Guidance for Assessment Boards on Mitigating Circumstances

2017-18

This guidance includes:

1. Update on regulations and procedures

2. Principles for considering mitigating circumstances

3. Steps for assessing mitigating circumstances forms

4. Acceptable evidence

5. Confidentiality and data protection: communication with colleagues and with students

6. Examples of some commonly-presented cases and outcomes

2

The Mitigating Circumstances Procedure 2017-18• Mitigating circumstances are defined as “recognisably disruptive or unexpected events, beyond

a student’s control, that would have a significant and adverse impact on their academic performance” (T43.1)

• This definition of mitigating circumstances replaces all reference to ‘fit to sit’ in previous College Regulations and associated documentation

• The regulation states: “A student who attends, submits or participates in any form of assessment shall be considered by the College to be in a position to do so; that is to say, they do not believe that they are affected by any mitigating circumstances, as defined above, which would have a significant and adverse impact on their academic performance. As such, any result achieved in that assessment will stand” (T43.2)

• The regulations recognise that, exceptionally, there will be some significantly disruptive or unexpected events that will affect a student’s ability to make a conscientious, proactive decision about whether their academic performance is likely to be affected by mitigating circumstances, as such retrospective MCs are permitted (T43.4)

3

Time-frames

• MCF to be submitted, normally, within 7 days of the assessment taking place (T43.3)

• Students continue to have 21 days to provide supporting evidence (T43.3)

• Boards continue to have the discretion to accept late submissions if there are compelling reasons to do so, and providing results have not been ratified (T43.4)

• After results are ratified: only recourse is an Academic Appeal (T44 Regulations)

4

Some context for considering MCs• Across all faculties, high numbers of MCs are being submitted: 8996 (excluding SSPP

PGT) in 2015-16 (source: report to CASC, September 2016)

• Majority of MCs report mental health difficulties; the next biggest category is ‘domestic complications’

• Universities are very stressful environments for students: the high cost of fees and London-living, reduced access to financial support, the involvement of families/sponsors in funding a course, all have an impact on a student’s wellbeing

• Recent research acknowledges the fact that university students in the UK experience higher rates of poor mental health than the general population (HEPI, 2016)

• Not all mental health difficulties will have a clinical diagnosis, but will be confirmed by other specialists, such as counsellors or mental health advisers

• King’s Counselling Service saw 2040 students in 2015-16 (~8% student population)

5

Some context (cont.)

• For students, deciding to defer an assessment/request an extension means taking into account the cost of this, both any additional fees and living expenses, but also any income lost through not being able to work part time: it is a difficult decision to take

• Some students will be under considerable pressure from families/sponsors not to defer

• The above will be felt acutely by students where deferral also means repeating a year in full

6

Principles of decision making• Understand that the majority of students will submit MCs as a necessary

recourse, and thus Chairs should take them in the spirit of providing support

• By submitting MCFs, students are following our regulations and are taking proactive steps to support their studies, which we ask them to do

• Be trusting of students’ accounts for how their difficulties meet the definition of MCs and the impact that these are having/have had on their ability to be assessed. Be sensitive to cultural differences and avoid making value judgements based on personal experiences

• Treat information disclosed in MCs confidentially and in line with College data protection guidelines

• MCs should be seen within a framework of student support: we should not neglect to follow-up on any concerns reported in an MC about a student’s wellbeing

7

Defining mitigating circumstances

“recognisably disruptive or unexpected events, beyond a student’s control, that would have a significant and adverse impact on their academic performance”

• “events” may refer to an illness or a personal difficulties (e.g. mental health problems or death of a relative etc.)

