not the module learning outcomes have been achieved, and therefore whether the module credits have been attained.

5.2 Where a module has one assessment element, the grade associated with that element goes forward as the module grade and determines whether or not the module has been passed.

5.3 Where a module has more than one element of assessment, each element contributes to the demonstration of learning outcomes, so each must achieve at least the minimum pass grade. An exception to this is when a marginal fail grade is achieved in an element of a module, then, providing at least a pass grade has been achieved for the module as a whole, the student’s performance is recorded as a pass for that module.

5.4 The minimum pass grade for a module is a pass.

5.5 The weighted arithmetic mean of the grade points associated with the relevant grades is calculated to arrive at the overall module grade (see also Appendix 3).

5.6 Occasionally, several assessment tasks (sub-elements) contribute to a single element. Unlike elements, individual sub-elements themselves do not have to be passed. The definitive module information in CourseLoop describes the way in which sub-elements contribute to an element grade (for example, all grades are equally weighted, or the lowest grade is disregarded). Grade points are accordingly aggregated to arrive at the element grade. When determining whether a module has been passed and the credits attained, it is the element grade(s) that is/are considered (see also Appendix 3).

5.7 The relative contribution of a sub-element of assessment to an overall element grade will have been agreed at approval. These arrangements should be clearly articulated for all stakeholders

6.1 A course may include competency-based elements that are assessed on a pass or fail basis. These elements are not used to determine the module grade, level result or award classification.

6.2 Competency-based refers to a practical, professional or work-based type of performance assessment that is normally measured as a personal competence against pass and fail criteria.

6.3 Where a student has been admitted on the basis of prior learning or has undertaken study at another institution as part of their course, the credits may be graded on a pass or fail basis. Such credits are not used to determine the module grade, level result or award classification.

7.1 Because courses are designed such that course learning outcomes are assessed in more than one assessment, a student who has failed a module may be considered to have demonstrated the achievement of the same learning outcomes elsewhere. This can only be properly determined when students have completed the entire stage, although when personal circumstances apply, the board may need to use its discretion to determine the most appropriate outcome.

7.2 In acknowledgement of this, boards  may compensate a marginal fail grade for a module as a whole. In addition, a board may compensate a mid-fail grade for an element provided at least a pass has been achieved for the module as a whole. In both circumstances, there should be evidence that the student has achieved the minimum pass requirement or higher at the end of the stage, and in the case of a failed element, that all sub-elements have been completed. In cases of a marginal fail grade in an element for which the module has achieved a pass, a pass is recorded automatically without the need for compensation.

7.3 A board may apply compensation to a maximum of one quarter of the award. Course teams / SASQCs should agree specific maxima according to the credit structure of the course. This should be agreed prior to the examination board.

7.4 A board may compensate beyond the maxima where personal circumstances apply.

7.5 Where there are no personal circumstances but the board is satisfied that the course learning outcomes have been achieved, it may exercise discretion in cases of marginal and mid fail grades and compensate beyond the maxima agreed.

7.6 A major project or dissertation should not be compensated.

7.7 Once a module or element grade has been compensated, the grade must not be adjusted.

8.1 A student must submit work for assessment in the required form(s) by a specified time on the dates indicated in the Assessment and Feedback Plan. When students submit work after the specified time, the following rules will apply.

8.2 Where a student is taking a first attempt at a module and submits assessed work after the submission date (and specified time) indicated in the Assessment and Feedback Plan, the work will be marked if submitted within five working days of the submission date.

8.3 Where a student is making a first attempt and submits assessed work by this second deadline (i.e. five working days after the submission date), the maximum grade awarded will be a pass. Where the quality of the assessed work falls below the minimum acceptable level (i.e. below a pass) a lower grade will be awarded as appropriate.

8.4 Where a student is making a first attempt at a module and submits work after the second deadline (i.e. five working days after the official deadline), a zero grade will be awarded and examiners must only comment on the work for learning purposes and return it to the student with a zero grade.

8.5 A course may adopt a shorter timescale than five working days. This should be agreed with ASQC and indicated in the course handbook and other appropriate documentation provided to students.

