APPENDIX TO:

Assessment policies for undergraduate and taught postgraduate awards
of the University of Essex

Marking Policy for Undergraduate and Taught Postgraduate Work

The policy applies to all taught course students (i.e. students on sub-degree awards, Undergraduate awards and Taught Postgraduate awards). 

The policy applies to assessment contributing to a mark at all levels, including the bridging year, year zero, year one, as well as the mark appearing on the Examination Board grids from which a student's final degree classification is derived.

A list of definitions and marking policies is given below, followed by a table showing the requirements applied to different forms of assessment. Where a particular mode of assessment requires double-marking the requirements outlined in the policy are a minimum. Departments
can double-mark more work if they wish, or if they are required to do so by a professional body.

A         Definitions

A1)     Single Marking

 This is self-explanatory.

Students still have the right to request that the work is re-marked if they are unhappy with the original mark (see  section C below). 

A2)    Single Marking Using a Marking Schedule or OMR

This is usually found in science departments.  Normally there would be some kind of clerical check to ensure that the marks have been added up correctly, and assigned to the correct candidates where OMR is used.  Where marking schedules are used for exams beyond the first year, the marking schedules must be sent with draft exam papers to the External Examiner for comments and approval. 

A3)    Single Marking with Moderation

Moderation must take place where the original marker is a GTA or recently appointed member of staff, or where a team of markers is involved in marking coursework.  Students have the right to request that the work is re-marked if they are unhappy with the original mark and their work has not already been moderated (see section C below). 

 Here are two examples of how moderation could be carried out by departments:

 i)          Moderation by an Individual Member of Staff

This is where a second marker samples the work to see whether it has been marked at an appropriate standard.  This form of marking would be appropriate where the first marker is a GTA or a recently appointed member of staff.  In the case of a recently appointed member of staff it is up to the department to establish an appropriate mechanism for moderating his or her work, and for determining how long the moderation process needs to continue.

A moderator would not change the individual marks for the work, but would liaise with the first marker if s/he believed that the marks were not at the correct level, with a view to the first marker reviewing and adjusting the marking.  In the case of a major discrepancy it might be necessary for all the work to be second marked.

Moderation should take place before the work is returned to students so that any problems with the level of marking can be resolved at the time. 

 ii)         Holding a Moderation Meeting for a Team of Markers

Holding a moderation or standardisation meeting for a team of markers would be suitable where there are multiple staff involved in marking coursework.   The form can vary, particularly depending on the numbers of teachers involved.  It could include, for example, blind marking of sample scripts by all the teachers and a discussion of how they reached their decisions and why.

A4)    Second Marking

This is where a second marker marks the work but has access to the first marker’s marks and/or comments.  Marks must be reconciled – see section D below.

A5)    Blind Double Marking

This is where two markers mark the work independently without access to each other’s marks or comments about the work.  Marks must be reconciled – see section D below.

A6)    Monitored Assessment

This is all assessment carried out under invigilation or supervision – for example: examinations, multiple-choice tests, time-controlled essays, open-book essays, presentations, performances, group discussions.

A7)    Unmonitored Assessment

This is assessment that that is written in a student’s own time – for example: essays, journal articles, lab reports.

A8)   Performance-based Coursework with Non-permanent Output

This is coursework such as presentations, acting and dance, where the student does not provide an output capable of being shown to the external examiner. (A presentation where output such as a PowerPoint presentation is submitted would still count as performance-based coursework with non-permanent output, unless the key learning outcome being assessed is academic content rather than presentation skill.)

B        Marking Policies

B1)    Assessment Strategy (requirement of all departments)

Departments should develop an assessment strategy for each course, or set of courses, for approval in the annual monitoring process. The assessment strategy should address the following issues:

• Diversity of assessment within a course;
• Coverage of module learning outcomes by assessment methods;
• The balance between monitored and unmonitored assessment;
• Approaches to prevent and detect plagiarism in assessment;
• Professional Body Requirements, if appropriate;

         and in cases of Departments proposing to have modules assessed by 100% coursework: 

• Appropriate use of the academic year;
• Approaches to assessment for the discipline at other comparable institutions.

B2)    Assessment of Performance-based Coursework (including oral presentations)

Performance-based assessment with a permanent output, capable of being shown to the External Examiner should be subject to the normal single marking policy for essays/assignments, but only where the permanent output relates directly to the assessment criteria. For example, a presentation where output such as a PowerPoint document is submitted would still count as performance-based coursework with non-permanent output, unless a learning outcome being assessed is academic content rather than presentation skill.

Performance-based assessment with a non-permanent output worth up to and including 40% of a module may be single marked. Where this type of assessment contributes to more than 40% of a module, work must be either double-marked, team marked, video/audio recorded or attended by the External Examiner based on 100% coverage of the whole cohort.

