Search

Computer Science / Internal / Staff / Handbook / Assessment3 3

• School of Computer Science
• Academic Advisor Lists
• Assessment Regulations
• College Website
• Committee Minutes
• Degree Programmes
• E-mail Lists
• Lecture Cancellation Form
• Lecture Rooms
• Modules
• Project Database
• Research Committee
• Student Information Lookup
• Staff Calendar
• Staff Handbook
• Telephone Directory
• Timetables
• Health & Safety

Original Approved:	6 Feb 2008
Original Author(s):	P Coxhead
Link to Previous Version:	Version 3.2
Relevant University documentation:	University Regulations Code of Practice on Taught Programme and Module Assessment Code of Practice on the External Examiner System for First Degrees and Taught Masters Programmes University diary for academic year Code of Practice for Student Development and Support in Schools Code of Practice on Plagiarism
Relevant College documentation	College Guidance on the Handling of Assessed Work and Exam Scripts
Relevant School documentation	Undergraduate Examinations Board: Terms of Reference; MSc Examinations Board: Terms of Reference Exam paper templates (Word and LaTeX) Adjusting Marks Module Mark Adjustment Form (Word) Module Mark Adjustment Form (PDF) See also Monitoring Student Progression and Achievement, Continuous Assessment: Summary

Version Number	Notes on Changes	Author(s)	Date
2.0	Encryption	L Ewers	4 February 2009
2.1	Order of subheadings in §3	L Ewers	30 April 2009
2.2	Removed requirement of choice of questions in Level H/M exam papers (§2.1)	L Ewers	30 April 2009
2.3	Penalties for late submission of coursework (§1.1)	L Ewers	24 August 2010
2.4	Deadlines for setting exam papers (§2.1)	L Ewers	18 January 2011
2.5	Minor change to wording of penalties for late submission of coursework (§1.1)	L Ewers	2 February 2011
3.0	New paragraph on feedback to students	L Ewers	23 February 2011
3.1	Scripts to be obtained from the School Office only (§3.1)	L Ewers	6 May 2011
3.2	Abolishment of preliminary exam boards for Years 1/2; Scatterplots (Module Board)	L Ewers	19 October 2011
3.3	Abolishment of substitute panels for exam boards (§6.2)	L Ewers	9 March 2012

Contents

• 0. Terminology
• 1. Continuous Assessment
• • 1.1 Setting
  • 1.2 Anonymous Marking
  • 1.3 Submission
  • 1.4 Extensions
  • 1.5 Returning Marked Work
• 2. Examinations
• • 2.1 Setting exam papers
  • 2.2 Marking
• 3. Marking Guidelines
• • 3.1 Obtaining the scripts
  • 3.2 How to mark
  • 3.3 Marking by people other than Teaching Staff
  • 3.4 Processing Marks for Modules with Examinations
  • 3.5 How to check
  • 3.6 Processing Marks for Continuous Assessment
  • 3.7 Attendance at exams
• 4. Assessment Standards Monitoring by the QAEC
• 5. Mitigations and the Mitigation Panel
• 6. Examination Boards
• • 6.1 Timetable of events
  • 6.2 Examiners' meetings
• 7. Feedback to Students on examinations
• 8. Appeals Panel
• 9. Procedures for dealing with Plagiarism
• 10. Maintaining Assessment Standards

0. Terminology

Examiner refers to a person who is responsible for setting any part of an assessment, e.g. a formal examination, a class test or a piece of continuous assessment. An examiner must be a member of academic staff. A module may have more than one examiner.

Module Examiner The University's Code of Practice on Taught Programme and Module Assessment requires there to be a single academic member of staff to be responsible for each examination paper. Within the School, there will be a single Module Examiner for a module. This will be:

• the person described as the Coordinator in the Syllabus web page OR
• the first person listed as a Module Lecturer if there is no defined Module Coordinator.

In the case of a linked pair of modules where no Coordinator is given, the Module Examiner for the second semester module is responsible for collating marks for both modules. (The term 'Module Leader' is widely used in other parts of the university.)

Marker refers to a person who is charged with marking any part of an assessment. A marker may or may not be an examiner (and thus may or may not be a member of academic staff). A piece of assessment may have more than one marker.

Class and Classification as used in this document refers not only to the traditional First, Upper Second, Lower Second and Third of undergraduate Honours degrees, but also to lower awards, such as Pass, Diploma of Higher Education and Certificate of Higher Education, and also to the categories used in the award of MSc degrees (Distinction, Merit, Pass and Postgraduate Diploma).

