Assessment Handbook

Effective January 2020 to Present

Table of Contents
1 Introduction and Scope (for staff) ............................................................................................................................ 1
2 Assessment principles and procedures for taught programmes (for staff).............................................................. 2
2.1 Principles of Assessment ................................................................................................................................ 2
2.2 Regulations ..................................................................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Anonymous Marking ....................................................................................................................................... 8
2.4 Use of Turnitin ................................................................................................................................................. 9
2.5 Assessment Procedures ................................................................................................................................. 9
2.6 Publication of Examination Arrangements .................................................................................................... 12
2.7 Chairing and Secretarial Support of the Assessment Board ........................................................................ 12
3 Extension requests for taught programmes (for staff and students) ..................................................................... 14
3.1 Policy and Procedures on Extensions........................................................................................................... 14
3.2 Approving Extensions ................................................................................................................................... 15
4 Extenuating Circumstances for Taught Programmes (for staff) ............................................................................ 15
4.1 Policy and Pocedures on Extenuating Circumstances ................................................................................. 15
4.2 Grounds......................................................................................................................................................... 16
4.3 Handling Requests for Extenuating Circumstances...................................................................................... 17
4.4 Approving Extenuating Circumstances ......................................................................................................... 18
4.5 Applying Extenuating Circumstances ........................................................................................................... 18
5 Examination Procedures for Taught Programmes ................................................................................................ 19
5.1 Scope ............................................................................................................................................................ 19
5.2 Examination Instructions for Invigilators ....................................................................................................... 19
5.3 Evacuation Procedures ................................................................................................................................. 21
5.4 Examination Instructions for Candidates ...................................................................................................... 21
6 Procedure for Unfair Means to Enhance Performance ......................................................................................... 22
6.1 Policy Statement on Unfair Means: Promoting a Culture of Academic Integrity in Staff and Students ......... 22
6.2 Scope ............................................................................................................................................................ 23
6.3 Principles ....................................................................................................................................................... 23
6.4 Regulations ................................................................................................................................................... 24
6.5 Definition of Unfair Means ............................................................................................................................. 24
6.6 Procedure Following an Allegation of Unfair Means ..................................................................................... 25
6.7 Academic Penalties for Taught Programmes ............................................................................................... 26
6.8 Academic Penalties for Postgraduate Research Degrees ............................................................................ 26
6.9 Procedure following an Unfair Means Hearing ............................................................................................. 26
7 Academic Appeals Procedure ............................................................................................................................... 27
7.1 Scope and Purpose ....................................................................................................................................... 27
7.2 Principles ....................................................................................................................................................... 28
7.3 Grounds for Appeal ....................................................................................................................................... 28
7.4 Process for Appealing Against Assessment Decisions................................................................................. 29
7.5 First Stage Appeal ......................................................................................................................................... 29
7.6 Second Stage Appeal ................................................................................................................................... 30
7.7 Second Stage Appeal Panel ......................................................................................................................... 30
7.8 Documentation for Second Stage Appeal Panels ......................................................................................... 30
7.9 Outcomes ...................................................................................................................................................... 31
7.10 Status of a Student during an Appeal ........................................................................................................... 31
7.11 Independent Review ..................................................................................................................................... 31
 7.12 Monitoring and Review .................................................................................................................................. 32
7.13 Procedure for Hearing the Second Stage Appeal ......................................................................................... 32
Appendices ................................................................................................................................................................... 32
Appendix 1: Further reading and useful websites (for staff) ..........................................................................................
Appendix 2: Standard Descriptors (for staff) .................................................................................................................
Appendix 3:Verification and Moderation Guidance
Appendix 3a: Exemplar Verification Form
Appendix 3b Exemplar Moderation Form
Appendix 4: Form – Moderation Report (for staff) .........................................................................................................
Appendix 5: Online Assessment Policy and Electronic Management of Assessment (EMA) – Online Submission,
Marking and Feedback (for staff) .....................................................................................................................
Appendix 6: Chair’s Action Forms .................................................................................................................................
Appendix 7: Examination Incident Report Form ............................................................................................................
Appendix 8: Procedure for Handling Suspected Academic Misconduct during an Examination ..................................
1 Introduction and Scope (for staff)
1.1.1 A review of assessment across the sector by JISC has identified that in many universities, institutional
documentation has a focus on procedures rather than Learning and Teaching. Often the articulation of
educational principles appears in second tier documentation i.e. in advice and guidance documents rather
than actual strategy and policy. There is widespread referencing of inter alia the REAP principles as well as
the NUS feedback principles and the QAA Code of Practice (now the UK Quality Code for Higher Education)
without necessarily stating a firm institutional commitment to the application of the principles.

This Assessment Handbook therefore first espouses a set of principles:

- assessment FOR learning rather than assessment OF learning

- a shift in the balance from summative to formative assessment
- use of a ‘curriculum design’ framework for constructing learning outcomes
- increased dialogue between tutors and students

Guidance on curriculum design including the appropriate use of assessment is to be found in the course
developers guide.

Whilst there is no generally agreed definition of assessment, we are adopting that from the QAA Quality Code,
as 'any processes that appraise an individual's knowledge, understanding, abilities or skills'.

a) The regulations governing assessment are set out in the Academic Regulations of the University which are
available at: https://www.uclan.ac.uk/study_here/student-contract-taught-programmes.php
b) This Assessment Handbook contains assessment policies and procedures that underpin and carry the same
authority as the Academic Regulations.
c) It should be read in conjunction with the Academic Regulations and, where appropriate, with
programme documentation and student handbooks.
d) These assessment policies and procedures apply to all the University’s academic programmes delivered in the
UK or overseas (including under franchise arrangements), and by distance learning, unless variation for
individual modules or programmes have been specifically approved by, or on behalf of, the Academic Board.
e) These assessment policies and procedures apply to all of the University’s academic awards delivered as part
of an apprenticeship programme, unless variation for individual modules or programmes have been
specifically approved by, or on behalf of, the Academic Board.
f) Where programmes of study lead to the qualifications of a Professional Statutory and Regulatory Body
(PSRB), or exemptions from the PSRB’s own qualifications, full account is taken of the regulations and
requirements of the PSRB in respect of assessment. Such exceptions are detailed in programme
documentation.
g) Any reference in this Handbook to an office holder of the University (eg. Dean/Head of School) include
a nominee acting on behalf of that office holder.

1
2 Assessment principles and procedures for taught programmes (for staff)

2.1 Principles of Assessment

2.1.1 Assessment for Learning

Learning and assessment should be integrated and fully aligned as an integral part of the learning process. There
should be a focus on the development and achievement of intended programme outcomes rather than on marks
and grades.

2.1.2 Assessment lacks precision

Not all meaningful learning or assessment outcomes can be precisely defined.

2.1.3 Construct standards in communities

Staff and students should develop their own and a shared understanding of what is required from, and
entailed in, the assessment and feedback process.

2.1.4 Ensure professional judgements are reliable

Since the assessment of high level complex learning is largely dependent on holistic judgement rather than
mechanistic processes, academic, disciplinary and professional communities should set up opportunities and
processes, such as meetings, workshops and groups, to regularly share exemplars and discuss assessment
standards.

2.1.5 Assignment briefs

It is important to clearly explain to students what is expected of them in carrying out the assessment, and how
marks will be awarded, i.e. the assignment brief, and the marking criteria. Regardless of whether the marking
criteria are published or are negotiated, a clear principle is that assignment briefs and marking criteria should be
written clearly, and be available to and discussed with students.

2.1.6 Marking Criteria (schools)

1) Marking criteria are used to judge the standard to which each learning outcome has been achieved. They need
to be specific to the assignment because they need to link thecriteria and the intended learning outcomes for
the module.
2) Marking criteria which have been developed in schools should be included in the module information pack, and
should be reviewed regularly to ensure that they are being applieda. consistently; b. transparently; c. in such a
way that the full range of marks isdeployed.
3) A (generic) set of verbs associated with Bloom’s taxonomy is available for the wording of learning outcomes (e.g.
apply, analyse, evaluate, create); a corresponding set of (generic) adjectives should be used to define /
differentiate the level of performance across a level. Unlike those which represent a ‘gradation of excellence’
e.g. ‘excellent, very good, good, satisfactory’, these are distinctive and applicable to different sorts of assessment
activities.

2
2.1.6.1 Grade band Indicative language

High 1st Exceptional 1stCreative, insightful, illuminating, inspiring, exciting, authoritative,

challenging

Low 1st – Mid 1st Persuasive, sophisticated, original, reflective, ambitious, meticulous, critical,
convincing, unexpected

2:1 Fluent, thorough, analytical, precise, rigorous, confident, consistent,

thoughtful

2:2 Satisfactory, clear, accurate, careful, congruent, coherent

3rd Sufficient, adequate, descriptive, limited

Marginal Fail Incomplete, inadequate, inconsistent, derivative, contradictory, superficial,

irrelevant

Mid Fail Erroneous/wrong, missing, extremely limited, inappropriate, insufficient, incoherent,

unstructured

Fail/non-submission Absent/none, lacking, formless, detrimental

2.1.7 Standard Descriptors (generic)

Standard Descriptors sketch out in broad terms what is expected of students at a particular level. An example
(reproduced with kind permission of Manchester Metropolitan University) is attached at Appendix 2.

They are designed to be a reference point for marking criteria in the appropriate subject area and to provide a common
language for differentiating level and performance within each level. They are too generic to support the making of
grading decisions for individual assignments, and so need to be interpreted into specific marking criteria for each task.

2.1.8 Grading bands

The University uses a grade band marking scale. This marking scale contains a fixed number of percentage points in
each class bandwhich might be assigned by amarker for a pieceof assessed work. This is intended to encourage markers
to make decisions about assessed work in relation to which class band it most appropriately belongs and encourage
markers to use the full range of the marking scale. For certain modules, such as those subject to professional body
requirements or those assessed solely numerically (e.g. multiple choice tests), the nature of the assessment will mean
the mark should be recorded as a mark out of 100 and these marks would fall outside of the fixed percentage point
bands.

The grading bands used by the University are set out below:

3
2.1.8.1 Level 3 assessments (e.g. HNC/HND) and Level 4 and 5 Foundation Degrees

Numerical
Band
equivalent

Exceptional Distinction 100

Very High Distinction 94
High Distinction 87
Mid Distinction 80
Low Distinction 74
High Merit 68
Mid Merit 65
Low Merit 62
High Pass 58
Mid+ Pass 55
Mid Pass 52
Low+ Pass 48
Low Pass 45
Low- Pass 42
(Minimum Pass/Capped Mark) 40
Marginal Fail 35*
Mid Fail 30*
Low Fail 25
Fail 10
Non-submission/Penalty/No Academic Merit 0

*can be compensated

4
2.1.8.2 Level 4, 5 and 6 assessments (e.g. Undergraduate programmes)

Numerical
Band
equivalent

Exceptional 1st 100

Very High 1st 94
High 87
Mid 1 st
80
Low 1 st
74
High 2.1 68
Mid 2.1 65
Low 2.1 62
High 2.2 58
Mid 2.2 55
Low 2.2 52
High 3rd 48
Mid 3rd 45
Low 3 rd
42
(Minimum Pass/Capped Mark) 40
Marginal Fail 35*
Mid Fail 30*
Low Fail 25
Fail 10
Non-submission/Penalty/No Academic Merit 0

*can be compensated

5
2.1.8.3 Level 7 assessments - Integrated Masters only

Numerical
Band
equivalent

Exceptional 1st 100

Very High 1st 94
High 1st 87
Mid 1st 80
Low 1st 74
High 2.1 68
Mid 2.1 65
Low 2.1 62
High 2.2 58
Mid 2.2 55
Low 2.2 52
(Minimum Pass/Capped Mark) 50
Marginal Fail 45*
Mid+ Fail 42
Mid Fail 40
35
Fail 30
25
Fail 10
Non-submission/Penalty/No Academic Merit 0

*can be compensated

6
2.1.8.4 Level 7 assessments (e.g. Postgraduate taught programmes)

Numerical
Band
equivalent

Exceptional Distinction 100

Very High Distinction 94
High Distinction 87
Mid Distinction 80
Low Distinction 74
High Merit 68
Mid Merit 65
Low Merit 62
High Pass 58
Mid Pass 55
Low Pass 52
(Minimum Pass/Capped Mark) 50
Marginal Fail 45*
Mid+ Fail 42
Mid Fail 40
35
Fail 30
25
Fail 10
Non-submission/Penalty/No Academic Merit 0

*can be compensated

7
2.1.9 Dialogue between tutor and student

Staff should ensure that opportunities for dialogue are maximised. A recommended model for dialogue is that of
O’Donovan, Price and Rust (2004), which sets out a range of opportunities for dialogue, both pre- submission
and post-submission, and which ranges from an explicit transfer of knowledge, e.g. written learning outcomes
and written feedback, to a tacit transfer of knowledge, e.g. use of exemplars, self-and peer assessment of drafts
and peer discussion of submitted work.

