This webpage offers guidance and clarification on both the moderation and verification of assessment.
Verification involves checking that the structure and content of assessment briefs and tasks are suitable and fair, meet required standards and enable effective appraisal of how learning outcomes are met at an appropriate level.
Moderation ensures that marking is undertaken to set academic standards and criteria throughout a module or course, enabling fair and consistent assessment of student cohorts.
It is important that moderation and verification are considered separately to avoid confusion (in the past these terms may have been used erroneously and interchangeably when in fact they are different).
Verification of Assignment Briefs and Examination Papers
Coursework and Examinations
The Head of Department has overall responsibility for overseeing the internal verification of assignment briefs and examination papers for modules at all levels of study.
Internally verified briefs and papers for those modules delivered both on campus and at partners and which contribute to the classification of students’ awards (levels 5 -8 and 4, where appropriate), both first sits and resits, will be sent to the External Examiner for approval prior to their publication. Any changes recommended by the External Examiner, if accepted by the module leader, shall be incorporated into the final version of the brief or paper. If the proposed changes recommended by the External Examiner are not accepted by the module tutor, the module tutor should discuss the issue with both the Head of Department and the School Associate Dean Students before providing feedback to the External Examiner.
Details of coursework assignments including submission dates, and assessment criteria/rubric should be available to students on Blackboard. Partners may use Blackboard or equivalent platforms, which designated School staff shall be given access to for monitoring and compliance purposes.
Students should be directed to submit coursework through Blackboard. For collaborative partner institutions an alternative online learning resource may be used. In some circumstances submission through the VLE may not be possible (artefacts etc.). Manual submission of assessments must be approved by the School on an exceptional basis only and in such instances digital storage of the assessment is still required (for example through a digital recording or photograph).
Schools and Partners will also take reasonable steps to ensure that all students are aware of the procedures and process with regard to claims for extenuating circumstances.
The University will ensure that information on the date, time and location of all examinations is published in good time. Students are responsible for making themselves aware of the date, time and venue for all examinations that they are required to take and for presenting themselves at the examination room in good time before the examination is due to begin.
Coursework and Examinations – Partner Institutions
For franchised and validated provision Schools must ensure that:
Partners are provided with approved University examination papers, coursework tasks and other assessments in good time, where the partner is utilising assessments developed by the University.
Where a partner is not using assessments developed by the University, School staff should review and approve the form and content of proposed examination papers, coursework tasks and other assessments developed by the partner before their submission to the External Examiner. Designated staff will ensure that:
- All assessment briefs are appropriate for the level of study and will enable students to demonstrate that they have met the identified learning outcomes for the module; and
- Clear assessment criteria are produced for each assessment and that the criteria are closely linked to the learning outcomes being assessed.
School staff should review comments submitted by the External Examiner on any proposed examination papers, coursework tasks and other assessments developed by the partner and liaise with the partner to respond to these.
In the case of common assessment tasks used by multiple partners, Schools should ensure that:
- All partner course teams have a common understanding of the assessment brief; and
- All course teams have a common understanding of the assessment criteria.
In the case of dual awards, a shared understanding must be reached at validation regarding the assessment responsibilities of each partner in relation to maintaining oversight of the academic standards of those components of the programme for which they are responsible. This should be clearly documented. In many cases, subject experts from both institutions will work together to develop examination papers, coursework tasks and other assessments.
Anonymous Marking
All formal written examinations, including those at Partners, must be marked anonymously.
Where possible, summative coursework assessments must also be marked anonymously.
Moderation of Assessment Results
Internal moderation is a process separate from that of marking and provides assurance that assessment criteria have been applied appropriately, reflecting the shared understanding of the markers (UK Quality Code for Higher Education Advice and Guidance: Assessment (QAA, 2018).
Second marking is an aspect of examining and assessment which is important for a number of reasons. It is one of the means by which the University seeks to ensure that students are assessed accurately, fairly and with only those aspects of subjectivity which are academically justifiable.
The University doesn’t accept appeals from students against the marks awarded as to do so could question academic judgment. The University will accept appeals against a failure of a process. This distinction is an essential protection and is an important part of academic freedom which is dependent on the integrity and efficiency of the assessment processes used.
Process
Moderation of module results involves marking and second marking by tutors and review by External Examiners. Heads of Department are responsible for ensuring that this takes place. It is not the expectation that external moderation is required for referral assessments.
Tutors are responsible for ensuring that students have been fairly assessed in accordance with the module assessment criteria and also for maintaining accurate records of students’ marks. Where two or more staff are involved in the assessment of a module, the module leader is responsible for moderating marks, entering those results into the University’s computerised student record system and checking them.
The dissertation in masters programmes must be ‘double blind’ marked. This means that the two markers must mark the work without having sight of the mark awarded by the other marker. The markers must then determine an agreed mark and the form and content of the feedback.
All final year undergraduate dissertations (and not a sample thereof) must be second marked for moderation purposes. The second marker will review all work already first marked, with annotations and/or marks still attached from the first marker, in order to moderate overall standards.
For all other forms of assessment, Heads of Department have overall responsibility for ensuring that a sample of all coursework submissions and examination scripts are second marked for moderation purposes.
The sample for moderation second marking is at least ten or ten per cent (whichever is the greater) of the scripts. Where the number of scripts is less than ten, then the marking sample should be set at 50%. The size of the sample will only vary in exceptional circumstances, such as being a requirement of a professional, statutory or regulatory body.
Where there are significant discrepancies between the first marker and second marker (either within classification boundaries or at a classification borderline), and this discrepancy cannot be resolved between the two markers, this should be reported to the Head of Department to take appropriate action, which might include:
- Requiring the first marker to review all assessment marks for the module in the light of the second marker’s comments.
- Asking a third marker to mark the same sample of work.
- Requiring that all work in a particular class be re-marked.
- Requiring that all work for the module be re-marked.
It must be noted that any amendment to the marks of the sample as a result of the internal moderation process must be applied to the rest of the cohort in order to ensure equity and consistency.
In those cases where the overall module mark is at the borderline of pass/fail or a classification threshold (module marks of 39, 49, 59 or 69), the module leader must review the mark in advance of the moderation process.
Once moderation is finalised, all assignments must be digitally stored; the completed storage exercise will then be signed off by a designated School representative following university policy. This requirement includes accounting for the storage of assessments in collaborative set ups in ways appropriate to validated and franchised arrangements.
Marks will only be considered by a Board after moderation has taken place.
Partners
Schools should ensure that appropriate staff review a sample of examination scripts and a significant proportion of summative coursework marked by each partner institution to verify the standard of marking for at least the first three years of (a) a new partnership or (b) the delivery of programmes in a distinctively new subject area by an existing partner. The sample of assessments must represent fully the cohort of students’ work and the spread of classifications in the module.
Following this period of three years, the Partnerships Committee may decide that the partner can assume more responsibility for internal moderation. The outcomes of annual monitoring and reports from External Examiners will inform the Partnership Committee’s decision. Schools wishing to delegate internal moderation to partners must make a recommendation to the Group.