1. Continuous Assessment

The separate document Continuous Assessment: Summary summarizes the processing of Continuous Assessment.

1.1 Setting

In setting continuous assessment/coursework, the possibility of plagiarism and cheating must be kept in mind.

• Assessments should be designed to reduce the risk of this happening, e.g. regularly varying written assignments.
• Be aware that weaker students are more likely to plagiarise; they should not be allowed to get so far behind that they are tempted to cheat simply to catch up.
• Lecturers should make clear the extent to which group discussion is permissible in a module -- the balance between mutually beneficial group learning and collusion is difficult.
• Procedures to detect and respond to evidence of plagiarism or cheating should be in place and students should be made aware of this.

All continuous assessment specifications should make clear:

1. The contribution of the work to the module mark.
2. The hand-in date and method.
3. The principles that will be employed in marking, where these are not obvious. For example, for essay-type continuous assessment, indicative descriptions of work corresponding to degree classes could be given.
4. The penalty for lateness (see below).
5. The target length of time from the hand-in date to return of the marked work (or just the mark where work is not returned). Note that if no such date is given, the default for the School is two weeks (see 1.5 Returning Marked Work below).

The procedure in detail for setting assessed work is as follows:

1. The Syllabus for each module specifies the overall contribution of continuous assessment to assessment. Students must be informed in writing of the contribution, hand-in date, hand-in method and lateness penalty for each separate piece of work, ideally in advance, but at the latest when the work is given out. Hand-in dates should chosen so that no activity requiring co-operation between students (e.g. a team work exercise) takes place during the vacation [Cases where hand-in is required in Term 3 are under review].
2. The examiner must specify for each assignment the penalties which apply for late submissions. There are two possible schemes:
   • A mark of 0 is given for late assignments.
   • A penalty of 5% will be imposed for each day that the assignment is late until 0 is reached. For example, a mark of 67% would become 62% on day one, 57% on day two, and so on. The days counted do not include weekends, public and University closed days.
3. In all cases students must be clearly informed in advance of hand-in dates and procedures. See also below under Submission.
4. Where continuous assessment forms 50% or more of the overall assessment for a module, a copy of the continuous assessment specifications will be sent to the External Examiners for comment (retrospective in the case of work already set) along with examination papers.
5. Where continuous assessment forms 50% or more of the overall assessment for a module, it is moderated in a similar way to examination scripts. Samples of marked assessments should be copied and added to the Module Box. The samples should cover at least half of the total continuous assessment marks available and be distributed across the range of marks (e.g. one for each degree classification, including Fail). Prior to the Examination Board meeting, the Module Reviewer should use the appropriate form to comment on the samples of work placed in the Module Box. The samples and the comments are then made available to the External Examiner.
6. After the exams are over, QAEC meets to check common standards of continuous assessment and suggests changes to examiners.

Where a module has examinations and continuous assessment, the Syllabus must describe what happens for September resits. There are three possibilities:

1. The resit is based only on the supplementary examination.
2. The resit is based on the supplementary examination plus the original continuous assessment mark.
3. New continuous assessment is set.

See also 3.6 Processing Marks for Continuous Assessment and 8 Procedures for dealing with Plagiarism.

1.2 Anonymous Marking

The University's Undergraduate Assessment Protocols require anonymous marking where practicable. The University also requires students' marks to be kept confidential. School policy is as follows.

• Anonymously marked work should be the norm unless impracticable.
• Work which is not marked anonymously is permitted provided that the following criteria are met. The work must contribute to no more than 20% of the assessment for the module as a whole, or must involve a demonstration, presentation or other staff-student interaction so that anonymity is impracticable, or must involve only objective marking (e.g. multiple-choice questions).

It is essential that students EITHER put their names (or equivalents) on continuous assessment OR their University ID numbers, but not both. Students are informed of this requirement in prominent notices near the School Office. The requirement should also be reinforced by the examiner.

1.3 Submission

Principles:

• Receipts, electronic or paper, should be issued where a piece of work is worth 20% or more of the module mark.
• Anonymous marking should be employed as far as possible, particularly for pieces of work worth more than 20% of the module mark.
• Personal identification details (e.g. name, log-in name) and University registration number should never appear together, in order to preserve the confidentiality of registration number.