A spectrum of processes supporting the transfer or construction of knowledge of assessment requirements,

standards and criteria (from O’Donovan, Price and Rust, 2004).

2.1.10 Further Reading - See Appendix 1

2.2 Regulations

The Regulations governing assessment are set out in the Academic Regulations (Section G).

2.3 Anonymous Marking

The anonymity of students should be preserved wherever possible for any piece of work submitted for
assessment. Student names should therefore be absent from their submissions at the point of marking.

In order to preserve the anonymity of candidates when marking a piece of work, students should be instructed to
use a unique proxy identifier, which will be generated by Turnitin, rather than putting their name on work
submitted for assessment.

Wherever possible, all summative assessed work should be submitted electronically through Turnitin which must
be set up to enable anonymised marking to take place. (see Appendix 4: Online Assessment Policy)

There is no expectation that student work remains permanently anonymous to markers after they have
finished marking for the purposes of providing feedback to students on their performance.
8
 While every effort should be made to preserve the anonymity of students when marking work, it is inevitable
that, in some instances, an examiner will become aware of the identity of the candidate submitting work (for
instance in modules with very few students, or where students have discussed coursework in detail with a tutor
before submitting). In such instances, the Assessment Board should satisfy itself that every reasonable effort has
been made to give students the opportunity to submit work anonymously.

It is also recognised that it is not be feasible to mark all work anonymously, for example, assessment of
presentations, performance, music recitals, laboratory skills or seminar contributions. There is a need for clarity
and consistency, ensuring that exceptions to the academic regulation are justified and that the justification is
understood by both staff and students. Module leaders would therefore need to identify the elements of their
summative assessments that cannot be marked anonymously and the School Quality Lead/Head of School would
approve these exemptions from the anonymised marking requirements. Module leaders would then be
responsible for communicating the exemptions to students through module handbooks, etc.

2.4 Use of Turnitin

A pseudo-Turnitin assignments will be set up using a BlackBoard Organisation space to which all students can
self-enrol. This assignment will allow students to check as many drafts as the system allows before their final
submission to the ‘official’ Turnitin assignment.

Students are required to self-submit their own assignment on Turnitin and will be given access to the Originality
Reports arising from each submission.

In operating Turnitin, Schools must take steps to ensure that the University’s requirement for all summative
assessment to be marked anonymously is not undermined and therefore Turnitin reports should either be
anonymised or considered separately from marking.

Schools must ensure that the University’s approach to be adopted in using Turnitin is clearly communicated to
students either before or at the time the assignment is set. Turnitin may also be used to assist with plagiarism
detection and collusion, where there is suspicion about individual piece(s) of work

2.5 Assessment Procedures

2.5.1 Verification
(Approval of assessment briefs and examination papers)

Verification is the checking of assessment briefs including examination paper* questions and coursework/practical
assignments of any type for all elements of assessment for every module which contributes to the final mark for the
module.

* a definition of ‘examination paper’ is set out within the Course Developers Guide Appendix 4c.

Responsibilities for internal and external verification for collaborative provision and UCLan Cyprus campus are
detailed in the AQA Manual.

2.5.1.1 Internal Verification:

The purpose of internal verification is to ensure that the briefs are appropriate in relation to the intended
learning outcomes.

Internal verification applies to re-assessment briefs as well as the original assessment brief and should be undertaken
9
 at the same time. Unseen re-assessment examination papers should be distinct from the first- sit paper.

Internal verification must be undertaken by a minimum of two members of academic staff (author and one
other) and be recorded.

The internal verification of assessment briefs must be undertaken before the briefs are published to the
students.

2.5.1.2 External Verification:

External verification involves the checking by the external examiner of assessment briefs.

The External Examiner(s) must verify the form and content of all examination papers for every module which
contributes to an award, and this must be recorded. External Examiner verification of examination papers and re-
assessment examination papers should be undertaken at the same time and must be completed before the
examination is sat.

All briefs for coursework/practical assignments for modules which contribute to an award must be made available for
review by the external examiner (access will be facilitated electronically).

The external examiner is entitled to review an amended assessment brief on request if substantial changes were
suggested in external verification.

2.5.2 Moderation
(checking of students’ assessed work)

Moderation is the checking of a sample of students’ assessed work in order to confirm that the verified assessment
and marking criteria for a component of assessment have been correctly, accurately and consistently applied, that
students are being treated equitably through the assessment process and that there is a shared understanding of the
academic standards students are expected to achieve.

Changes may not be made exclusively to marks within a representative sample. Should concerns be identified during
internal moderation regarding the accuracy or consistency of marking based upon the sample, the relevant parts of
the assessment for the entire cohort should be re-marked. This might be through scaling up or down, should the sample
be considered to be consistently over or under – marked, or a full re-mark if the pattern of error is inconsistent.

The minimum requirement for moderation samples for both internal and external moderation purposes is set at 10%
of all work submitted for a particular element of assessment, and (where student numbers on modules are small) the
sample to include at least 3 pieces of work from the batch to be taken from work awarded the highest marks, marks
in the middle range and the lowest marks.

Where assessments comprise various types of performance or presentation, Schools must still ensure that they meet
the minimum requirements for moderation samples.

Responsibilities for internal and external verification for collaborative provision and UCLan Cyprus campus are detailed
in the AQA Manual.

2.5.2.1 Internal Moderation:

Each module must have an identified internal moderator who will be responsible for checking a representative sample
(see details of minimum requirements above) of work and confirming that the assessment criteria for every element of
10
 assessment have been correctly and accurately applied and for recording the appropriate evidence of moderation.

Parity review (Standardisation) may be used for courses with multiple teams of markers (eg on a large course with
different pathways). The review ensures that marks have been awarded consistently by different marking teams and
that there is a common understanding of the marking boundaries. For example; parity reviews often take the form of
a meeting of all markers and moderators, or they can take place online. The Module Leader will normally identify a
sample of work to be reviewed, taking examples from all the marking teams. The module team will compare the marks
awarded, resolving any discrepancies and agreeing the final mark and feedback for the students.

2.5.2.2 External Moderation:

External moderation involves the external examiner in checking that the assessment criteria for every element of
assessment have been correctly and accurately applied to a representative sample (see details of minimum
requirements above) of work, for all modules contributing to a final award. The sample of work moderated by the
external examiner should include a selection of work that has been internally moderated.

The external examiner will be asked to provide confirmation of whether marking is in accordance with the stated
criteria and weightings and identifying any issues.

An exemplar moderation form detailing the minimum requirements for evidencing moderation is set out in Appendix
3 of this Handbook. Schools must use a moderation form which requests the same information as that requested
within this exemplar form.

2.5.3 Second Marking

Second marking is where all assessments in the set are independently marked by two markers with a view to
agreeing on a mark. See Academic Regulations (Section G6).

2.5.4 Assessment Feedback

Generic feedback on assessment/examination performance can be given to a group as a whole. Where the assessments are
of a factual nature it may include an outline of the expected answers. For descriptive essays it may include statements of
what an expected answer might include but not necessarily a model answer. A description may also be included of any typical
problems encountered in answering the questions or general misunderstandings.
Generic feedback may incorporate statistical information including grade distributions (although means, medians,
modes, the range and variance estimates could also be used) allowing individual students to understand their position
in a group. See Academic Regulations (Section G2).

For all assessments, students will be provided with individual written and/or audio/digital feedback. See Appendix 4
for further information about the electronic management of assessment (EMA).

2.5.5 Liaison with External Examiners

The Chair of the Assessment Board for the School concerned is responsible for ensuring proper liaison with the
external examiner during the assessment period and during the year.

11
2.5.6 Disclosure of Marks
The University is committed to the policy of disclosure of moderated and unmoderated grades and marks to individual
students. A moderated mark/grade is defined as a mark or grade which has been confirmed by a Module Assessment Board.
An unmoderated mark/grade is defined as the provisional mark which is submitted to the Module Assessment Board.
Moderated marks/grades will be published to students via the Student Portal.

Students may request and obtain disclosure of the unmoderated mark/grade after the Module Assessment Board has
confirmed the mark or grade.

Marks/grades or recommendations will not be disclosed by telephone unless authorised exceptionally by the
Dean/Head of School. For students below the age of 18, notification of marks/grades and recommendations will be
sent to the student’s parents or guardian.

2.6 Publication of Examination Arrangements

Information regarding the date and time of examinations is published on students’ personal timetables.

2.7 Chairing and Secretarial Support of the Assessment Board

The Chair and Secretary must work together to ensure a successful outcome of the assessment process. The Chair is
considered the guardian of the regulations and assessment policy, ensuring an equality of experience for each student,
while the Secretary is considered the guardian of the official record of the assessment process. The Secretary should
also have a good knowledge of the regulations and policies in order to act as an adviser to the Chair if required. On
campus the Chair of Assessment Boards will primarily be the Dean/Head of School. All Chairs are required to undergo
compulsory training and should be on the log of Chairs held by AQC. Both Chairs and Secretaries should attend annual
update training.

In order to ensure impartiality, the Chair should be somewhat removed from the programme. However, it is recognised
that some areas, Schools/partners may struggle to find a Chair who was not involved in some part of the programme
delivery.

Chairs should be members of academic staff with an excellent knowledge of the regulations and assessment policy, while the
Secretary should be an experienced administrator with knowledge of the regulations, assessment policy and report writing
skills. The key responsibilities of the Chair and Secretary tothe Board are listed below:

2.7.1 Key responsibilities of the Chair

• to appoint in consultation with the appropriate Dean/Head of School, the internal members of the Assessment
Board.
• to ensure all members of the board are properly briefed.
• to liaise closely with the secretary to the board to ensure that the marks presented are full and correct.
• to ensure that the external examiner has seen an appropriate sample of the assessed work of the students.
• to ensure full and frank discussion about the performance of students takes place, taking into account the views
of the external examiner, extenuating circumstances and to guide the board towards clear
recommendations/decisions.
• to consider and initiate such actions as he/she thinks necessary on advice given by the external examiners.
• in close collaboration with the secretary, ensure that marks and award recommendations as confirmed by the
board are prepared, checked and entered on to the Banner system
• following the board to check and approve the minutes as a true record of the proceedings.
• to exercise Chair’s Action on behalf of an Assessment Board – see 2.7.3 below.

12
2.7.2 Key responsibilities of the Secretary

• to establish the dates of meetings in advance at the start of each academic year, arrange the meetings and
inform the members.
• to make all administrative arrangements for the boards they are responsible for, this includes liaison with the
external examiner.
• draft agendas for approval by the Chair, to be disseminated to all members prior to the board.
• prepare and provide the board documentation.
• to provide advice on examination and assessment regulations during the meeting.
• to produce full and accurate minutes.
• ensure the marks presented to the board are correct and any amendments are actioned and entered on to the
Banner system.
• to record the conditions of reassessment.
• to prepare pass lists and arrange for them to be checked by the Chair of the board.
• to ensure results are communicated to students by entering results on to the Banner system.
• to ensure module results that have been taken by students from other Schools are communicated to the
student's home School in a timely and appropriate manner.

The Chair and Secretary have an opportunity to minimise the occurrences of appeals by ensuring appropriate
application of policy and regulation through the assessment board structures.

2.7.3 Guidelines for exercising Chair’s Action on behalf of an Assessment Board

1. It is the responsibility of the Module Assessment Board to determine the marks/grades achieved by each
student and to make recommendations to the Course Assessment Board. It is the responsibility of the Course
Assessment Board to determine the results for each student in relation to their progression or award.