8.6 Where a student is making a referred or repeat attempt at a module (see sub-section 10 below), they must submit work by the submission date and they will not be allowed a second deadline. Work received after the submission date without an extension will be awarded a zero grade. Examiners must only comment on the work for learning purposes and return it to the student with a zero grade.

8.7 A student who has an approved personal circumstances request may be granted an extension to submit work between seven and up to fourteen calendar days after the submission date. Where a student is authorised to submit work after the submission date, they will not be penalised provided it was submitted within the authorised extension (see also Quality Handbook Section 17A).

8.8 For modules that are marked on a pass and fail basis, a 'Late Pass' should be recorded by the board for successful work that is submitted after the submission date and without an extension.

8.9 For assessment events (for example, examinations, including ‘take and do’ examinations) rather than coursework, where a student fails to attend an assessment event and does not have an approved personal circumstances request, a zero grade will be awarded.

8.10 Where an approved personal circumstances request explains the lack of attendance at an assessment event, the University may allow the opportunity for the student to be assessed at the next most appropriate opportunity. Such a decision by the University must be ratified by the relevant board.

8.11 For details of the outcomes of claims of personal circumstances, see Section 17A: Consideration of Personal Circumstances Policy.

9.1 A student who has not achieved the minimum module pass grade, and who has not been granted a compensated pass, has failed the module.

9.2 Where individual elements do not reach the minimum pass grade, then a decision must be made about how to provide the opportunity for the student to have another attempt (see below) unless the failed element has been awarded a marginal fail and the overall module aggregate is calculated to be at least a pass. In this case, it is considered that the student has demonstrated just enough evidence not to be reassessed and the module grade goes forward.

9.3 Where a professional practice placement has been failed, a board can rule that a student may not be eligible to retake that placement.

10.1 Following a failure of a module, a student has the right to be reassessed on one further occasion.

10.2 For reassessment in a module, the examination board will decide whether a student should:

1. Undertake a referral in the same academic year; or
2. Repeat the assessment in the following academic year with or without further attendance.

10.3 The maximum permitted number of attempts normally allowed for a student to pass a module is two: first attempt and then referral or repeat. A board has discretion to authorise a third attempt only in exceptional circumstances.

10.4 A student may not demand reassessment in a module that is no longer offered in the course. A board may, at its discretion, make special arrangements where it is not practicable for students to be reassessed in the same modules and by the same methods as at the first attempt.

10.5 Referral is the normal form of reassessment since it is linked to the student’s original module studies and normally will not involve further attendance. As it is linked to the student’s original module studies, it should take place in the same academic calendar (e.g. August or September for year-long modules) unless there are sound academic reasons for not doing so. If a student fails the referred work, they may be offered the opportunity to repeat the module (with or without attendance). This would be considered an exceptional third attempt (see reg. 10.3 above).

10.6 In the case of some failures, it may be appropriate for a board to decide to forego the initial referral opportunity and require a student to repeat the module with or without attendance. Without attendance means that the student is not required to attend classes except those, if any, during which assessment is conducted. If a student fails the repeat, they may be offered a referral opportunity. This would be considered an exceptional third attempt (see reg. 10.3 above).

10.7 At the master’s stage, students should not be offered the opportunity to retake marginal failures until the board has confirmed the decision. For courses terminating at PGCert or PGDip, the same applies.

10.8 Where the module is part of the PGCert or PGDip stage of a master’s course and the failure is marginal, a Course Leader may allow a student to make good a failure(s) during the same stage of study, provided (a) it would not overburden the student and (b) the external examiner has moderated the assessment task. A student may decline the option and undertake the referral after completing the stage.

10.9 In all circumstances of reassessment, where a student has passed other elements, the grades associated with these elements should go forward and the student should not be reassessed in them.

10.10 Where a student has several failures, which include one or several elements within a module for which some elements have been passed, the student should be given a referral in the failed element(s), even when the board has decided that the student should repeat the remaining failed modules. Ideally, this referred element should be reassessed in the same academic year. Where this cannot happen, the referral can take place in the following academic year alongside the modules being repeated. In this situation, the maximum grade that is recorded for this element is a pass. The result for any element(s) passed on the first attempt in the previous year is then used to determine the overall module grade.