Students must be clearly informed in advance of the submission date and submission procedures for all continuous assessment. 12 noon is the standard submission time. It must be used whenever the School Office is involved and is recommended in all other cases.

In order for the School Office to be able to process continuous assessment, a 'slot' must be booked in advance, to avoid excessive workload in any given week. Please contact Julie Heathcote as soon as possible. Hand-in dates may have to be moved if clashes occur.

Special procedures for submission and return are provided for projects and miniprojects. Other work that is not to be marked anonymously must not be submitted or returned via the School Office, since procedures cannot keep marks anonymous from other students when the work contains names.

Continuous assessment which is marked anonymously and handed in via the School Office must have on it the standard School cover sheet. The declaration on the cover sheet regarding plagiarism must be signed by the student. The student's name is only visible on the part of the cover sheet which is retained by the School Office. The cover sheet given to the examiner will only have University ID number on it.

Written/printed components of continuous assessment which are marked anonymously should be submitted via the Reception of the School Office. The standard cover sheet enables receipts to be issued and a copy kept for School records.

1.4 Extensions

This section is out of date and is currently being reviewed.

A student may request mitigation for continuous assessment (e.g. for an extension to the hand-in date or for the piece of work to be disregarded).

• Requests for extensions must be made before the work is due to be handed in. Requests received later will only be accepted when there are sound reasons as to why the request could not have been made in time (e.g. the student has been hospitalized).
• Extensions affecting individual students can only be granted with authorization by a member of the Welfare Team, who will require a written submission by the student on a standard form, with supporting evidence where appropriate. The submission will detail all modules affected by the circumstances reported.
• The member of the Welfare Team will advise the member of staff concerned that an extension up to a specified length of time is acceptable based on the mitigating circumstances. However, depending on the published conditions for late submissions for that piece of work (see above), the member of staff can decide to grant less time or refuse an extension, instead allowing the work to be disregarded, provided that the Examiner is satisfied that the Learning Outcomes of the module have been adequately assessed.
• This policy applies also to projects and miniprojects.

1.5 Returning Marked Work

Assignments are marked and returned as soon as possible. (Note the need in some cases to keep copies of samples as explained above.)

• The module examiner should normally aim to return marks within two weeks (10 working days) of the final hand-in date. The intended date of return should be given on all continuous assessment specifications.
• If the announced date of return cannot be met, students should be informed of the intended date for marking and return (normally by e-mail to the module mailing list). The announcement should be copied to the QA Secretary (Julie Heathcote) for the attention of the Chair of Teaching Committee and for the module box.
• A log should be kept of all the continuous assessment hand-in and return dates; the log should be included in your module box at the end of the semester. (For modules with multiple sections/tutorial groups, a separate log should be kept for each section.)
• Appropriate feedback should be provided, e.g. by comments on individual pieces of work or via solutions to exercises.

There are a number of ways of returning marked work. In all cases it is a University requirement that a student is not able to see another student's mark.

• Anonymously marked work may be returned via the School Office.
• Mark which is not marked anonymously must be returned individually, either by a member of staff or by a demonstrator.

2. Examinations

2.1 Setting exam papers

1. The examiner writes the paper and a mark scheme/model answers, for both the sessional (main) and the supplementary (resit) exam (where required). Deadline: Please refer to the Examination Diary Dates for the current year. Both a Microsoft Word template and a LaTeX template are available.
   • All 10 credit modules have a maximum examination length of 1.5 hours. Where a 20 credit module consists of two 10 credit components taught separately, the default is a 3 hour examination otherwise the default is a 2 hour examination.
   • Papers should show percentage marks for each question or part of a question and these must be adhered to in marking.
   • The mark scheme should further break down assigned marks, where necessary, to within 5-10%, although examiners are free to make documented adjustments to this breakdown based on experience during marking.
   • The mark scheme should demonstrate the relationship between questions and the Learning Outcomes for the module and also indicate which questions or parts of questions are 'creative' (i.e. not simply routine book work or standard exercises).
   • Exam papers are confidential. They need to be kept under lock and key and stored only in encrypted form on a computer or external disks. The School uses truecrypt to perform encryption. Instructions how to use it may be found here. Exam papers must be submitted in encrypted form to School Office, which will decrypt them using the passphrase entered by the setter.
2. The Module Reviewer checks the paper; deadline: Please refer to the Examination Diary Dates for the current year. Where changes are required, this process may involve one or more cycles between the examiner and the Module Reviewer. QAEC meets to look at papers to check for adherence to School standards; requests for changes are forwarded to the examiner and checked. Papers are then sent to External Examiner(s); requests for changes are forwarded to the examiner and checked by an QAEC member. Throughout, the process of checking is defined in detail by the cover sheet attached to the examination paper, which provides an 'audit trail'.
3. All deadlines are set in order to meet the University deadline for the submission of exam papers.