2. When issues arise subsequent to a meeting of an Assessment Board that, in the view of the Chair, are too
urgent and important for consideration to be deferred until the next scheduled meeting, the Chair may decide
to:
a. call a special meeting of the Board;
b. consult with members of the Board by correspondence;
c. take Chair’s Action

The University discourages the use of Chair’s action between Assessment Board meetings as a routine method of
determining marks/grades or results for progression or an award, however, it is acceptable for Chair’s action to be
taken in a limited number of circumstances (see point 4 below) where there are:

a) matters relating to the implementation of decisions which have already been approved at previous meetings
(eg where a student’s profile of marks is incomplete and the Board has agreed that further clarification be
sought subsequent to the meeting before a result is recommended).

b) urgent circumstances which mean that waiting for the next scheduled Assessment Board would
unnecessarily delay a student’s normal progression or conferment of award providing:

 the issue involved is not contentious and does not merit discussion at the Assessment
Board meeting and;

 the issue does not relate to a cohort of students.

3. Circumstances when Chair’s action can be implemented include:

a. Administrative action, for example where it is necessary to correct an error and the resulting
13
 recalculation of marks.

b. Academic judgement, for example where it is necessary to make a decision which requires the
exercise of academic judgement in order to allow a student to progress or be awarded in a timely
fashion.

c. Delegated action, for example where the Board has given the Chair authority to act on its behalf
following consideration of a case at its previous meeting.

d. Academic Appeals, where an appeal is upheld and is referred to the Chair of the Assessment
Board for consideration or immediate action to be taken on behalf ofthe Assessment Board.

4. Procedure related to decisions taken by Chair’s Action:

a. The minutes of the Assessment Board must record where the Board has agreed that a decision be
deferred for Chair’s Action to be taken subsequent to the Assessment Board meeting.

b. Where a decision has been taken by Chair’s Action, the Chair of Assessment Board must complete
and sign the appropriate proforma (see Appendix 5 for the proforma for making amendments to
recommendations and the proforma for making amendments to marks and grades) and circulate
it as stipulated on the respective form.

c. Details of all decisions taken by Chair’s Action must be reported to the next meeting of
the Assessment Board for noting and the outcome must be minuted.

d. A log must be maintained of all decisions taken by Chair’s Action for auditing purposes.

3 Extension requests for taught programmes (for staff and students)

3.1 Policy and Procedures on Extensions
3.1.1 The University requires all students to adhere to submission deadlines for any form of assessment. Students are
expected to plan ahead and manage the demands of their workload.

3.1.2 Where students are experiencing difficulties in meeting a submission date, they should discuss any issues promptly
with the appropriate tutor*. The Tutor will advise if an extension request is appropriate in the circumstances or if
the matter should progress to the Extenuating Circumstances procedure. *This may be your module/course/year
lead or Academic Advisor.

3.1.3 Extensions may be granted for up to 10 working days. The student will receive confirmation of the number of days
for the extension after consideration has been taken of the individual circumstances
i.e. the reason specified for the extension, the student’s workload and the nature of the assessment.

3.1.4 Requests for extensions must be made prior to the submission date as extensions cannot be given retrospectively.

3.1.5 There is no automatic right for an extension to be granted and students are advised to continue working to the
original submission deadline until a decision regarding the extension is received.

3.1.6 Requests for extensions should be made in writing to the relevant CAS Hub clearly stating the reason for the extension
and detailing the module and assessment where an extension is requested.
3.1.7 Requests for extensions may be granted where circumstances or events are of a temporary nature and are
sufficiently disruptive to prevent submission by the due date. Such circumstances should not be foreseeable or
preventable. These may include for example:
14
 - short-term illness
- caring for a sick relative
- unexpected personal difficulties.

3.1.8 Requests for extensions will not normally be granted for the following reasons:

- Planned events such as holidays, religious festivals or moving house.

- Appointments arranged on the submission date (unless outside the student’s control).
- Attending courses.
- Paid employment.
- IT issues (printer problems/PC crashes/USB issues), including denied access to the
University systems due to debt.
- Inadequate time planning.
- Planned Turnitin downtime/maintenance

3.1.9 Where adverse weather conditions prevent the handing in of work on the submission day the assessment should be
emailed to the appropriate tutor to prevent a penalty being applied. The formal submission should be made at
the earliest opportunity.

3.1.10 If the extension request is declined, the original submission date remains and the rules regarding late submission
will apply.

3.1.11 Students who submit work after an authorised extended deadline date will be awarded a mark of 0% for that
element of assessment.

3.2 Approving Extensions

3.2.1 The student will receive the revised submission date in writing.

4 Extenuating Circumstances for Taught Programmes (for staff)

4.1 Policy and Pocedures on Extenuating Circumstances
4.1.1 Extenuating circumstances arise where students suffer from some illness or misfortune that adversely affects
their ability to complete an assessment or the results they obtain for an assessment. The University has adopted
robust procedures to ensure that such misfortunes are dealt with systematically and that students are treated
equitably across all Schools.

4.1.2 The procedure is not intended to operate at the day to day level of requests for extensions or other matters
which can (and should) be dealt with at the time by the relevant CASHub.

4.1.3 Extenuating circumstances must be submitted no later than 3 days after the examination/assessment or
submission date.

4.1.4 Particular conditions which have affected groups of students (e.g. disruption in an examination) should be
reported to the appropriate Boards by the invigilator and/or marker using the examination incidents

15
 form. This will avoid the need for multiple submissions by students. In such cases, block action by the
Assessment Board may be justified.

4.1.5 A disability or learning difficulty does not constitute an extenuating circumstance. Students requiring special
arrangements in relation to assessment (e.g. Dyslexia, Physical Disability) should use the specific procedures
operated through Student Support and Wellbeing. However, extenuating circumstances may be claimed
where:
• reasonable adjustments have not been in place because of late diagnosis;
• there is an unexpected change in disability/condition which has had an adverse impact on the
student’s ability to complete assessments

4.1.6 Requests for extenuating circumstances submitted after the deadline date for the submission (except as a result
of circumstances that have prevented the submission) will not be considered without a credible and compelling
explanation as to why the circumstances were not known or could not have been declared beforehand.

4.1.7 Requests for extenuating circumstances which are judged to be vexatious, malicious or frivolous will not be
considered. This may arise where the request clearly does not have any serious purpose, or where repeated
requests are unreasonable in all the circumstances.

4.1.8 Students are responsible for submitting their own requests for consideration of extenuating circumstances.
Hence they should be made aware of the University’s definition of extenuating circumstances and of the
procedures for submitting a request for consideration. They should also have a realistic appreciation of the
range of actions or remedies available to deal with the difficulties or problems they may encounter. Staff
responsible for advising students need to be fully aware of what circumstances may be considered under the
procedure.

4.1.9 Where students have submitted an application with sufficient supporting evidence, they will be advised within
5 working days whether the application has been approved.

4.1.10 The University is committed to ensuring confidentiality and only those staff who are part of the decision making
and academic process will have access to the information. If the Extenuating Circumstances are of a particular
sensitive and/or personal nature students may request that the information is only seen by the senior member
of staff who is considering the application. A paper based application should be completed in these cases.

4.1.11 A CAS administrator is designated to take overall responsibility for handling extenuating circumstances cases
in each School. Duties include making information available to staff and to students, observing the deadlines
for submission, advising students and academic colleagues and receiving submissions.

4.1.12 Where reasonably possible, approved extenuating circumstances should be handled by applying flexibility in
the arrangements for assessment, e.g. by extending a coursework deadline (including an extension of time to
submit a dissertation), rescheduling a presentation, setting a special examination paper, or allowing an
examination to be sat outside the normal examination period. Such arrangements are at the discretion of the
School. Students have no automatic right to individual assessment.

4.2 Grounds
4.2.1 For extenuating circumstances to be considered they should be unforeseeable or unpreventable and may have
had a significant adverse effect on the academic performance of a student. Possible extenuating circumstances
include:

16
 - significant illness or injury;
- the death or critical/significant illness of a close family member/dependant;
- family crises or major financial problems leading to acute stress;
- absence for jury service or maternity, paternity or adoption leave;
- a criminal act where you have been a victim

4.2.2 Examples of circumstances that may be considered beyond the reasonable control of the student would
include:
- previously approved medical operations or tests;
- being taken ill during an examination;
- unanticipated and unavoidable professional obligations;
- private or public transport failure leading to significant delays;
- accommodation difficulties.

4.2.3 The following will not be regarded as grounds for extenuating circumstances:

- any event that could reasonably have been expected or anticipated;

- minor accidents/injuries or minor ailments;
- accidents/illness experienced by friends or relatives (unless this has occurred within 3 days of an assessment
deadline or examination or where the student is the sole carer)
- religious observance or obligation
- holidays, moving house and events that were planned or could reasonably have been expected;
- childcare problems that could have been anticipated;
- domestic problems (unless supported by independent evidence);
- ignorance of the regulations or examination/assessment arrangements
- assessments that are scheduled close together;
- misreading the timetable or misunderstanding the requirements for assessments;
- inadequate planning and time management;
- failure, loss or theft of a computer or printer that prevents submission of work on time. Students should
back up work regularly and not leave completion so late that they cannot find another computer or printer;
- notes burned or stolen (unless supported by a fire or police report);
- consequences of paid employment (except in some special cases for part-time students);
- examination stress or panic attacks not diagnosed as illness;
- feeling generally anxious, depressed or stressed (unless medically certified and notified in advance i.e.at
least two weeks before the assessment deadline/date);
- being unable to access the University’s computer network – in the case of debt;
- general financial problems;
- inclement weather (unless exceptional/severe conditions).

Note: Pregnancy is not an illness but an altered state of normality. Events may arise during pregnancy that may
constitute extenuating circumstances, and these need to be judged on an individual basis.

4.2.4 Absence from the University during the semester for any period of no more than five working days will not
normally be regarded as grounds unless the absence occurred for good cause within a two-week period
immediately preceding a formal university examination or the deadline for submitting a piece of assessed course
work or delivering an assessed presentation.

4.3 Handling Requests for Extenuating Circumstances

4.3.1 It is the sole responsibility of the student to submit a request for consideration of extenuating circumstances
according to the published procedures and deadlines. Prompt submission makes it easier to offer flexibility in the
arrangements for assessment. Requests should normally be accompanied by appropriate independent third-party
supporting or corroborative documentation. If the information is highly confidential, details should be submitted
in a sealed envelope together with the supporting documentary evidence.
17
4.4 Approving Extenuating Circumstances
4.4.1 Following submission a decision will be taken as to whether there is substantiated evidence of extenuating
circumstances. The circumstances will be considered to determine whether they have had an adverse effect on
the student’s performance and if so, it will be judged how significant the effect was likely to have been. Extenuating
Circumstances will only be approved where it is considered that the effect has been significant. They may be
approved for a specific assessment, for more general impairment over a number of assessments, or for both.

4.5 Applying Extenuating Circumstances

4.5.1 If extenuating circumstances are approved, the School will determine the most appropriate course of action.

4.5.2 All approved extenuating circumstances will be reported to the appropriate Assessment Board for consideration
when results are determined.

4.5.3 Where extenuating circumstances have prevented completion of all elements of assessments for some modules
and no further attempt is available, the Assessment Board will judge whether it has sufficient evidence to award
a mark.

4.5.4 Where assessment has been only partially completed for some modules and no further attempt is available the
Assessment Board may judge that it has insufficient evidence to award a mark. In such cases, the Board will judge,
in the light of the severity of the impairment and of other available evidence such as prior performance, whether
without the impairment the student would have reached higher overall marks sufficient to demonstrate
appropriate learning outcomes. It will then determine in the light of the available results whether the student
satisfies the requirements for progression, for a given award or classification, or for treatment under its usual
procedures for a borderline candidate. The Board will not adjust the mark of the student in individual modules
or overall, but will flag marks in respect of which extenuating circumstances has been applied so that this can be
taken into account by the Assessment Board in a subsequent year. (For example, when using that year’s marks
in computing the overall average for the course in a subsequent year, the Board will need to allow for the
consequent reduction in the overall average if it falls close to a borderline).

4.5.5 The Board may apply extenuating circumstances to the overall performance of the student. See Academic
Regulations (Section G9).

4.5.6 In some courses of study, discipline-specific or professional requirements may mean that the options available to
the Board for dealing with extenuating circumstances are very restricted e.g. permission to re-sit an examination
or to re-submit a piece of assessed coursework. In such instances students must be informed clearly and
unambiguously in the relevant course handbook.

4.5.7 If there is a credible and compelling explanation as to why the circumstances were not brought to the attention
of the School at an earlier stage, requests made after the publication of results may be considered under the
Appeals Procedure (See Section 7 of this Handbook).

