Extract from Teaching and Learning Committee Minutes: 25 October 2000

EXTRACT FROM TEACHING AND LEARNING COMMITTEE MINUTES

7 February 2007

07.33 QUALITY ASSURANCE AGENCY CODE OF PRACTICE FOR ASSURANCE OF ACADEMIC QUALITY AND STANDARDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION: REVISED SECTION 6: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS

The Committee received a commentary on the University’s position against the revised section 6: Assessment of Students of the Code of Practice published in September 2006 (TLC/07/11). The commentary identified changes since the last edition (2000) and outlined how the University addressed the expectations of the Code.

The Committee noted that the Assessment Handbook (April 2003) was being updated to incorporate developments including those relating to internal moderation, plagiarism, APC/EL, regulations and examination procedures. Any matters arising from consideration of the revised section of the Code would also be addressed.

The Committee noted that the new edition of the Code had added ‘monitoring’ to the precept that expected institutions to have effective procedures for designing, approving, monitoring and reviewing the assessment strategies for programmes and awards (precept 1). To assist in this, the Code suggested that trends in results might be analysed for example to consider mark, grade or honours distributions or to identify any relationship between student entry qualifications and assessment outcomes. The Committee acknowledged that current, largely manual and limited, exercises, were resource intensive and that the University might in the near future, through the introduction of the new Student Records System, be in a position to facilitate more analysis of trends. The Committee was very supportive of such a development, although it recognised the need to define and prioritise such activity.

Precept 3, relating to the encouragement by institutions of assessment practice that promoted effective learning, now made specific reference to the possible use of employers, patients and clients in providing part of the feedback to students on their performance.

Precept 9 related to the need for appropriate and timely feedback to students. The particular needs of students studying part-time and/or remotely were now highlighted. The Committee had already identified student feedback as an area which needed further improvement in the University arising from the results of the National Student Survey.

Precept 10 emphasised that everyone involved in the assessment of students should be competent to undertake their roles and responsibilities. AGREED:

i) that the University’s policies, procedures and protocols for the assessment of students were compliant with the revised section of the QAA Code of Practice;

ii) that Faculties continue to ensure that all staff remained competent through staff development and training where necessary;

iii) that the facility to analyse trends would be valuable and its feasibility should be investigated further;

iv) that the feedback section of the Assessment Handbook be updated to include specific reference to the role of employers, patients and clients, part-time and distance learning, and guidance about the point in the module or programme where it is no longer appropriate for a member of staff to continue providing feedback to a student on his/her work.

25 October 2000

00.26 Section on Assessment of Students (TLC/00/8)

The Committee noted that the Code covered both academic and administrative aspects of assessment. Faculties had previously submitted statements of their assessment policy and practice, arising from a report on Subject Review outcomes.

A key proposal in the paper was the compilation of an Assessment Handbook for staff. It would focus on general principles, which should be detailed at the level of the subject. It was agreed that, among these principles, the University should seek to set broad criteria relating to its classification and mark bands which might apply across the University. Some good examples, elaborated at either Faculty or subject level, already existed.

There was also thought to be scope for drawing up a University template setting the minimum standards for module teaching plans, which should address all aspects of assessment. Current examples could be used to create a standard model.

The Committee confirmed that Faculties should be responsible for defining acceptable forms of referencing and citation and advise students accordingly (Precept 3).

Regarding the conduct of Boards of Examiners (Precept 4), the Committee agreed that the Chairman fulfilled the expectation of an independent internal member and that, as all internal examiners were expected to attend, it would be inappropriate to establish a quorum for meetings.

AGREED: i) that an assessment working group be established to consider the form and content of a University-wide assessment handbook, taking account of this section of the QAA Code of Practice;

ii) that a University template for module teaching plans be drawn up;

2 iii) that Faculties be asked to review the proportion of pre-final level results contributing to overall honours degree classifications, in order to ensure that there was a rationale for any variations between courses within subjects; iv) that it be recommended to Senate that Regulations Governing Examinations in Courses of Study be amended as follows:

Regulation 2

Add “Members of the board are required to declare personal interest, involvement or relationship with a student being assessed to the Chairman of the board.”

Regulation 3

Add “Internal examiners are required to inform their head of school and the course director of any personal interest, involvement or relationship with a student being assessed.”

Regulation 4

Add “All assessed work shall be available to the board.”

Regulation 26: Offences in Connection with Examinations and Other Forms of Assessment

Add “collusion” and “use of inadmissible material” to the list of examples of offences.