2.2 Marking

This process is driven by the very tight deadlines for entering marks in the central system.

1. The examiner can obtain details of students taking the module from the School Office.
2. The examiner marks the scripts. Detailed instructions are given in Section 3, Marking Guidelines.
3. The examiner returns marks to the School Office on a signed mark list. Deadline: one week after the examination has been sat.
4. Afterwards the exam goes for checking. The checker, who will be drawn from postgraduate students and staff and a list of people especially appointed for this task, checks the printed copy against the exam scripts and signs it. In particular the checker ensures that the whole script has been marked and that the transcription and additions are correct. Errors are reported back to the examiner and entered on paper and on disk by the examiner.
5. The next step is the moderation by the Module Reviewer, who is required to look at the marking of one script from each degree classification. Any queries will be raised with the examiner for the paper first; if they cannot be resolved, they will be forwarded to the internal examiners' meeting. A cover sheet will be attached to this process. Deadline: during Week 6 of Term 3 (one week before the deadline for entry of marks into the central University system for collecting exam marks -- the 'EMS' or 'Electronic Mark Collection System'). NB: some examinations may not take place until the end of Week 6, but for processing to be completed in time, the majority of checked and moderated marks must be in by the deadline.
6. The marked and checked scripts will be made available to students for inspection during the exam period. There will be one session only per year group. Before the session the list of marks for the relevant modules will be posted on the notice board. Complaints have to be made in writing on a special form, and will be passed on directly to the examiner for the paper.
7. The School Office then takes the marks, transfers the data to Electronic Mark Collection System and checks the data in the system against the examiner's marks.

3. Marking Guidelines

3.1 Obtaining the scripts

You will be able to pick up your scripts from the School Office.

If a paper has several examiners, the sections will be separated by the School Office staff. Each section will be given to the examiner responsible for that part of the module.

Note: In contrast to previous years, you will no longer be able to collect scripts directly from examination venues.

3.2 How to mark

• Use a red pen for marking
• Put a red line through each page (or part page) as you mark it.
• Component marks should be written in the left-hand margin of the page, either as a single number or as a fraction of the possible marks for that component (e.g. either 3 or 3/4 is acceptable). Do not circle these component marks.
• Candidates who have been instructed to choose and answer only one or more parts of an assessment (which might be a paper or a question), sometimes answer more than is required. If no information has been given as to what will happen in this case, then the examiner is free EITHER to mark the parts in the order that they were answered until the required number of parts has been marked OR to mark all the parts answered and choose the best to form the total. However, the same approach must be applied to all candidates in this position.
• The total mark for the question should be written in the margin at the end of the question, but circled to indicate that it is a total mark. Needless to say, the component mark should add up to the total mark. The total mark can be written either as a single number or as a fraction of the possible marks for that question (e.g. either 21 or 21/34).
• The total mark for the question is copied to the front cover of the answer book.

3.3 Marking by people other than Teaching Staff

Research Staff and students who act as Demonstrators or Teaching Assistants may mark exam papers or continuous assessment contributing to module marks, but cannot act as examiners (see also 3.3.3 Tutoring and Demonstrating). This means that the examiner must provide detailed marking schemes, moderate marks and accept full responsibility for the final mark. If a problem is discovered, the examiner may need to moderate all scripts from a particular marker. PhD students are only allowed to mark first-year exams.

3.4 Processing Marks for Modules with Examinations

Marks should be returned in printed form, on a signed mark list.

If marks are computed from the components in any way other than by simple addition, the formula for computing the final mark must be clearly written on the first mark sheet for the benefit of the checker, External Examiner, etc. Similarly if marks are adjusted to give a final mark which is not simply the aggregate of the components, the formula used must be clearly written on the mark sheets. (See Adjusting Marks for some further guidance on the process of adjusting marks.) A brief explanation of the reason for the adjustment must be made available for the Examination Board and the External Examiners.