4.5.8 Students with approved extenuating circumstances should be advised not to sit any examinations or hand in work
to be assessed until they feel able to do so (or when any period of time away from study granted by the Board
expires). Where a student still undertakes assessment despite having their application for extenuating
circumstances approved, this will be considered an attempt and allowance will not be given for their declared
circumstances when deciding a mark. Should the student feel that they have not performed as they would do
normally because of the extenuating circumstances, they will have two weeks from publication of the result to
appeal against their assessed mark under the Appeals Procedure set out at Section 7. Any reattempt at an
assessment granted upon appeal will not be considered a formal reassessment, in that the student’s mark will
not be capped at a minimum pass mark and the student will be able to rely on the higher of the original and
reattempted mark.
18
5 Examination Procedures for Taught Programmes
5.1 Scope

These procedures govern the examination of all students registered at the University for Taught Programmes of
study. This includes all work conducted under formal supervised examination conditions, practical laboratory
tests or multiple choice examinations.

5.2 Examination Instructions for Invigilators

Invigilators play a central role in ensuring that all examinations are conducted in a fair and appropriate manner in
accordance with the University’s regulations and procedures.

5.2.1 Appointment of Invigilators/Invigilator-in-Charge

Each School must ensure that invigilators are appointed for all examinations. There should be at least one
invigilator for every 30 students and a minimum of two invigilators at each venue. There should also be, for
every examination, a member of staff available, normally present in the main room for the first fifteen minutes
of the examination, who can answer any questions about the paper. This can be, but does not have to be, the
invigilator. This member of staff must then remain contactable for the remainder of the examination in the
event of exceptional queries.

The Invigilator-in-Charge will be the invigilator with the largest single group at a particular examination session.
Each School is responsible for informing its invigilators of their appointment and their duties.

5.2.2 Responsibilities of the Invigilator-in-Charge, supported by the other invigilators

The Invigilator-in-Charge is responsible for all the examinations taking place in the room at the time. The other
invigilators are responsible for assisting the Invigilator-in-Charge. Invigilators must attend all examinations for
which they have been appointed and should arrive at least 30 minutes before the scheduled start of the
examination. When an invigilator cannot attend an examination for which they have been scheduled they must
inform the relevant CAS Hub who are then responsible for making sure another invigilator is appointed.

5.2.3 Before the examination commences

Before the examination commences, invigilators are required to:

a) ensure that all examination papers for a particular examination session are collected from the designated
office and reach their venue in good time;
b) ensure that the seating plan (if applicable) is adhered to (copies of all seating plans can be found in the
Information for Invigilators file in the venue);
c) ensure that answer books and relevant stationery are distributed to each candidate’s place;
d) ensure that the correct examination papers are distributed to each candidate’s desk;
e) admit candidates 10 minutes before the start of the examination;
f) ensure that all bags, coats and all items not needed for the examination, are placed in the area defined by the
invigilator;

19
 g) ensure that all candidates’ identities are verified by checking their UCLan Card. Candidates who fail to
produce their official identification card at the beginning of the examination must provide alternative evidence
of identification to the satisfaction of the invigilators e.g. passport or current photo-driver’s license.
Candidates failing to produce satisfactory evidence at the beginning of the examination must not leave the
venue and must accompany an invigilator to verify their identity when the exam concludes.
h) ensure that all the standard announcements (copy in Information for Invigilators file in venue) are made to
candidates prior to the start of the examination.

5.2.4 During the Examination

During the Examination, invigilators are required to:

a) ensure that the examination is conducted in accordance with the University Regulations and Assessment
Handbook.
b) act in a vigilant manner throughout the examination by monitoring students’ conduct and behaviour
carefully to ensure compliance with procedures and regulations.
c) ensure that no candidate enters the examination room after the first 30 minutes of the examination.
d) ensure that no candidates leaves the examination room during the first 30 minutes or last 30 minutes of the
examination unless for reasons relating to illness or emergency.
e) relay any query that is raised by a candidate regarding the accuracy or content of an examination paper
directly to the relevant invigilator in the venue at the time. If the invigilator in attendance is unable to deal
with the query a message should be relayed back to the relevant CAS Hub. All such queries raised by
candidates at any juncture in the examination must be recorded on an Examination Incident Report form
(available in the Information for Invigilators file located in venue). See example of Form in Appendix 5
f) announce any error noted in an examination paper to all candidates and ensure that all candidates in
alternative venues are notified. This error should then be entered on the incident report form. If the relevant
error is such that it warrants it, the start of the examination can be delayed. If the author of the examination
paper has left the examination room they should be contacted via the relevant CAS Hub. If the issue cannot
be resolved the examination can be terminated.
g) take any measures they deem appropriate if a candidate becomes ill. If a first aider is required, the invigilator
should contact either Security on ext. 2068 or the emergency operator by dialing 333 or by using the
emergency green or red telephones.
h) ensure that any candidate who needs to leave the examination room is properly escorted.
i) note any untoward incidents which occur during the examination, on the incident report form (available in the
Information for Invigilators file to be found in the venue) and to ensure the form is copied to the Chair of the
relevant module Assessment Board, Module School Administrator and Academic Registry.
j) adhere to the procedure described in 5.3 below in the case of evacuation
k) inform any candidate suspected of cheating that they are in breach of examination regulations.
l) indicate in the answer book of any candidate suspected of cheating, the point at which the alleged offence
was noted.
m) note any cases of cheating on the Academic Misconduct Report Form.

N.B. A candidate should be expelled from the examination room only if he/she is disturbing other candidates, and
they may not then be re-admitted. (See Guidance for Invigilators on dealing with suspected academic misconduct
in Appendix 6).

5.2.5 At the end of the Examination

At the end of the Examination, invigilators are required to:

a. announce the end of the examination and ensure that all candidates remain seated while their scripts are
collected.

b. ensure that all examination scripts and attendance slips are collected in at the end of the examination.
20
 c. ensure that all surplus stationery is collected at the end of the examination and put back with the stock of
stationery at that venue. No candidate should leave the venue with any stationery. Venues should be left in
a fit state for the next examination session.

5.3 Evacuation Procedures

The invigilator should take the following steps in the event of a fire alarm, bomb alert or other emergency requiring
the evacuation of the examination venue:

a) note the time the examination was interrupted and instruct the candidates to stop writing.
b) tell candidates to leave all examination materials on their desks; to leave the venue in an orderly fashion without
collecting any personal belongings and to assemble in the designated fire assembly point without communicating
with one another.
c) hold the candidates in silence under examination conditions (where possible).
d) where the delay in returning to the venue is not lengthy (less than 30 minutes), escort candidates back inside to
resume their seats
e) tell candidates to annotate their examination scripts with the words ‘Examination interrupted’.
f) resume the examination – allow candidates 10 minutes compensation for the disruption in addition to the
remaining duration. Announce the revised end time.
g) where the delay is lengthy (beyond 30 minutes) or the integrity of the examination has been compromised, it
may not be possible to restart. If the examination is not to be resumed, the invigilator should allow candidates
to return to their seats to ensure their scripts are correctly labelled. Scripts should then be collected in the normal
manner.
h) complete the Examination Incident Report Form for submission to Academic Registry (whether the examination
is resumed or not).

5.4 Examination Instructions for Candidates

Examinations are conducted by examination invigilators in accordance with the rules and procedures laid out
below. You must obey the instructions of an invigilator.

5.4.1 Entering the examination venue

a) You should arrive at an examination room no later than 15 minutes before the start of an examination and wait
quietly outside until admitted by an invigilator. Do not communicate with other candidates after entering the
examination room.

b) You must leave all personal belongings including electronic devices (e.g. phones) in the area defined by the
invigilator.

c) You may only take to your desk the equipment required to complete the examination which must be clearly
visible to the invigilators. If you wish to use a pencil case or small bag, it must be made of clear plastic.

d) You may take one drink to your desk which must be contained within a clear bottle.

e) No-one will be allowed to enter the examination room after the first 30 minutes of the examination.

5.4.2 Before the examination commences

a) You must place your UCLan Card on the corner of your desk with the photograph side upwards to assist the
invigilators in checking your identity. You may provide an alternative form of evidence as proof of identity
including a valid passport or driving licence. If you fail to bring any proof of identity with you to an examination
21
 you will be asked to remain behind at the end of the examination until your identity can be verified.
b) You should check that the correct examination paper is in front of you and complete all the details on the front
of the answer book and the attendance slip when asked to do so by the invigilator;

5.4.3 During the examination

a) You should start each answer at the top of a page unless told otherwise in the examination paper. Question
numbers must be written in the left-hand margin and the rest of the left and right margins left blank. If additional
answer books are needed please raise your hand. You should number any additional books used, and clearly label
them with your student number.

b) If you have a question regarding the accuracy of the examination paper, please raise your hand.

c) If you wish to visit the toilet, please raise your hand and you will be accompanied by an invigilator.

d) You may not leave the examination room during the first 30 minutes or last 30 minutes of the examination unless
the reason relates to visiting the toilet, illness or emergency.

5.4.4 Conduct

a) You must not speak to or communicate in any way with anyone other than invigilators during the examination.

b) You must not behave in any manner which may disturb other candidates.

c) You must behave in a reasonable manner at all times or you may be expelled from the examination room and not
allowed to return. Further disciplinary action may also be taken.

d) If you are suspected of using unfair means in an examination, you will be cautioned and the matter will be
investigated in accordance with the Academic Regulations.

5.4.5 At the end of the examination

a) If you finish the examination early (before the last 30 minutes), please raise your hand and wait for your
examination script to be collected before leaving the room quietly. See also 5.4.11 above.

b) You must remain seated and silent until all the answer books have been collected and you are told by an invigilator
that you can leave the room.

6 Procedure for Unfair Means to Enhance Performance

6.1 Policy Statement on Unfair Means: Promoting a Culture of Academic Integrity in Staff and Students

6.1.1 The University adopts a strategic approach to the prevention and management of unfair means to enhance
performance. This is cognisant of the University strategies for Learning and Teaching and Research. The University
advocates a holistic approach and fosters a culture of academic and research integrity amongst staff and students,
by providing a coherent set of Academic and Research Degree Regulations and guidelines for implementation by
Schools and Services.

6.1.2 The University recognises that all academic, administrative and support staff, holding a variety of roles, have the
responsibility to promote a culture of academic and research integrity, acting as role models for students and their
peers.

22
6.1.3 Student support, advice and guidance will be provided within Schools and by central University services to facilitate
student personal and professional development, with an emphasis on information literacy, study skills and problem
solving.

6.1.4 Importance is placed on providing education for staff and students and raising awareness on unfair means to
enhance performance. The use of Turnitin is promoted as both an education and detection tool, together with a
range of deterrents.

6.1.5 Course teams are responsible for ‘designing out’ unfair means to enhance performance by implementing robust
procedures for curriculum design, student recruitment, course delivery, assessment and evaluation and through
continuous enhancement.

6.1.6 Standards and behaviour expected of students will be made explicit to students, including standards of proficiency
and competencies required by Professional Statutory Regulatory Bodies and Research Council Codes of Practice, in
a range of verbal communication, written and electronic resources.

6.1.7 Schools are responsible for investigating suspected cases of unfair means to enhance performance and imposing
penalties determined by circumstances and evidence presented in accordance with the Academic and Research
Degree Regulations. Schools will monitor occurrence of unfair means to enhance performance utilising
standardised templates which will be reported centrally. Incidence will be systematically collated and School action
plans focusing on improvements will be monitored.

6.2 Scope

6.2.1 This Procedure applies to all students registered for a University award including those studying at a partner
institution in the UK or overseas. It applies to all taught programmes and postgraduate research degrees,
professional doctorates and professional awards.

6.2.2 This Procedure is designed to deal with allegations of unfair means, defined as cheating, plagiarism, re-
presentation of work and collusion. If the Head of School is of the view that an academic sanction by itself is
inadequate, given the nature of the offence, (e.g. where the offence involves theft, falsification, impersonation or
bringing the University into disrepute) the matter will be referred for action under the Student Disciplinary
Procedure or the Fitness to Practise Procedure, where this corresponds with professional body guidance.

6.2.3 Allegations of research misconduct (e.g. fabrication, falsification or misrepresentation of data or contravention of
ethical principles) will be considered in the first instance in line with the Code of Practice operated by the Ethics
and Integrity Team in Research Services.