10.11 The decision about the type of reassessment task is made in advance of the examination board by the course team and ratified by the board. Reassessments may take the form of the same kind of assessment(s) or the completion of a different kind of assessment. It may also be that one task is set to assess two or more assessment elements if this is considered fair and valid. If the decision is made that the reassessment should be a rework of an already completed assessment task, the board may decide that the pass grade is higher than a pass grade. In this case, if the student meets the board’s requirement in their reassessment attempt, the student is awarded a pass grade irrespective of the actual grade assigned by the marker. A fail grade should be factored down appropriately.

10.12 All students who are required to undertake referred work during the summer vacation will be given a common date to return work to the University. This will normally be the first day of the referral examination period.

11.1 The same rules apply to reassessments (referrals or repeats) as they do to first attempts when determining whether an assessment has been passed. Students need to achieve at least a pass. When this has not been achieved, a board can consider compensation according to the parameters set out above.

11.2 Where a student is referred in more than one element, a pass grade in each of the referred element(s) is required unless the board sets out an alternative minimum as part of the referral conditions.

12.1 The maximum grade for reassessment of a module (both referrals and repeats) where no elements have already achieved above a pass is a pass grade.

12.2 When a student has already passed at the first attempt one or more of the elements within a module that was referred or required to be repeated, the student retains their grade(s) for that (those) elements. In these circumstances, the student may achieve a maximum overall module grade for a referred or repeated module which is higher than a pass grade.

13.1 When a student has a Consideration of Personal Circumstances request approved and has been given an extension to complete the assessment, the delayed assessment submission is graded as normal and no further compensatory measures are required.

13.2 When the Consideration of Personal Circumstances request have resulted in the offer of a first attempt at the assessment at the next available opportunity, the outcome of this attempt will be decided in the same way as if there had been no personal circumstances.

14.1 A student who has committed academic misconduct may be referred in a module or element in order to provide them with the opportunity to meet the learning outcomes. If a student subsequently demonstrates those outcomes, a pass should be recorded, the module is not compensated and the module grade remains zero.

15.1 No reassessment is permitted for a student to improve upon a grade above the pass level required for the award. This includes situations where a student has an approved Consideration of Personal Circumstances request and has a module grade above a pass grade.

16.1 At the completion of a taught postgraduate course (and normally at the completion of each postgraduate stage), a student will be given a stage result. This is derived by averaging (with appropriate weighting as necessary) the grades of the modules that comprise that student’s level or award.

16.2 A board may use its discretion to allow a student to enter the postgraduate diploma or master’s degree stage carrying a deficiency, normally of up to 20 credits from the previous stage.

16.3 Normally a student will not be allowed to enter the master’s degree stage with modules from the postgraduate certificate stage outstanding.

16.4 A student who is allowed to proceed to the next stage carrying a deficiency of core modules should normally make good the deficiency by the end of that academic year.

16.5 At the discretion of a board, a student who is allowed to proceed to the next academic stage carrying a failure(s) in an optional module may be allowed to make good the deficiency in either the same failed module or an approved alternative module of at least the same level and credit value. An alternative module should be treated the same as if it was a repeat module.

17.1 A board is authorised to terminate a student’s studies for the following reasons:

1. The student has exhausted the total number of attempts as set out in sub-sub-section 10 above.
2. The student has an overall poor record of performance, attendance, participation or commitment on the course and the board judges that there are no grounds to permit the undertaking of further remedial or repeat modules.
3. Serious academic misconduct.

17.2 A member of the course team should formally counsel a student who has failed a majority of modules at interim assessment points or where progress is giving cause for concern.

18.1 The following classifications apply to taught postgraduate awards with respect to grade bands:

Posgraduate degree and Grade bands

• Distinction – Distinction, mid distinction, high distinction, exceptional distinction
• Commendation – Commendation, mid commendation, high commendation
• Pass – Pass, mid pass, high pass

18.2 The classification is based upon the module results for all modules contributing to the award. Consideration of a student’s final award takes place after the student has completed all modules comprising the course.