• “beyond a student’s control” means that these events could not have been foreseen or (within reason) have been prevented. This includes events such as those outlined above, but would not include holidays, routine paid employment, or normal exam stress not supported by appropriate specialist evidence

8

Steps for considering MCs1. Refer to the T43 Regulation for MCs:

a) Assess if the circumstances presented meet the definition of MCs (T43.1) and

b) would prevent a student from submitting/attending the assessment within given timeframe (T43.5) or

c) whether student has provided an explanation for how their MCs would have a significant and adverse impact on their performance (T43.5).

d) Check that appropriate evidence has been supplied (T43.3) [see slides 11 &12]

2. If an MCF meets the requirements outlined above, it should be accepted

3. MCFs may be rejected if:

a) The circumstances described do not meet the definition of mitigating circumstances; or

b) If no suitable evidence is supplied (see below for exceptions); or

c) If no explanation is given to meet the requirements of 1b or 1c (T43.5); or

d) An MCF is submitted outside of the required timeframe 9

Steps for considering MCs (cont.)

4. Students have 21 days to supply evidence. If evidence is pending, an initial assessment can be made subject to receiving acceptable evidence

5. When considering extension requests: typically, these would not be longer than 2 weeks. However, Facs should decide what is reasonable, practical and fair for their students, according to their particular assessment styles and patterns, based on the request or need of the student.

10

11

Circumstance

What evidence is required?

Please note any medical certificate should be from a UK-based medical practitioner or one recognised by UK

authorities.

Illness

Confirmation of the illness, the impact the illness would have/has had on the affected assessment(s) and the

dates concerned. This should be provided on:

• An original medical certificate; or

• A letter from King’s support services who have been actively supporting you; or

• A letter from external support services who have been actively supporting you.

Long-standing medical

condition or disability

A King’s Inclusion Plan (KIP) that confirms the medical condition or disability and explicitly states that the KIP

may be used as evidence to support mitigating circumstances.

Please note that most KIPs will not include this adjustment. If yours does not, you should follow the procedure

for illness (as above). You may wish to discuss your future requirements directly with the Disability Advisory

Service.

Hospitalisation

Confirmation of the illness, the impact the illness would have/has had on the affected assessment(s) and the

dates concerned. This should be provided on:

• An original medical certificate/letter.

Family illness

Confirmation of the illness, the impact that this would have/has had on the affected assessment(s) and the

dates concerned. This should be provided on:

• An original medical certificate/GP letter; or

• A letter from King’s support services who have been actively supporting you; or

• A letter from external support services who have been actively supporting you.

Bereavement

A letter confirming the death from an independent person (usually not a family member) with their contact

details provided and including a view on the closeness of the relationship to you. A death certificate or order

of service are other forms of acceptable evidence, but these must also be accompanied by a letter from an

independent person which includes a view on the closeness of the relationship.

Acute Personal Difficulties

Confirmation of the circumstances, the impact that these would have/have had on the affected assessment(s) and the dates

concerned. This should be provided on

• An original medical certificate/GP letter; or

• A letter from King’s support services who have been actively supporting you; or

• A letter from external support services who have been actively supporting you.

Pregnancy- related illness The requirements for illness, hospitalisation etc. should be followed if there is a specific incident during pregnancy.

Victim of crimePolice report (including a crime reference number). If the incident has resulted in your seeking medical attention then the

requirements for illness should be followed.

Domestic Disruption

Confirmation of the circumstances, the impact that these would have/have had on the affected assessment(s) and the dates

concerned. This should be provided on:

• A letter from an independent authority (eg social worker, counsellor); or

• A police report (inc. crime reference number); or

• A letter from King’s support services who have been actively supporting you.

Representing the College or

your Country at a significant/

prestigious event

A letter of confirmation from the relevant organising body and a supporting statement from the student and/or member of staff

explaining why the event should be considered as significant/prestigious.

Student athletes with an international commitment (such as an international training camp or world-standard competition) should supply

third-party evidence of the commitment.

Jury Service (UK) A letter from the Court.

Court Attendance (UK)If you are required to attend a tribunal or court as a witness, defendant (not for ‘Criminal Conviction’) or plaintiff, please provide a

solicitor’s letter including the dates of the legal proceedings and the requirement for you to attend.