6.3 Principles

6.3.1 At all stages of this Procedure, a student is entitled to be accompanied and/or represented by a person of their
choosing, who may be from the Students’ Union Advice and Representation Centre. This Procedure is intended to
be fair and to comply with the rules of natural justice. The Procedure is not a formal court process and, therefore,
should not be adversarial or overly legalistic, and there is no need for anyone to have formal legal representation.
Notwithstanding this provision, a student may be accompanied by a person who is legally qualified, providing that
person understands and respects the nature of the hearing, and does not adopt an overly adversarial or legalistic
stance.

6.3.2 Reasonable adjustments will be made where students have mobility or communication problems in order that
they may be informed of the process and have the opportunity to present their case, test the evidence, and offer
an explanation and mitigation.
6.3.3 At any point following receipt of an allegation of unfair means, the assessment and/or research in question may
be suspended pending the outcome of this Procedure.

23
6.3.4 If, in the case of a postgraduate research degree, unfair means is identified by the examiner(s) at any stage during
the examination process, the examiner(s) should report the matter immediately to the Research Student Registry.
The examiners may be requested to complete their preliminary reports before this Procedure is invoked.

6.3.5 If unfair mean is identified during an oral examination for a postgraduate research degree, the examiners should
suspend the examination and report the matter immediately to the Research Student Registry.

6.3.6 Where evidence of unfair means becomes apparent subsequent to the recommendation of the examiners, the
matter will be re-opened and the original decision may be set aside if appropriate.

6.3.7 Confidentiality will be preserved during the investigation of an allegation of unfair means to protect the interests
of everyone concerned, unless disclosure is necessary to progress the investigation in line with the rules of natural
justice. The University expects that all parties will respect the confidentiality of the process.

6.3.8 All references in this Procedure to the Head of School will include his/her appointed nominee who will be a senior
member of academic staff.

6.4 Regulations

6.4.1 The Regulations governing the use of unfair means to enhance performance are set out in the Academic
Regulations (Section G7)

6.5 Definition of Unfair Means

6.5.1 The University regards any use of unfair means in an attempt to enhance performance or to influence the standard
of award obtained as a serious offence. Such offences can include, without limitation:

6.5.1.1 Cheating

The term cheating includes, without limitation:

• Being in possession of notes, 'crib notes', or text books during an examination other than an
examination where the rubric permits such usage;
• Copying from another candidate's script or work;
• Communicating during the examination with another candidate;
• Having prior access to the examination questions unless permitted to do so by the rubric of the
examination;
• Substitution of examination materials;
• Unfair or unauthorised use of an electronic calculator/device;
• Impersonation;
• Use of a communication device during the examination;
• Any deliberate attempt to deceive.

6.5.1.2 Plagiarism

a) Material submitted for assessment through open book examination, coursework, project, dissertation or thesis
must be the student's own efforts and must be his/her own work. Students are bound by the Academic Regulations
and the Regulations for the Conduct of Students and any individual work submitted for assessment must be their
own.

b) Copying from the works of another person constitutes plagiarism, which is an offence. The penalties for plagiarism
are applied consistently in all circumstances, notwithstanding the level of the programme of study or whether the
offence was considered to be intentional or unintentional. Brief quotations from the published or unpublished

24
 works of another person, suitably attributed, are acceptable. Every School issues guidelines on the use and
referencing of quotations which students are required to follow.

6.5.1.3 Detection

Students’ work may be submitted electronically to Turnitin UK which is a web based system that provides
comprehensive checking of submitted work for matching text on web pages, electronic journals and previously
submitted student work. Turnitin UK generates an Originality Report to facilitate the identification of potential
plagiarism cases. The Originality Report can be used as evidence and to support the related decision making
process.

6.5.1.4 Re-presentation of work

The same work cannot be recognised twice for academic credit. A student who attempts to submit the same work
for academic credit, except where the rubric of assessment permits, shall be deemed to have used unfair means.

6.5.1.5 Collusion

a) Collusion is an example of unfair means because, like plagiarism, it is an attempt to deceive the examiners by
disguising the true authorship of an assessed piece of work e.g. an assignment or thesis, in full or in part. Its most
common version is that student A copies, or imitates in close detail, student B’s work with student B’s consent. But
it also includes cases in which two or more students divide the elements of an assignment among themselves, and
copy, or imitate in close detail, one another’s answers.

b) It is an unfair means offence to copy, or imitate in close detail, another student’s work, even with his or her consent
(in which case it becomes an offence of collusion). It is also an offence of collusion to consent to having one’s work
copied or imitated in close detail. Students are expected to take reasonable steps to safeguard their work from
improper use by others.

c) Collusion should not be confused with the normal situation in which students learn from one another, sharing
ideas, as they generate the knowledge and understanding necessary for each of them successfully and
independently undertake an assignment or research project. Nor should it be confused with group work on an
assignment or research project where this is specifically authorised.

6.6 Procedure Following an Allegation of Unfair Means

6.6.1 Alleged offences of unfair means will be reported to the appropriate Head of School for investigation. In the case
of a postgraduate research degree, if the Head of School is also a member of the supervisory team, the allegation
should be reported to the Chair of the Research Degrees Board who will appoint an alternative member of staff to
investigate.

6.6.2 The Head of School will conduct the investigation with due expedition and fairness and without bias. The enquiries
will be sufficiently thorough and objective to enable well-founded conclusions to be reached on the matter.

6.6.3 The Head of School will give the student the opportunity to put their case and may ask questions about the assessed
work. The School will provide the student with a copy of any evidence used to support the allegation, including the
Originality Report where relevant, with the formal notification letter inviting the student to the meeting.

6.6.4 The Head of School’s decision will be based on the facts and on the evidence presented. The standard of proof will
be the civil standard of proof which is that ‘on a balance of probabilities’, the facts of an allegation are more likely
than not to have happened. If the student does not attend without good cause, a decision will be made in their
absence and a penalty may be imposed (see below).

25
 6.5 If the allegation is found to be proven the Head of School will consult with the Chair of the Assessment or Research
Degrees Board to implement the appropriate academic penalty and report it to the Assessment or Research
Degrees Board.

6.7 Academic Penalties for Taught Programmes

6.7.1 In the event of a single offence of unfair means in an undergraduate or postgraduate taught element of
assessment, the appropriate penalty should be 0% for that element of assessment, and an overall fail for the
module (which will be the resulting numeric average mark if below the minimum pass mark, or FR if the average
would otherwise be a pass mark). The affected elements of the assessment must be resubmitted to the required
standard. The mark for the module following resubmission will be restricted to the minimum pass mark.

6.7.2 Where unfair means is detected for the first time on a reassessment for an already failed module, no further
reassessment for the module will be permitted, and the appropriate fail grade will be awarded.

6.7.3 In the event of a repeat offence of unfair means (irrespective of whether the repeat offence involves the same
form of unfair means) on the same or any other module within the course, the appropriate penalty should be 0%
for the module with no opportunity for re-assessment. This penalty does not preclude the student being permitted
to retake the module in a subsequent year.

6.7.4 The above penalties will apply where a student transfers from one UCLan course to another during their period of
studies and module credits gained on the former course are transferred to the current course.

6.8 Academic Penalties for Postgraduate Research Degrees

6.8.1 In the event of a single offence of unfair means at any point in the postgraduate research student journey, including
registration, transfer, annual progression or examination, the following penalties may be imposed:

- referral for reassessment with or without a further viva, where a viva formed part of the original assessment
strategy;
- that the maximum level of award by defined as MPhil, where a student is seeking registration or is registered
for a PhD;
- failure of the award.

6.8.2 In the event of a repeat offence of unfair means (irrespective of whether the repeat offence involves the same
form of unfair means) on the same research degree, the appropriate penalty should be failure of the degree.

6.8.3 Where the outcome of the appeal states that the maximum level of award should be MPhil, the examination
process must be completed to ensure the student meets the criteria for the award of MPhil.

6.9 Procedure following an Unfair Means Hearing

6.9.1 If the Head of School is of the view that an academic sanction by itself is inadequate, given the nature of the offence,
(e.g. where the offence involves theft, falsification, impersonation, or bringing the University into disrepute) the
matter will be referred for action under the Student Disciplinary Procedure or the Fitness to Practise Procedure, where
this corresponds with professionally body guidance.

6.9.2 A hearing under the Student Disciplinary or Fitness to Practise Procedure cannot change an academic penalty
imposed by a Head of School or any decision reached by the Assessment Board. However, the outcome of the
hearing will be made available to the Head of School and the Chair of the Assessment Board, who may review their
decision based on the recommendations made at the hearing.

6.9.3 The Head of School will inform the student of the outcome in writing, normally within 5 working days of the meeting.
The outcome letter will identify the evidence considered, the regulations applied, the decision and associated
reasons and the student’s right of appeal.
26
6.9.4 The student may appeal against the decision of the Head of School, where there are grounds, in line with the
Academic Appeals Procedure (see Section 7 of this Handbook). Appeals should be made in writing within 10 working
days of the decision to the Appeals Officer in Academic Registry using the First Stage Appeal application form.
Students may seek independent advice and representation from the Students’ Union Advice and Representation
Centre.

6.9.5 Any matter dealt with under either the Academic Regulations or the Student Disciplinary Regulations which results in
a sanction against a student which affects their academic progress will be reported to the Assessment or Research
Degrees Board.

6.9.6 Where an allegation of unfair means has been upheld, the University may inform relevant third parties of the nature
and outcome of the case, including the relevant Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body, placement providers or
potential employers in the event of a reference request. The student will be informed in the event of any such
disclosures.

7 Academic Appeals Procedure

7.1 Scope and Purpose

7.1.1 An academic appeal is a request by a student for a review of an academic decision made by an academic body
which is responsible for making decisions on student progress, assessment and awards.

7.1.2 This Procedure applies to all students registered for a University award including those studying at partner
institutions in the UK and abroad. It applies to all University awards including taught programmes and postgraduate
research degrees, professional doctorates and professional awards.

7.1.3 Academic decisions include:

- A decision by an Assessment Board or associated sub-committee on marks, classifications and progression,

including decisions on early withdrawal or the use of unfair means.

- A decision by the Research Degrees Board or associated assessor(s) on any assessment point in the
postgraduate research student journey, including registration, transfer, annual progression and examination,
including decisions on the use of unfair means.

7.1.4 This Procedure does not apply to decisions on disciplinary outcomes, fitness to practise or fitness to study
outcomes for which there are separate appeals procedures in the Regulations for the Conduct of Students.

7.1.5 The University operates a Student Complaints Procedure for dealing with student complaints about any service
provided by the University including academic related services. If you have a concern about course delivery or
supervision, you should raise this at the time so that it can be resolved. The University reserves the right to re-
classify an academic appeal as a complaint or vice versa, if the submission falls properly within the remit of one
procedure rather than the other. Where an appeal relates to a service provided by the University this will normally
be dealt with under the Student Complaints Procedure before the appeal is considered.

7.1.6 The University has robust procedures to ensure fairness in the assessment process. The grounds for appeal do not,
therefore, include bias or perception of bias. If a student has evidence to support a claim of bias, this should be the
subject of a complaint. If that complaint is upheld, and any proven bias may have been material to the outcome of
an assessment, this outcome will be considered as an appeal.

7.1.7 It is your responsibility to ensure that applications for Extenuating Circumstances are communicated through the
relevant Procedure at the appropriate time. If you submit evidence of Extenuating Circumstances after the decision
has been made and you do not have good and valid reason for not submitting it at the right time, then
27
 your appeal may not be successful.

7.2 Principles

7.2.1 An appeal cannot be made against the academic judgement of the assessors, properly exercised. ‘Academic
judgement’ means any decision about a student’s assessment or progression that can only be made by an
appropriate academic expert. An appeal may not be based on a questioning of the academic judgement of any
properly appointed individual examiner and appeals on this basis will be ruled invalid.

7.2.2 Appeals submitted outside the deadline will be ruled invalid unless, exceptionally, you can show good reason why
the appeal could not have been submitted earlier, with suitable supporting evidence.

7.2.3 At all stages of this Procedure, as a student you are entitled to be accompanied and/or represented by a person of
your choosing, who may be from the Students’ Union Advice and Representation Centre. This Procedure is intended
to be fair and to comply with the rules of natural justice. The Procedure is not a formal court process and, therefore,
should not be adversarial or overly legalistic, and there is no need for anyone to have formal legal representation.
There is no objection if the accompanying person is legally qualified, so long as that person understands and
respects the nature of the hearing and does not adopt an overly adversarial or legalistic stance.