The office staff will then pass the scripts and mark sheets for the complete examinations to the checker (they cannot be checked until all parts are complete and a final mark has been computed). Do not pass scripts directly to the checker or moderator.

The School will normally employ clerical staff as checkers. The checker checks the scripts and the mark sheets and when satisfied that all are correct, signs and dates each page of the mark sheets, and returns them to the School Office. If any errors are found, the corrections should clearly marked in green ink on both the exam paper as well as mark sheet or on the printed version of the spreadsheet and the relevant Examiner notified to confirm the corrections.

After the checking the moderator (normally the module reviewer) does moderation of the marking. In particular, the moderator looks at the marking of one script of each degree classification. Any queries will be raised with the examiner for the paper first; if they cannot be resolved, they will be forwarded to the internal examiners' meeting. A cover sheet will be attached to document this process.

The School does not use any form of double-marking, for two reasons: firstly, most examinations are marked according to relatively objective criteria, rather than being, e.g., subjective essay-based assessments; secondly, resources do not permit this to be done in the time scale available for examination marking.

3.5 How to check

• Use a green pen for checking.
• The checker checks that all pages have been marked and indicates this by ticking each page or part page.
• The checker checks also that the additions are correct, and indicates this by ticking all numbers on the front page.
• The checker makes sure that all marks are correctly transcribed to the spreadsheet, and that the calculations on the spreadsheet are correct. This is indicated by ticking each final mark.

3.6 Processing Marks for Continuous Assessment

There is no checker for continuous assessment. The procedure as for written examinations is followed, but all the steps involving the checker are removed.

Checked marks for all modules with 100% continuous assessment should be given to the School Office by the end of Week 2 of Term 3. All other continuous assessment marking should be complete by this date.

3.7 Attendance at exams

Please note that all examiners must be available (either to invigilate or at the end of a telephone line) during their examinations in case queries arise. You must make special arrangements for someone to stand in for you if you cannot be present. If you will not be contactable by phone on your normal phone number, then the name and the telephone number of a stand-in should be notified to the Examinations Office (with a copy to the School Office please). For each exam for the first 15 minutes at least one member of teaching staff from the School needs to be present.

4. Assessment Standards Monitoring by the QAEC

Assessment standards monitoring will be carried out by the Quality Assurance & Enhancement Committee (QAEC), with the Head of Quality Assurance & Enhancement as Chair. This committee reports to the College QAEC. Students are not involved because this committee deals with examination papers before they are taken. The committee monitors assessment in the School on a global basis. In particular, it ensures that different assessments are of a comparable standard, and propagates good practice in examination papers and continuous assessment.

A meeting of QAEC will take place directly before the examination papers are considered by the External Examiners. In addition to the examination papers, examiners must provide model answers, brief specifications of which elements are meant to be creative or challenging, and linkages to module learning outcomes. Several modules are assigned to each member of the committee. Each examination paper is checked for having a standard comparable to the other papers, and for spelling and layout. Key points to be checked include:

• coverage of module content
• adequacy of the material for the length of the examination
• variations in the techniques required for different questions
• a good mixture of routine questions and more challenging and creative questions
• linkage to learning outcomes
• a clear specification of the marking criteria.

Changes can be requested on the associated form for each examination. QAEC will report any matters of general concern to other bodies as appropriate.

Another meeting of QAEC takes place at the beginning of the summer vacation. Its purpose is to monitor continuous assessment, in particular where this forms 50% or more of the assessment for the module. The mechanism is roughly the same as for the written examinations, with several modules assigned to each committee member. The main criteria for the assessments are that:

• the quantity of work involved should be reasonable
• the assessment should be suitable for independent but guided work
• the assessment should be linked to the learning outcomes of the module
• there should be a clear specification of the marking criteria.

Changes can be requested, and a note will be made in the module box. Normally the check whether the changes have been done will take place at the next review meeting, after the module has been given again, but in more serious cases the QAEC monitor may request that the Assessment Specification is shown to the monitor before it is handed out to the students. Again, QAEC will report any matters of general concern to other bodies as appropriate.

5. Mitigations and the Mitigation Panel

This section is out of date and is currently being reviewed.

Students have to submit written evidence of mitigating circumstances by a fixed date following the end of the examination period(s) and before the Mitigation Panel meets.