B3)    Assessment of Group Work

Group work with a permanent output should be subject to the normal single marking policy for essays/assignments.

Group work with a non-permanent output should be subject to the policy for the assessment of performance-based coursework. 

The maximum amount that a joint mark (where a single group mark is derived from people working together in a group) can contribute to a single module is 25%.

B4)   Marks for Participation

Marks for participation may contribute no more than 5 percent of the overall mark a module and the marks should relate to a module learning outcome.

B5)   Moderation of Work-based Leaning/Placement

The University publishes guidelines on work-based learning which state that ‘the assessment of work-based learning/placement should be subject to the normal departmental procedures in respect of moderation and external examining’. 

B6)    Moderation of Study Abroad Work

The University should take the mark awarded by the host institution and use the established conversion tables to convert the mark to the standard University scale. The External Examiner should have oversight of the marks awarded by a host institution and the conversion used. The External Examiner should be invited to provide comment, through his/her report, if he/she observes any anomalies between the converted marks and the rest of the students’ marks profiles.

C       Requests from students to have their work re-marked

Where coursework has a permanent output and is single marked, students have the right to request formal re-marking of a piece of work if they are unhappy with the original mark, unless the work has already been through a moderation process.   

When work is re-marked, it must be second or blind double marked by another member of staff.  The marks must be reconciled – see section D below. Departments must publish their policy on how students can request re-marking, and they must warn students that marks can go down as well as up.  Departments are advised to set a deadline for students to submit their requests for re-marking.  Departments can determine the appropriate level of feedback to give the student on the re-marked work. 

Students cannot request that their exams are re-marked.   

D        Reconciliation of Marks  

Where two members of staff are involved in marking a piece of work, the markers should make every effort to agree a mark, rather than merely averaging the two marks.  Departments must keep a full record of both individual and agreed marks for all work which is second or blind double marked.

Where the two internal markers are unable to reach agreement, the department should make every effort to resolve the matter internally, for example by involving a third person to arbitrate or, if necessary, to act as a third marker. Work should only be sent to an External Examiner, who will be asked to arbitrate, in exceptional circumstances. The External must be given access to written comments from internal markers on the piece(s) of work involved. 

E         The Use of Internal and External Staff for Marking 

E1)     Examination Marking by GTAs

It is generally desirable that examinations should be marked by permanent teaching staff. Where it is necessary for graduate students to undertake this role, the following policy applies:

                             i. A graduate student should be employed to mark examinations only when the individual has taught the whole or a significant part of the module.  

                             ii. Permission to employ a graduate student for marking must be sought in advance from the relevant Dean, on the basis of a case made by the Head of Department or partner institution, indicating the monitoring arrangements proposed. There is an application form which must be completed and submitted to the relevant Dean.

E2)    Coursework Marking by GTAs

It is generally desirable that coursework should be marked by permanent teaching staff. Where it is necessary for graduate students to undertake this role, the following policy applies:

i. A graduate student should be employed to mark coursework only when the individual has taught/demonstrated a relevant part of the module in the current or previous academic year(s) or the relevant Dean has accepted a case made by the Head of Department on the competency of the graduate student.

E3)     The Role of the External Examiner

Unless the External has been specifically sent work to arbitrate on a dispute between internal markers, the External’s role will be as a moderator. Externals should not act as second markers.   In moderating student work the Module External is providing an independent overview of the consistency of approaches to assessment.  As such, the Module External’s primary concern is with the overall marking standard in the module rather than with marks obtained by individual students.  The External should not alter the marks of any individual student.

E4)     Marking the Work of Students who are Partners or Close Relatives

Staff should not mark the work of partners or close relatives unless approval is given by the Head of Department.  In the case of a query, the Head should determine whether there is a conflict of interest.

E5)     Moderating/Second Marking/Blind Double Marking the Work by Staff who are
           Partners or Close Relatives

Staff should not act as moderator or second marker where their partner or close relative is the first marker unless approval is given by the Head of Department.  In the case of a query, the Head should determine whether there is a conflict of interest.

F)      Marking Policy for all Taught Students * 

(* These are the minimum requirements and departments can double-mark more work if they wish, or if they are required to do so by a professional body.) 

** It is for departments to determine how long moderation needs to continue for a new member of staff.

*** If a department/centre believes it is not possible to second mark a particular form of assessment, then the department/centre must apply for an exemption to this aspect of the University’s marking policy and propose an acceptable alternative arrangement for approval by the relevant Dean.  Where an exemption is granted there is still a requirement for moderation.

Approved by Senate 2012

(Previous Policy approved by the Graduate and Undergraduate School Boards in June 07.)