7.2.4 Where a student has declared a disability to the University, all endeavours will be made to ensure that information
is available in appropriate formats and reasonable adjustments are made to the proceedings and facilities to
accommodate their needs.

7.2.5 It is recognised that attendance at a hearing at the Preston campus may be problematic for students on distance
learning awards or studying at partner institutions in the UK or overseas. Alternative arrangements will be
considered including the opportunity to undertake the appeal by correspondence, video or teleconference, or to
attend a hearing at a partner institution. In such cases, the timescales will be adjusted accordingly, although both
parties will be expected to fulfil their respective responsibilities within a reasonable timeframe.

7.2.6 You will not be disadvantaged by submitting an appeal in good faith. Appeals which are judged to be vexatious,
malicious or frivolous will not be considered. This may arise where the appeal clearly does not have any serious
purpose, or where repeated appeals are unreasonable in all the circumstances.

7.2.7 All information submitted in relation to appeals will be dealt with confidentially and will only be disclosed to those
persons involved in making a decision on the appeal, or as necessary to progress the appeal.

7.2.8 It is not within the remit of the Academic Appeals Procedure to adjust marks or classifications, unless there has
been a calculation error.

7.2.9 All references in this Procedure to the Head of School include an appointed nominee.

7.3 Grounds for Appeal

7.3.1 A request for an appeal against an academic decision (with the exception of an appeal against the decision at an
unfair means hearing) shall be valid only if it is based on one or more of the grounds listed below, and must be
supported by suitable evidence:

i) that insufficient weight has been given to extenuating circumstances;

ii) that the student’s academic performance has been adversely affected by extenuating circumstances
which the student has for good reason been unable to make known at the time;

iii) that there has been a material administrative error at a stage of the process, or that some
material irregularities have occurred;

iv) that the assessment procedure and/or examination(s) have not been conducted in accordance
28
 with the approved regulations.
7.3.2 A request for an appeal against the decision at an unfair means hearing will only be valid if it is based on the
following grounds:

i) That the original hearing was not conducted fairly and/or in accordance with the published procedure;
ii) That the original decision was unreasonable in all the circumstances.

7.4 Process for Appealing Against Assessment Decisions

7.4.1 If you are not sure whether an appeal is appropriate, you should discuss the matter with a relevant member of
staff e.g. module tutor, course leader, supervisor, research degrees tutor or Head of School. This will be an
opportunity to seek clarification on your results and/or to discuss any concerns. You may seek such a meeting at
any time without invoking the Academic Appeals Procedure.

7.4.2 This Procedure is a two-stage process. The First Stage must be completed before the Second Stage can be invoked.

7.5 First Stage Appeal

7.5.1 First Stage appeals must be lodged with the relevant Course Administration Service (CAS) Hub in the case of taught
programmes, or the Research Student Registry (RSR) in the case of postgraduate research degrees, within 10
working days of the official notification of the academic decision you wish to appeal.

7.5.2 The First Stage appeal must state the grounds on which the appeal is made and should be accompanied by
appropriate and relevant documentary evidence. The appeal should be submitted on the application form available
at:

https://www.uclan.ac.uk/students/study/examinations_and_awards/academic_appeals.php

7.5.3 The CAS Hub or RSR will acknowledge receipt of your appeal within 3 working days, and will refer it to the Faculty
Director of Academic Development who will allocate the appeal to a member of staff with appropriate assessment
expertise, who has had no previous involvement in the case.

7.5.4 The Chair of the First Stage Appeal will consider whether the appeal demonstrates valid grounds. If the Chair
considers that valid grounds have not been demonstrated, you will be offered a meeting to explain why this is the
case and to review the matter in the light of any representations by made by you. If the Chair concludes that there
are no valid grounds, you may submit a Second Stage appeal.

7.5.5 If the Chair of the First Stage Appeal considers that there are valid grounds for appeal, a hearing with you will be
arranged, normally within 10 working days of receipt of the request for appeal. You may be accompanied by a
friend who may be from the Students' Union Advice and Representation Centre.

7.5.6 The Chair of the First Stage Appeal will ensure that you are invited to present your case at the meeting so that you
have the opportunity to amplify the written case. The Chair of the First Stage Appeal will make enquiries that are
appropriate and proportionate, will ask questions and consider evidence to enable a decision to be made about
the appeal.

7.5.7 The Chair of the First Stage Appeal will normally inform you verbally (at the meeting) and in writing of the outcome
of the appeal which may be that:

i) the appeal is upheld and referred back to the academic decision making body for reconsideration;
ii) the appeal is upheld and the Chair of the First Stage Appeal takes immediate action on behalf of the
academic decision making body. Where appropriate, the Chair of the First Stage Appeal will consult with
the Chair of the academic decision making body to ensure the outcome is academically and professionally
acceptable;
29
 iii) the appeal is turned down.

7.5.8 The Chair of the First Stage Appeal will be responsible for preparing a report of the First Stage meeting, which will
be sent to you with the outcome letter. The outcome letter will identify the evidence considered, the findings of
fact, the regulations applied, the decision and associated reasons, any remedy that has been identified and
instructions on the next steps.

30
7.5.9 In all cases, you will be informed of your right to submit a Second Stage appeal if you have grounds to request a
review of the outcome of the First Stage appeal, with details of the procedure and the timescale.

7.6 Second Stage Appeal

7.6.1 If the appeal is not satisfactorily resolved at the First Stage, you may submit a request for review to the Appeals
Officer in Academic Registry (via cliaison@uclan.ac.uk) within 10 working days of the official notification of the First
Stage appeal outcome.

7.6.2 The Second Stage appeal must state the grounds on which the appeal is sought and should be accompanied by
appropriate documentary evidence. The appeal should be submitted on the application form available at:

https://www.uclan.ac.uk/students/study/examinations_and_awards/academic_appeals.php

7.6.3 A Second Stage appeal will take the form of a review. It will not normally consider the issues afresh or involve
further investigation.

7.6.4 A Second Stage appeal will only be valid if it is based on one or more of the following grounds:

i) that the First Stage appeal process was not conducted fairly and/or in accordance with the published
procedure;

ii) that the decision of the First Stage appeal was not reasonable in all the circumstances;

iii) that there is material new evidence that for good reason could not have been made known at the First Stage
appeal.

7.7 Second Stage Appeal Panel

7.7.1 An Appeal Panel will be established to hear all Second Stage academic appeals, comprising:

Chair: Vice-Chancellor’s nominee

Members: A senior member of staff with appropriate expertise in the assessment of taught courses or
research degrees
An elected officer of the Students' Union

7.6.5 The Appeal Panel will not include any member of staff from your School or anyone else who has had any relevant
prior involvement in the academic decision which is the subject of the appeal. The Chair shall rule in the event that
objections are raised to the composition of the Appeal Panel.

7.8 Documentation for Second Stage Appeal Panels

7.8.1 The Appeals Panel will receive the following information:

• the Second Stage appeal application and any supporting documents;

• the outcome of the First Stage appeal meeting, including the meeting notes and outcome letter;
• documentation from the Assessment or Research Degrees Board including extracts from the minutes, the
Assessment Board profile, or the examiner’s reports in the case of an appeal against a research degree examination
decision;
• documentation from the course/supervisory team concerning your academic performance including e.g. the
outcome of any applications for extenuating circumstances; attendance record; details of any interruptions of
study; annual progress reports; and details of academic support provided and any other relevant information.

31
7.6.6 The Appeal Panel will meet in private session to review the documentation and consider whether there are valid
grounds for review.

7.6.7 The Appeal Panel may request further information from you or the School or the Chair of the First Stage Appeal,
before making a decision.

7.9 Outcomes

7.9.1 The Appeal Panel will decide on the appropriate action as follows:

iv) to decline the appeal and uphold the original decision of the First Stage appeal, in which case you will be
notified of the decision and summary reasons, and your right to refer the matter to the OIA (see below);

v) to uphold the appeal and determine the outcome, including any actions to be taken by the School. Where
appropriate, the Chair of the Appeal Panel will consult with the Chair of the academic decision making body to
ensure the outcome is academically and professionally acceptable;

vi) to refer the appeal back to the School to consider afresh, in cases where there is evidence of a material
procedural irregularity or where valid new information has been submitted. The School will inform you and the
Panel of the outcome of the re-consideration of your First Stage appeal, and you will have the further right of a
Second Stage appeal;

vii) to convene a hearing to hear the case by you and the response by the original decision maker, in cases where
the facts and evidence are complex or contentious. The procedure for a Second Stage appeal hearing may be
viewed at appendix 1.

7.6.8 The Appeals Officer will notify you, the School and the CAS Hub in writing of the decision of the Appeal Panel and the
associated reasons, within 5 working days of the meeting of the Appeal Panel. The outcome letter will identify the
evidence considered, the findings of fact, the regulations applied, the decision and associated reasons, and remedy
that has been identified and instructions on the next steps.

7.10 Status of a Student during an Appeal

7.10.1 It is acknowledged that waiting for the outcome of an appeal may be stressful, but if you have referred assessments
or other work to complete, you should continue with that work pending the outcome of your appeal unless advised
otherwise by the School.

7.6.9 If you are appealing against a decision which prevents you from progressing from one year to the next or continuing
on the course, you will not normally be permitted to progress to the next stage of study while an appeal is pending,
but this may be granted in exceptional circumstances if considered academically appropriate by your School, in
consultation with Academic Registry. This will be on the understanding that if your appeal is not successful, you
will discontinue study immediately.

7.6.10 If a student is on a course recognised by a professional and/or statutory body, the School has the right to suspend
a student’s placement and bursary (if they are in receipt of one) until the outcome of the internal appeal has been
reached.

7.11 Independent Review

7.11.1 Where the University’s Academic Appeals Procedure has been completed, the student will be provided with a
Completion of Procedures advising of his/her right to request a review by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator
for Higher Education (OIA). A Scheme Application form must be submitted to the OIA within 12 months of the date
of Completion of Procedures letter. Details of the OIA scheme may be found at: www.oiahe.org.uk.

32
7.12 Monitoring and Review

7.12.1 The University will monitor the receipt and outcome of all First and Second Stage appeals to identify trends,
areas of good practice and how the student experience could be enhanced.

7.13 Procedure for Hearing the Second Stage Appeal

7.13.1 The student and the Chair of the First Stage Appeal will be given 10 working days’ notice by the Appeals
Officer of when to appear before the Appeal Panel. The student may be accompanied by a representative
or friend who may be from the Students' Union Advice and Representation Centre.

7.6.11 The Chair of the First Stage Appeal will present the case for the decision made at the First Stage appeal.
S/he may be accompanied by another member of the course or supervisory team. The student, the Chair
of the First Stage Appeal and the Panel members in the appeal hearing will be given copies of all
documentary evidence submitted as part of the appeal.

7.6.12 The procedure for the hearing will be as below:

a. All parties are invited to join the hearing;

b. Introductions;
c. The student and the Chair of the First Stage Appeal are asked to confirm that they are satisfied
with the impartiality of the Panel. The Chair of the Panel shall rule on any objections that may be
raised;
d. The Chair explains the powers of the Panel and details its procedures;
e. The Chair of the First Stage Appeal states the position and reasons for the decision reached;
f. The student presents his/her case;
g. Questions from Panel members and/or the student/Chair of the First Stage Appeal;
h. The Chair of the First Stage Appeal’s final comments;
i. Student's final comments;
j. The student and any representative and the Chair of the First Stage Appeal shall withdraw while
the Panel deliberates the issue;
k. The student will normally be notified verbally of the decision and the associated reasons at the
end of the hearing;
l. Written notification of the decision and the associated reasons will be sent to the student within
5 working days of the hearing;
m. The Panel may, at its discretion and in the interests of fairness: i. depart from this procedure; ii.
seek further information; and/or iii. adjourn to a later date at any stage in the proceedings.

7.6.13 Following an Appeal Hearing, the Appeal Panel will decide on the appropriate action as follows:

1) to decline the appeal and uphold the original decision of the First Stage appeal, in which case you will be
notified of the decision and summary reasons, and your right to refer the matter to the OIA (see below);

2) to uphold the appeal and determine the outcome, including any actions to be taken by the School. Where
appropriate, the Chair of the Appeal Panel will consult with the Chair of the academic decision making body
to ensure the outcome is academically and professionally acceptable.