The functions of the Mitigation Panel are:

• To review all cases of mitigating circumstances that have been collated and put forward by the Mitigations Officer.
• To discuss all cases, and grade them according to severity and their likely impact on the academic performance of the student.
• To record their decisions and pass them to the relevant Examination Board; note that details of mitigating circumstances must not be given to the Examination Board.

External Examiners have the right to attend meetings of the Mitigation Panel, but are not required to do so. All documentation produced by or for the Mitigation Panel, as well as the decisions taken by the Panel will be made available for the scrutiny of the External Examiners.

The Panel must provide feedback on their considerations, but not the results of mitigation, should a student request it. This feedback should be a statement confirming that the mitigation has been considered by the full Mitigation Panel and that the recommendation was passed to the Examination Board in accordance with the University's procedure.

Membership:

• Senior Tutor (chair).
• Welfare Tutor.
• Up to two further members of the Welfare Team.
• One member of the corresponding exam board to be present at any discussion of undergraduate or MSc students respectively.

For current membership, see 2.3 Officers and Committees.

Where mitigating circumstances are to be taken into account, normally one of the following actions will be recommended to the Examination Board:

• If the mitigating circumstances concern continuous assessment comprising up to 50% of the module mark, the student's module mark may be based on the rest of the assessment for the module.
• If the mitigating circumstances affect a module which the student has failed, and for which repeating or resitting is allowed, the student may repeat or resit the module as if for the occasion on which the failure took place.
• In the case of years which count towards the final degree classification, the year average (and hence degree classification) may be computed based only on modules not affected by the mitigation, assuming that these make up a significant proportion of the required credits. Affected modules may be regarded as counting to the credit total, even if failed.
• In the case of mitigating circumstances which have a widespread effect, the recommended degree classification of a student may be different from that indicated by average mark and/or credit totals. Only very exceptionally would it be raised by more than one class.

6. Examination Boards

6.1 Timetable of events

1. Prior to meetings of Examination Boards, the Extenuating Circumstances Panel meets to address extenuating circumstances.
2. In the case of the final year undergraduate Examination Board, a preliminary meeting of the Board without External Examiners takes place before the main Board meeting (normally on Monday of Week 8 of Term 3). This meeting discusses problem cases and suggests recommendations. This meeting acts as a progress meeting as well, and looks also at the distribution of marks. In exceptional cases the meeting may refer marks for whole modules to examiners for possible re-scaling.
3. The formal Examination Board, with External Examiners present where final awards are being made, ratifies marks, progress decisions and degree classifications. Matters arising will be noted and referred to Teaching Committee, School Committee or curriculum review meetings as appropriate. (The undergraduate Board is normally scheduled for Tuesday of Week 8.) For further details see §6.2 below.
4. After receipt of the External Examiners' reports, Teaching Committee approves a written response, normally via its subcommittee, the Assessment Standards Monitoring Group.

6.2 Examiners' meetings

Internal membership of Examination Boards for programmes operated by the School is determined by School Committee. The Examinations Officer is responsible for obtaining suggestions for the appointment of External Examiners and contacting them. Appointment is made via University-mandated procedures.

Two separate boards will be appointed for undergraduate and MSc programmes respectively. For most details of their composition and functions, see Undergraduate Examinations Board: Terms of Reference and MSc Examinations Board: Terms of Reference. The composition of current Boards will be found in 2.3 Officers and Committees.

Additional information/procedures:

• Absence from an Examination Board must be authorized by the Head of School.
• If an examiner is absent, it is their responsibility to arrange for cover.
• Recommendations will be prepared and presented by the Examinations Officer or Deputy. Signed attendance sheets of the meeting are kept, as are brief formal records of discussions and decisions. Normally two members of support staff will take notes at meetings. The Chair is responsible for ensuring that business is conducted in such a way that accurate records can be kept.

See above for mitigation.

See also the separate section on Project Assessment.

7. Feedback to Students on examinations

The School's main procedures for giving feedback to students on examinations are:

1. In order to provide "generic" feedback on the students' performance on each examination question, lecturers should send an email to the module group giving a brief guide to how well the questions were answered (in general terms), and what were the typical problems. This email is to be sent AFTER the final examination and BEFORE the examination script viewing. The emails will be archived by the Academic Administrator for quality assurance purposes.
2. The School provides an opportunity for all students to view marked examination scripts after the final examination and before the Examination Boards.
3. In order to provide constructive individual feedback to students who have failed and will have to do a resit or repeat, lecturers must provide office hours during the last week of term after the appropriate Examination Boards. These office hours should be advertised to the students in the module group as an opportunity to discuss preparation for the resit if they wish to do so.

