Fair assessment in the context of the strike Professor Alvin Birdi, Academic Director of Undergraduate Studies; Paula Coonerty, Academic Registrar; ProfessorSally Heslop, Academic Director of Graduate Studies. MITIGATION AND EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES PROGRESSION, AWARDS AND CLASSIFICATION
Introduction This presentation will cover: • purpose of assessment and learning outcomes • marking and quality assurance • mitigation and extenuating circumstances • progression, awards and classification • questions and answers
Purpose of assessment (1) Assessments are used for various purposes: • to provide feedback for your learning • to motivate learning • to give information about your progress • to enable measurement of learning (give you grades) • to provide a means to ensure quality is being upheld Take a look at the University’s principles for assessment and feedback: www.bristol.ac.uk/academic-quality/assessment/assessment-and-feedback-principles
Purpose of assessment (2) Our assessments are designed to be: • Valid : testing what they are intended to test, e.g. if testing explanatory skills, the assessment is suitable to enable display of these skills. • Reliable : appropriate marking criteria are set such that there is a consistent approach to judging the quality of the work. • Relevant/authentic : the skills/content being tested relates to real tasks that you might do outside the academic context.
Learning outcomes Learning outcomes are statements of what you are expected to know, understand and/or be able to demonstrate following teaching and your studies. Your programme of study has a set of learning outcomes that you need to fulfil in order for a degree to be awarded. Similarly each unit you take also has learning outcomes that map to your programme. This means that each assessment is designed to test how well you demonstrate the relevant learning outcome. Check the learning outcomes for the units & programmes you're studying – they're in the specifications found in the University’s unit and programme catalogues at: www.bris.ac.uk/unit-programme-catalogue/
External inputs into setting assessments (1) External examiners - are experts in their subject, normally they are an independent member of academic staff from another UK institution, but may be from a professional body or from industry. They scrutinise all major pieces of assessment to ensure they are an appropriate test of learning at the correct level. You can view the most recent report of the external examiner for your programme and your school/department’s response on Blackboard www.ole.bris.ac.uk.
External inputs into setting assessments (2) National subject benchmark statements – these set out the expectations about standards of degrees in each subject area. They are set by the QAA, the government appointed body to oversee quality and standards in UK Higher Education. When setting assessment, reference is made to these to check our degrees are meeting their standard. Go to the QAA website to find out more about your subject benchmarks: www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/subject-benchmark-statements
External inputs into setting assessments (3) External professional body accreditation - Where a programme is accredited by an external professional body these requirements are also integrated into the assessment. The programme specifications shows whether your programme has external professional body accreditation see - www.bris.ac.uk/unit-programme-catalogue
Marking (1) Marking criteria: • help give you a better understanding of what is expected of you • indicate the knowledge, understanding and skills that markers take into account • help gauge how well you have met the learning outcomes (for units and programmes) • are designed to enable a consistent approach to be taken We have common University-level generic marking criteria which broadly associate criteria to marking bands to provide broad comparability of standards across all taught programmes. Take a look at the University’s generic marking criteria at: www.bris.ac.uk/aqpo/assessment/regulations-and-code-of-practice-for-taught- programmes/marking-criteria/
Marking (2) Schools have their own specific marking criteria, based on the common version, relevant to the subject being taught. Where necessary, specific criteria are designed at programme and sometimes individual assessment level too. Schools agree and adopt the marking scale most suited to the form of assessment. Each mark or band of marks on the scale will have criteria attached to it. Check your school’s Handbook for your marking criteria
Quality assurance Checking marks - once assessment is completed 1. academic staff use the relevant marking criteria to assign a mark on the agreed marking scale 2. assessment is marked anonymously (where possible and practicable and consistent with the objectives) 3. marking quality is assured through a process of ‘moderation’ 4. marks are weighted and averaged to form the unit mark (once all the assessments in a unit are complete) 5. unit marks are presented to the board of examiners for approval
Mitigation (1) Mitigation is applied to account for any unforeseen circumstances that may affect your learning or the delivery of assessments that are beyond our or your control, which might result in your performance not being what would have been expected had the circumstance not occurred. These circumstances are addressed in two ways – the first is: if known about before an assessment ➢ then a common response will be to mitigate the circumstance by amending the form of the assessment, such that any disadvantage to your academic outcome is removed.
Mitigation - for industrial action specifically (2) Where we know before the assessment, the University acts to mitigate the impact by: • amending examination papers • adjusting other forms of assessment in advance • providing extensions The board of examiners will review these mitigations as we are keeping extensive records of the impact of industrial action on units (and at sub-unit level if there are multiple tutors).
Mitigation (3) The second way that we apply mitigations is: if the impact cannot fully be mitigated or the circumstance is unknown at the point of the assessment ➢ then its effect on assessment performance will be subsequently considered; this is called an ‘extenuating circumstance’.
Extenuating circumstances (EC) (1) The University has a common policy and approach, we determine: • whether assessment performance has been substantially affected by an EC • what action is required to take into account the circumstance that is fair and reasonable. This is in order to safeguard your outcomes. EC - what we can do in normal circumstances – common responses are to: • allow you to repeat the assessment without penalty • award credit for the affected unit(s) on the basis of performance in other contexts • disregard affected marks for the purposes of classification
Extenuating circumstances (EC) (2) EC - what can’t we do: • adjust any mark or set aside assessments or units that are required for you to fulfil the learning outcomes for the programme Any action to take into account a circumstance will be considered by a board of examiners at the same time it considers your progression, award or classification. For advice about the extenuating circumstances process you can speak to staff in your school, like your Academic Personal Tutor, Senior Tutor or School Education Director. The Bristol SU JustAsk team can also help and provide a guide to the process: www.bristolsu.org.uk/justask/extenuating-circumstances
Progression (1) Progression is either: ➢ to the next year of study or next stage of study or ➢ to the award and classification of a taught degree Progression: • students must fulfil specified criteria, including obtaining the pass mark, in a unit to be awarded ‘credit’ • students must accumulate sufficient credit (e.g 120 credit points) both to progress (to next year or stage) and to be eligible for a degree Progression is formally determined by two boards of examiners.
Progression (2) 1. School or programme board of examiners • consists of the internal and external examiners for relevant programmes • agrees unit marks and on the basis of these and any other mitigating factors, makes a recommendation around qualification for progression or the degree award and class 2. Faculty board of examiners • consists of representatives from each school, chaired by a Faculty Education Director • receives and approves the recommendations from the school / programme board • ensures proper procedures are carried out and consistent outcome achieved
Progression (3) This year we will add a further level of application of mitigation at all exam boards. 1. The board will scrutinise all the information that the school has recorded about the impact of industrial action 2. Where mitigation has already been applied the board will consider if it is sufficient 3. If it is sufficient, then the board will proceed as normal including considering individual cases of extenuating circumstances 4. If it is not sufficient, the board will apply further mitigations and then proceed as normal
Recommend
More recommend