33
Appendices

Appendix 1: Further reading and useful websites (for staff):

• Assessment standards: a manifesto for change

http://www.brookes.ac.uk/aske/documents/ManifestoLeafletNew.pdf

• Biggs, John (2003 newest edition) Teaching for Quality Learning at University OUP

• Brown, G. (2001) Assessment: A Guide for Lecturers Assessment Series No 3 LTSN Generic Centre

• Brown, S. & Glasner, A. (2000) Assessment Matters in Higher Education The Society for the
Research into Higher Education and Open University Press. Buckingham

• Brown, S. & Smith, B. (1997) Getting to Grips with Assessment SEDA Special No 3, SEDA
Birmingham

• Gibbs, G & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students' learning.
Learning and Teaching in Higher Education vol.1 pp.3-31.

• Haines, C (2004) Assessing Students’ Written Work Routledge Falmer

• McDowell, L. & Montgomery, C. (2012) Assessment for Learning in Higher Education, Routledge,
London.

• Nightingale, P., Te Wiata, I.T., Toohey, S., Ryan, G., Hughes, C., Magin, D. (1996) Assessing
Learning in Universities Professional Development Centre, University of New South Wales,
Australia.

• O'Donovan, B, Price, M and Rust, C (2004) Know what I mean? Enhancing student
understanding of assessment standards and criteria. Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 9,
No. 3,325-35

• Race P & Brown S (2001) The ILTA Guide: Inspiring Learning Teaching and Assessment Institute
of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education in association with: www.educationguardian.co.uk
York

• Ramsden, Paul (2003) Learning to Teach in HE 2nd Edition Routledge Falmer

• The Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange (ASKe) at Oxford Brookes

University: www.brookes.ac.uk/aske

• The Quality Assurance Agency for useful assessment strategy information and quality
issues. www.qaa.ac.uk

34
Appendix 2: Standard Descriptors (for staff)

Reproduced with kind permission of Manchester Metropolitan University

Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7

Links between Links between Links between Problems are Novel and
theory and theory and practice theory and practice solved with some complex
practice are are analysed in a are constructed. reference to theory problems are
identified. basic way. and practice and solved with
with evidence of reference to
The characteristics An acceptable Work is evaluated There is evidence There is evidence
of a professional are number of the with respect to the of the ability to of the ability to
identified. characteristics of a characteristics of a work competently work
professional are professional. with reference to autonomously with
applied to their own professional reference to
work. standards and professional
values, able to standards and
reflect on their values, reflecting
Work is Ideas are Work is clearly Work is presented The outcomes of
recognisably presented communicated using to a selected their work are
structured and adequately to an a range of strategies audience using a presented clearly
presented to a audience of peers and media. range of and appropriately
small group of using a defined strategies and to a defined
peers. range of strategies media. audience using a
and media. range of strategies
The characteristics Evidence of Evidence is There is evidence There is evidence
of successful teams contribution to a shown of ability to of working of contribution to a
are identified. team to complete work in a team as effectively in a team as either
defined activities is either leader or team as either leader or member
presented. member as leader or member as needed to
needed to as needed to scope and
complete projects complete complex complete complex
and identify projects. Evidence multi-faceted
strengths and of reflection on projects and of
weaknesses of their performance some reflection on
performance. within the team. their own
The key features Appropriate Professional A plausible Demonstrate a
of a professional opportunities for aspirations and professional vision of
development plan their own action plans are development plan is themselves and
are described. professional articulated. produced. their professional
development are futures.
Information Information from A project is A project is A project is
presented in the primary and designed and designed, planned planned and
course is applied secondary sources carried out to and carried out carried out to
to new questions is collected, collect, analyse using an gather information
or situations. analysed, and critique appropriate range from appropriate
interpreted and information from of primary and primary and
applied to specific primary and secondary secondary sources
problems under secondary sources. The and synthesise the
Social and The social and Social and The social and The social and
community contexts community contexts community community contexts community
within the of the discipline are contexts of the of the discipline are contexts of the
disciplinary field are identified. discipline in work considered in discipline are
described. are identified. drawing conclusions considered
and making critically in drawing
recommendations. conclusions and

35
Appendix 3 Verification and Moderation Procedure Guidance
Verification (approval of assessment briefs and examination papers)
Verification ensures that the form and content of assessment tasks and briefs are appropriate, fair and valid in terms of
standards, will effectively assess the achievement of learning outcomes and present an appropriate level of challenge to
students.
Verification is an enhancement process, and if done well will lead to better assessment. Verification should ensure the
assessment complies with the approved module descriptor and the inclusive learning policy. If alternative forms of assessment
are required it is good practice to ensure that these are also verified.
At all levels, all assessment briefs including examination paper questions and coursework/practical assignments of any type
for all elements of assessment for every module which contributes to the final mark for the module should be verified. While
the assessment handbook only requires examinations to be verified and coursework/practical assignments to be made
available, it is good practice for the external to see everything before the assessment brief is published to students. All
assessment briefs should be made available to Externals prior to the assessment briefs being published to students, or if the
External examiner changes mid-session.
Internal verification
Internal verification must be undertaken by a minimum of two members of academic staff (author and one other) and be
recorded.

The internal verification of assessment briefs must be undertaken before the briefs are published to the students.
Assessments at all levels should be subject to internal verification (regardless of whether they contribute to the final award).

External Verification
External verification involves the checking by the external examiner of assessment briefs.

The External Examiner(s) must verify the form and content of all examination papers for every module which contributes to
an award, and this must be recorded. Where there is no examination within a module the assessment brief/s it is best practice
for these to be externally verified. External Examiner verification of examination papers and re-assessment examination
papers should be undertaken at the same time and must be completed before the examination is sat. Other assessments
should be verified before the assessment brief is presented to students.

All briefs for coursework/practical assignments for modules which contribute to an award must be made available for review
by the external examiner (access will be facilitated electronically).

Internal verification applies to re-assessment briefs as well as the original assessment brief and should be undertaken at the
same time. Unseen re-assessment examination papers should be distinct from the first- sit paper.

The external examiner is entitled to review an amended assessment brief on request if substantial changes were suggested
in external verification.
An exemplar verification form detailing the minimum requirements for evidencing verification can be found as an appendix
in the Assessment Handbook. Schools must use this form, if additional information is required it should be collected and
appended to this form.

Moderation (checking of students’ assessed work)

Moderation is employed to ensure that academic standards are appropriate, that marking is regulated within agreed norms
or against predetermined criteria across a module or course. It also ensures that the assessment outcomes for students are
fair, consistent and reliable. It is undertaken internally and externally. Moderation can be undertaken by reviewing a sample
of student work, or by second marking. Second marking results in a single, agreed mark.
Assessments at all levels should be subject to internal moderation and those levels which contribute to the final award should
also be subject to scrutiny by External Examiner/s.

Samples
The minimum requirement for moderation samples for both internal and external moderation purposes is set at 10% of all
work submitted for a particular element of assessment, and (where student numbers on modules are small) the sample to
include at least 3 pieces of work from the batch to be taken from work awarded the highest marks, marks in the middle range
and the lowest marks.
36
Where assessments comprise various types of performance or presentation, Schools must still ensure that they meet the
minimum requirements for moderation samples.
Changes may not be made exclusively to marks within a representative sample. Should concerns be identified during internal
moderation regarding the accuracy or consistency of marking based upon the sample, the relevant parts of the assessment
for the entire cohort should be re-marked. This might be through scaling up or down, should the sample be considered to be
consistently over or under – marked, or a full re-mark if the pattern of error is inconsistent.
Internal Moderation
Each module must have an identified internal moderator who will be responsible for checking a representative sample (see
details of minimum requirements above) of work and confirming that the assessment criteria for every element of assessment
have been correctly and accurately applied and for recording the appropriate evidence of moderation.

Parity review (Standardisation) may be used for courses with multiple teams of markers (eg on a large course with different
pathways). The review ensures that marks have been awarded consistently by different marking teams and that there is a
common understanding of the marking boundaries. For example; parity reviews often take the form of a meeting of all
markers and moderators, or they can take place online. The Module Leader will normally identify a sample of work to be
reviewed, taking examples from all the marking teams. The module team will compare the marks awarded, resolving any
discrepancies and agreeing the final mark and feedback for the students.
External Moderation
External moderation involves the external examiner in checking that the assessment criteria for every element of assessment
have been correctly and accurately applied to a representative sample (see details of minimum requirements above) of work,
for all modules contributing to a final award. The sample of work moderated by the external examiner should include a
selection of work that has been internally moderated.

The external examiner will be asked to provide confirmation of whether marking is in accordance with the stated criteria and
weightings and identifying any issues.

The template moderation form for evidencing moderation is appended to the Assessment Handbook. Schools must use this
form, if additional information is required it should be collected and appended to this form.
Second Marking
Second marking is where all assessments in the set are independently marked by two markers with a view to agreeing on a
mark. See Academic Regulations (Section G6).
Sample Forms
An exemplar Verification and Moderation form can be found as an appendix to the Assessment Handbook. These forms should
always be used if additional information is required it should be collected and appended to the form.

37
Appendix 3a Exemplar Verification Report Form

Module Code and Title :

Semester :

Module Leader:
Assessment Strategy (including. weighting of elements if appropriate):

Main Campus Yes/No

Also at UCLan Campuses/Partner Campuses Yes/No (if yes please detail below)
Locations:

Attach a copy of the assignment brief or examination sit and resit papers and the current module descriptor to this Verification form
and sign all pages.
• If Ticking NA detail below why not applicable ,

Checklist Yes No NA*

Assessment complies with approved module descriptor and the inclusive learning policy
https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/sites/InclusiveLearning/SitePages/Home.aspx
Nature of brief is appropriate in terms of :
• content
• level
• size
Relevant learning outcomes are included (where appropriate) and addressed
Outline marking scheme or assessment criteria with % weighting included
Coursework/Practical etc:
Date and time for submission/assessment is stated
Guidance on the submission and assessment process are attached
Model Answers or correct answers are included for verifier
Examination:
Examination type (eg MCQ, short notes, essay etc)
Model Answers or correct answers are included for verifier
Examination Duration:

*If NA (not applicable), please explain

Internal Verifier’s comments:

Proposed action by assessor:

Internal Verifier’s Signature : Date :

Exam Verification

External Examiner: Does the module comply with the formally approved descriptor? YES/ NO
https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/ou/aqasu/coursedocumentation/default.aspx
38
External Examiner Comments:

External Examiner Signature : Date :

External Examiner Name:

39
 Appendix 3b: Exemplar Moderation Report

Module Code and Title :

Semester :

Module Leader:
Assessment Strategy (including weighting of elements if appropriate):

Main Campus Yes/No

Also at UCLan Campuses/Partner Campuses? Yes/No (if yes please detail below)
Locations:

Moderation Details

Name of Marker/s
Name of Moderator/s
Number of students assessed by the marker/s named above
Number of items moderated (minimum 3 or 10% of the batch)
drawn from work with the highest, middle and lowest marks

Student IDs Initial Grades Moderated Comments

Grades

Moderator/s comments :

Is marking in accordance with the stated criteria and

weightings?

Remarks on quality and consistency of feedback

UCLan Campuses/Partner Campuses – has the

internal moderation process been followed?

If yes, have any issues been identified and how have

these been resolved?

Moderator/s signature/s: Date:

Following Internal Moderation

Comments from or action if required from assessor/marking team

40
 Have any issues that have been identified been resolved?

Name and Signature: Date:

External Moderation

Student IDs/Names

External Examiner Comments:

External Examiner signature : Date :

External Examiner name :

Following External Moderation

Comments or action if required from assessor/ marking team for development :

Date:

41
Appendix 4: Online Assessment Policy and Electronic Management of Assessment (EMA) – Online Submission,
Marking and Feedback (for staff)

All assessments will, where possible, include an online element comprising one or more of:

• Electronic submission of the assessed work.

• Electronic assessment via an online tool.
• Electronic feedback to students on the assessed work.

This includes written final examinations where generic feedback should be provided online immediately after the
publication of results. All coursework or practical/performance assessment briefs must be published online via
eLearn, but this alone will not be considered to fulfil this policy. Where submission or assessment is online,
feedback would also be online.