8. Appeals Panel

Following an examination board, students may submit an appeal to the University, using the process described in the Students Handbook. When an appeal comes back to the School, in order to ensure fairness and consistency, it will be dealt with by an Appeals Panel consisting of:

• the Chair of the Mitigation Panel
• the Chair of the relevant Examination Board (undergraduate or MSc)
• the Examinations Officer.

The panel will decide whether to accept or reject the appeal on behalf of the School. The School's response will be completed by the Examination Board Chair with the assistance of the School Office.

9. Procedures for dealing with Plagiarism

Two general principles apply to penalties imposed for cheating/plagiarism within the School:

1. the penalty imposed within the School is limited to 0 for the module
2. subject to (1), in repeated or serious cases the penalty should exceed the loss in marks which would have occurred by simply not submitting that part of the work in which cheating/plagiarism occurred (so as to apply a 'positive penalty' for cheating as opposed to non-submission).

The procedure for dealing with cases of cheating/plagiarism is as follows.

Where a member of staff considers that a student's work contains plagiarised material, they will first determine the level of seriousness. A number of factors will be taken into account in this initial assessment, including:

• the proportion of the assignment affected;
• the academic level;
• any previous recorded instance of plagiarism.

Advice should be sought where necessary from the Senior Tutor.

The member of staff who discovers a suspected case of cheating/plagiarism may deal with it directly (with a report to the Senior Tutor) if:

• the degree is minor (e.g. affecting one or two paragraphs only in an essay or classes in a Java program) AND
• the student is a first-year or in the early stages of a postgraduate degree AND
• it is a first offence.

In such a case, the student will be given tutorial advice by the lecturer. If appropriate, the student may be asked to re-submit the work which will receive a mark capped at the pass mark. The student will be asked to sign a letter acknowledging the plagiarism, and promising not to repeat the offence. No further punitive action will be taken.

Where a member of academic staff considers that the instance of plagiarism is such that it is likely to be dealt with punitively, they should consult with the Senior Tutor and a joint decision should be taken on any further action. If it is decided that further action is necessary, then the Senior Tutor will initiate formal procedures as described in the University Code of Practice on Plagiarism.

10. Maintaining Assessment Standards

Checking and maintaining the standard of assessments is of great importance to the School. Some of the detailed procedures are described elsewhere in this handbook; this section gives a summary overview.

1. Every module has a reviewer (listed at http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/resources/modules/). As explained above, the reviewer is responsible for checking assessment materials and moderating module marks. 'Moderating' does not mean re-marking, but taking a sample of students across the range of marks for examinations (plus continuous assessment where this forms more than 50% of the module mark), and checking that marking procedures and mark schemes have been followed correctly. Any unresolved concerns will be reported to the Examination Board.
2. Students have the opportunity to view marked examination scripts and raise any apparent errors in marking (but not issues of academic judgement -- see 6 below).
3. Any concerns expressed by students over the marking of particular modules will be brought to the attention of the relevant Examination Board.
4. Statistical information is prepared for each module. In recent years, this has usually taken the form of a scatterplot for each module, plotting the marks obtained by each student who took that module against the student's average mark overall. The purpose of any analysis is to identify modules in which marks are noticeably out of line with overall average marks. The initial marks in the scatter plots should all be presented as non adjusted marks. The analysis is normally considered by a Module Board meeting before the main Examination Board meetings. Module examiners are not automatically asked to reconsider their marks (perhaps by re-scaling) just because the analysis looks wrong, since there are other factors to consider (the nature of the module, what the failure rate is, etc.). Module examiners may agree to adjust marks both upwards and downwards, and have regularly done so. (For some guidance on adjusting marks, see Adjusting Marks.)
5. The External Examiners have particular responsibility for ensuring comparability of standards across universities. They will have seen and commented on all examination papers (and also continuous assessment where this forms more than 50% of the module mark). Marked work is made available to them so they can comment on the assessment of individual modules, and hence influence decisions made.
6. Assessment is not an exact science; achievement in an academic subject, particularly in higher education, cannot be measured with the precision to which height or weight can be measured. In the end the Examination Board has to make a decision based on academic judgement. Students have no right of appeal against academic judgement, only against failures of procedure.