18.3 A master’s degree award is calculated based on all of the 180 credits contributing to the award (PGDip all 120 credits, PGCert all 60 credits).

18.4 A course may base its classification calculation on less than the full credits where it has a professional practice or similar module assessed on a pass and fail basis (see regs. 6.1). This arrangement must be approved.

18.5 The classification calculation for awards is provided in Appendix 2. Award board discretion must not be used to alter the classification determined by the calculation.

18.6 A board may exercise discretion for students who have personal circumstances.

18.7 These principles should also apply to the award of distinction and commendation for the PGCert and PGDip.

19.1 Where a candidate for a master’s degree has failed a module(s), a board may agree one of the following (1-5):

1. Allow a student’s overall performance to compensate for module failure and award a master’s degree and classification, provided the board is confident that the course learning outcomes have been satisfactorily achieved. In this case, the compensation rules apply (see sub-section 7 above). Where there are personal circumstances, a board may ascribe a grade for a module. This would normally have the effect of raising the student’s classification calculation.
2. Allow a student to be reassessed in the failed modules for the master’s degree. Where a student is reassessed for a master’s degree, a board may specify a maximum classification that the student can achieve. If a student fails some or all of these reassessed modules, they may claim a PGDip, or they may be offered one further attempt for a master’s degree at the discretion of the board.
3. Award a postgraduate diploma or postgraduate certificate if a student has achieved the required number of credits (see QH Section 16 reg. 5.1) and met the award outcomes. A board may award a named PGDip or PGCert even though a student has not met the precise requirements set out in course documentation (see QH Section 16 reg. 11.2). A candidate for a master’s degree who is subsequently awarded a PGDip or PGCert may receive a commendation or distinction provided they have achieved the appropriate grade.
4. Require a student to withdraw from the course with no further attempts.
5. Offer the award of an Aegrotat master’s degree or postgraduate diploma as appropriate. Aegrotat awards do not carry a classification. A student who declines an Aegrotat and instead elects to be reassessed as if for the first time may not subsequently claim the Aegrotat award if they fail, but may be reassessed for the award.

20.1 Where a candidate for a postgraduate diploma has failed a module(s), a board may agree one of the following (1-5):

1. Allow a student’s overall performance to compensate for module failure and award a postgraduate diploma and classification, provided the board is confident that the course learning outcomes have been satisfactorily achieved. In this case, the compensation rules apply (see sub-section 7 above). Where there are personal circumstances, a board may ascribe a grade for a module. This would normally have the effect of raising the student’s classification calculation.
2. Allow a student to be reassessed in the failed modules for the postgraduate diploma. Where a student is reassessed for a PGDip, a board may specify a maximum classification that the student can achieve. If a student fails some or all of these reassessed modules, they may claim a PGCert, or they may be offered one further attempt for a PGDip at the discretion of the board.
3. Award a postgraduate certificate if the student has achieved at least 60 credits and met the award outcomes. A board may award a named PGCert even though a student has not met the precise requirements set out in course documentation (see 11.2 in Quality Handbook Section 16). A candidate for a PGDip who is subsequently awarded a PGCert may receive a commendation or distinction provided they have achieved the appropriate grade.
4. Require a student to withdraw from the course with no further attempts.
5. Offer the award of an Aegrotat postgraduate diploma or Postgraduate certificate as appropriate. Aegrotat awards do not carry a classification. A student who declines an Aegrotat and instead elects to be reassessed as if for the first time may not subsequently claim the Aegrotat if they fail, but may be reassessed for the award.

A student’s final degree classification is determined by either the weighted arithmetic mean of the contributing grade points or by the majority grade, whichever results in the higher outcome.

Final classification of the award is determined by the better of either:

1. The weighted arithmetic mean of all modules that contribute to the final award or
2. The majority grade of all contributing modules, where the majority grade is calculated based on more than half of the credits that contribute to the award achieving a particular classification or higher.