The mechanism for online submission, assessment or feedback should be consistent for a given type of
assessment, for each student cohort. For example: submission of word processed work to Turnitin would be
required across a student’s programme of study; feedback via GradeMark would be used for all online essay
feedback across the programme of study. Wherever possible the tools supported by LIS Digital Services should
be used to comply with this policy. Course Teams can draw on the experience of the LIS Digital Services team
to develop means to incorporate appropriate online elements to each assessment.

Exceptions to this policy can only be on specific pedagogic or practical grounds that would otherwise
disadvantage the student or damage the learning experience. Exceptions must be reviewed annually in the
Course Leader’s Annual Monitoring Report. Course Leaders should consider developments in the tools and
techniques available to support online assessment on a regular basis and as part of the Annual Monitoring
Process.

Online submission refers to the process by which a student submits work online for storage and retrieval by
academic, administrative or other staff for marking, feedback or review. This can also include plagiarism checking
using Turnitin.

Online marking is the process by which staff provide marks and feedback to students online. Text-based
assignments can be electronically marked and feedback can be automatically distributed using GradeMark which
is part of Turnitin.

The electronic options for assignment submission, marking and feedback are designed to ensure that students will be
assessed fairly, given clear and prompt feedback, and receive feedback in a consistent, legible and timely manner.

The advantages of using of online submission and online marking include:

• Flexibility and convenience e.g. students can submit assignments or access marks and feedback from
anywhere without being restricted by office hours
• Tracking submissions and progress (for staff and students)
• Ability to use text-matching software (Turnitin), which is integrated with Blackboard, to help identify
plagiarism
• Whole process can be managed in one central, secure and familiar system (Blackboard)
• Archiving of assignments, feedback and marks for future reference e.g. for external examiner access
• Provision of clear, timely and easily accessible feedback
• Opportunities for innovative and engaging feedback e.g. audio or video, as well as greater consistency e.g.
through use of comment banks or rubrics showing feedback relating to assessment criteria
• Markers can re-edit their feedback in a document as they go through it
• Ability for markers to re-use feedback comments relating to common issues
• Non-essay type assignments can be marked using UCLan’s MarS Marking Sheet system with the resultant
feedback also electronically distributed. MarS can be used for assignments with up to 10 tasks with different

42
 weightings.

Examples of non-text assignments would include:-

• Presentations
• Observed Clinical Performance (OSCE)
• Portfolio
• Interview / Viva
• Acting Performance
• Fashion Design
• Short Film

43
Example of GradeMarked Paper

Comments can be colour coded and can be text and/or bubble-comments. Additional general comments
and audio comments can also be provided.

44
Example of a MarS Feedback Sheet

41
Appendix 5: Chair’s Action Forms

C H A I R’S ACTION

ID No First name Surname

Programme Title Programme Code

AMENDMENT TO RECOMMENDATION

Original Recommendation & New Recommendation & APM Banner Term Date of Award
Code Code (for all (eg 2017/18) if applicable
Awards) (eg April 2017)
%

Reason for Amendment:

Signed by Chair Date

Admin Contact Name Ext

Please return to: Assessment and Awards

(except for updates to Refer/Defer Recommendations which are undertaken by the CASHub)

(Forms being completed by Partner Colleges should be sent initially to owning CAS Hub for action and onward transmission
to Assessment and Awards Office whereappropriate)
Action CAS Hub

• UPDATE BANNER (REFER/DEFER) RECOMMENDATIONS • UPDATE ASSESSMENT FILE

ONLY

• PRINT NEW PROFILE & PASS LIST • COPY: COURSE LEADER/ACADEMIC ADVISOR

• COPY: ASSESSMENT & AWARDS OFFICE (NON

REFER/DEFER RECOMMENDATIONS) Signature Date

Action Awards Office

Banner Awards Office Systems

• SHAINST • AWARDS EXTRACT

• SHADEGR • CERTS TO BE PROCESSED LINKEDFILE

• SFAREGS • POSTING LIST

• SKAHINS • CERTIFICATE DOC

• SZAGDRC • GRADUATION STUDENT INVITES

• SZAMREC

42
 • SZASAPM

• SKAHINS

Signature Date
SCHOOL: ………………………………………

NOTIFICATION OF CHAIR’S ACTION/CHANGE TO MODULE MARK

(WHERE CHANGES ARE MADE TO MARKS FOR STUDENTS OWNED BY ANOTHER SCHOOL
INCLUDING NOTIFICATION OF COURSE BOARD CHANGES TO REASSESSMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS & THE ADDITION OF COMPENSATION DESCRIPTOR)

To:……………………………………………………………….Chair of Module or Course Board (Name

of Module/Course:…………………………………………………………………………..)

From:…………………………………………………………….Chair of Module or Course Board (Name

of Module/Course…………………………………………………………………..………..)

Please note the amendments noted below to student marks/grades which I have authorised through
the assessment process. These may impact either on the overall result for this student who is on the
Course noted below or on your module reassessments. The amendments have been made on the
Banner system.

Student Name: Course Code: Year:

Student ID: Course Title:

Module Code and title Original New Compe- Resit Resit Chair’s
mark/ mark/ nsation Added removed Action
examples grade grade added Change and
reason
CD1001 Career Devpt I 52 
TT1001 Social Aspects 38R 38C  
TT1002 Teaching & Learning 17 17R 
WM1003 Acc for Env Sci 48 84 
SP1002 Public Sector Mgt missing 55 

Signed:…………………………………………………………………Date:……………………
(Chair of Assessment Board)

For Admin use: (Initial and date)

43
Action Banner Updated CC: Module tutor
Student Informed Administrator owning student (if outside School)
Assessment file updated Head of host School (for Partner Colleges)
New profile and pass list printed University Administrator (for Partner Colleges)

44
Appendix 6: Examination Incident Report Form

UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL LANCASHIRE

EXAMINATION INCIDENT REPORT
Please report below any delay, disturbance, infringement of examination rules or other incident which may have
affected the conduct of the examination in respect of one or more students.

NB: This form must not be used for incidences of suspected cheating during an examination. Please
complete the Academic Misconduct During an Examination Form available in the Information for
Invigilators file.

Module Code(s):

Venue:

Date: Time:

REPORT:

Name: Signature of Invigilator

Name of Invigilator-in-Charge (if different to the above):

Please indicate if form has been copied to the following:

Head of School/Chair of Assessment Board:

CAS Administrator:
Assessment and Awards:

45
Appendix 7: Procedure for Handling Suspected Academic Misconduct during an Examination

Guidance for Invigilators on dealing with suspected academic misconduct (cheating) in an

examination

1. If an invigilator suspects a student of cheating during an examination or having access to

unpermitted material, this should be reported to the Invigilator-in-Charge. The student
should NOT be challenged at this point. The Invigilator-in-Charge should then try to witness
the suspected cheating. If it is the Invigilator-in-Charge who has first observed the
suspected cheating, he/she should ask another experienced invigilator to see if they can
witness what the student is doing.

2. The second invigilator, who is watching the student, should do so discreetly at a distance.

3. If there are two witnesses to the alleged cheating, the Invigilator-in-Charge should
approach the student and tell them that they are suspected of cheating by use of the notice
contained in the Invigilation File for this purpose (see example overleaf). The candidate
must remain behind following the examination. The time of the incident should be noted
on the candidate’s script. The student should then be allowed to complete the examination
in the scheduled timeframe i.e. they will not be permitted any additional time because of
the incident.

4. A student must not be approached unless two invigilators have clearly observed cheating.
If at the end of the examination, the second invigilator has not been able to observe
anything specific but is satisfied that the student was behaving suspiciously, e.g. spending
a lot of time watching the location of the invigilators, the Invigilator-in-Charge may choose
to ask the student to remain behind and talk to them about what was observed.

5. At the end of the examination, if two invigilators have observed cheating, the student’s
script should be collected and the student informed of what has been observed by two
invigilators and that this will be reported to the Head of School. The student should be
informed that it would be in their best interests to co-operate and that their co-operation or
lack of it will be reported.

6. The Invigilator-in-Charge should then ask the student to hand over what they were
observed using. If the student denies that they were using or were in possession of
unpermitted material, the Invigilator-in-Charge may ask certain questions which will
depend on what was observed: e.g.
i. if the student was observed putting notes in their pocket, the student could be
asked to empty their pockets;
ii. if the student appeared to be looking at something written on their hand/arm,
the student could be asked to show their hand/arm, which may mean asking
them to roll up their sleeves.

7. If the student refuses to answer any questions or hand over any material the Invigilator-in-
Charge should inform the student, that the refusal will be noted as part of the report to the
Head of School.

8. At no point should the invigilators make physical contact with a student.

9. The Invigilator-in-Charge should check the student’s desk to ensure that no unpermitted
material is present.

46
10. If the student is found with writing on their person, the Invigilator-in-Charge should
transcribe the material and ask the other invigilator to check that it has been transcribed
correctly.

11. Any unpermitted material should be retained by the Invigilator-in-Charge and the student
should be informed that this will be given to the Examinations Office.

12. All the invigilators who observed the incident should complete a ‘Report of Academic
Misconduct’ form (see example overleaf) and the candidate should countersign the form.
The completed form should be delivered to the Examinations Office.

13. If an Invigilator-in-Charge is unsure of how to deal with an incident, the Examinations Office
should be telephoned for advice (x2448).

47
Example of Notice

PLEASE READ THIS INFORMATION

The invigilators in charge of this examination believe that

you have broken examination regulations. You are
suspected of cheating.

To avoid disturbing the other candidates in this room, the

invigilators will discuss what they have seen with you
when this examination ends. Please remain in your seat.

In the meantime, you may continue to complete the

examination. The invigilator will mark your script to show
that you have been given this notice.

48
 UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL LANCASHIRE

ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT DURING AN EXAMINATION REPORT FORM

Candidate’s Details:

First Name Surname

Student Id/Enrolment Number

School

Examination Details:

Module Code Module Title

Venue

Date Time

Report:

Confiscated material appended: YES/NO

Invigilator’s Name Signature

Incident witnessed by
Signature

Candidate’s Statement:
I acknowledge the details supplied in the above report and I understand that I will be called to
attend an academic misconduct hearing.

Signature

This completed form should be delivered to Assessment and Awards

49
Appendix 8 – Guidance on Wordcounts

Word Count and Marking of Over length Coursework

This guidance covers modules assessed wholly or partly by coursework. It covers coursework
of all sorts, including essays, extended essays, reports, Independent study projects and
dissertations.

Purpose of a word count

The purpose of a word limit is to give all students, across the University, a clear indication of
the maximum length of a piece of assessed written work, the amount of work expected and
therefore how much detail they should go into and how they should allocate time to one piece
of assessed work in relation to others. Writing to set word limits is a skill required within some
professions, as well as an academic skill. Word limits are set appropriate to the assessment
outcomes.

Setting a word count limit

Coursework instructions given within assessments should clearly state a maximum word count
beyond which nothing will be marked. This maximum should include any margin for tolerance
which has been set (ie a word count with + 10% tolerances). If the course work instructions do
not state a tolerance then it does not exist for that coursework. Word count includes everything
in the main body of the text (including headings, tables, citations, quotes, lists, etc.). The list of
references, appendices and footnotes are NOT included in the word count unless it is clearly
stated in the coursework instructions that the module is an exception to this rule.

Appendices should be kept to a minimum and only contain reference materials illustrating and
supporting arguments fully made in the main body of the work. Any other materials included in
appendices, except where specifically requested in the coursework instructions, will not be
marked.

Module Teams should clearly indicate within module information how excessive length will be
addressed and should ensure that all relevant assessments clearly state instructions as
indicated above.

Provision of a word count

Students must provide an accurate word count on their assignment for all coursework
submitted for assessment. Markers should give students the benefit of the doubt and will
regard small undeclared over-runs as genuine errors of calculation, but significant inaccuracies
in declared word counts will be treated as an offence under the Academic Regulations and may
result in further action.

Special provisions
Where work is expected to include significant amounts of non-textual content (e.g. Musical or
mathematical notation or linguistic structure diagrams), specific word count guidance will be
provided for each assignment.

Penalty for exceeding the word limit

There is no regulatory/mandatory penalty for exceeding the word count but students should
be aware that the marker will not include any work after the maximum word limit (including the
tolerance if set for that coursework) has been reached within the allocation of marks. Students
may therefore be penalised for a failure to be concise and for failing to conclude their work
within the word limit specified. Likewise, a failure to meet the maximum word limit may result
in lower marks based on the quality of the
50
work because they may not have included the necessary information required for the
assessment and met the stated learning outcomes.

51