12

Road Traffic Incident

If you have been involved in a road traffic incident, either as a passenger or as the driver, evidence must be provided detailing the

time and place that the incident occurred including:

• A police report (including a crime reference number); or

• Insurance reference number/record of the event.

13

Circumstances that normally would not meet the definition of mitigating circumstances

Transport issues

It is your responsibility to arrive at the assessment on time, irrespective of the form of transport used or relied upon. Exceptions to this might be industrial

action or other significant disruption that is beyond your control. Evidence of any significant disruption would be required.

Holidays

All holidays and vacations should take place at a time that will not impact on your availability to study or undertake or prepare for an assessment(s).

Misreading the examination timetable

It is your responsibility to ensure that you have an accurate understanding of the location, time and duration of all formal assessments.

Paid employment or voluntary work

It is your responsibility to manage other commitments so that they do not adversely interfere with your studies.

If you are experiencing acute personal difficulties which have led to you needing to undertake unexpected levels of paid work, then these may meet the

definition of mitigating circumstances. Please refer to the evidence required for this category in the table, above.

IT and/or computer failure

It is your responsibility to ensure that all work which is electronically stored, generated and/or submitted is sufficiently backed up and the correct piece of

work is submitted.

Foreseeable/preventable circumstances

Where the circumstances are within your control.

Scheduling of assessments/deadline

Deadlines or exams being close together.

Not disclosing circumstances

The College can only consider circumstances if they are disclosed in accordance with the regulations. If you had good reason, which can be

documented, for not disclosing your circumstances you should speak to your personal tutor and the KCLSU student advice service.

Retrospective MCs

• Our regulations acknowledge that, exceptionally, students may submit/attend an assessment and then retrospectively apply for mitigating circumstances (T43.4)

• In doing so, students must meet the same requirements for evidencing prospective MCs

• Additionally, they must supply a ‘good reason’ for why they did not submit their MCF prior to assessment taking place (T43.6)

• Accordingly, section 5 of the MCF form asks students to provide an explanation for “why you did not follow the mitigating circumstances procedure before presenting yourself for your assessment(s)”

14

Context for considering retrospective MCs

• The MC process encourages students to take proactive steps to ensure that difficulties do not impact on assessment: it assumes that students will consider this before they are assessed

• However, some conditions or difficulties will compromise decision-making, including a student’s ability to recognise the impact that any mitigating circumstances are having, and also the ability to make an informed decision about submitting/attending an assessment

• Despite the fact that very few MCs are rejected - only 283/8996 MCs were rejected in 2015-16 (3%) – there is a perception among students that assessment boards are not sympathetic to their difficulties

15

Considering what is “a good reason”• A ‘good reason’ is where the student has provided an account for how

their circumstances have compromised their decision-making and/or adversely impacted on their concentration or personal organisation, leading them not to recognise the need to submit an MCF prior to assessment taking place

• GPs and other specialists (e.g. counsellors) understand that compromised decision-making and/or poor personal organisation may be a characteristic of a number of conditions/difficulties. For example (this list is illustrative, not exhaustive):

➢ mental health problems, including low mood, depression and anxiety

➢ insomnia, disordered eating, or obsessive compulsive behaviour

➢ substance abuse and addiction

➢ any traumatic events or personal difficulties that cause high levels of stress or distress

16

Steps for considering retro MCs1. Refer to the T43 Regulation for MCs and follow the steps outlined for assessing

MCs on slides 9 and 10

2. Additionally, assess whether a student has provided an account for why they did not submit an MCF prior to being assessed (T43.6)

3. The account should be congruent with the evidenced mitigating circumstances

4. Remember that students do not need to supply additional evidence to support their ‘good reason’, although some may choose to

5. If a student has supplied evidence of their MCs and their account is assessed to be a good reason (as outlined above), their MC should be accepted

17

Steps for considering retro MCs (cont.)5. Retro MCs should be rejected if:

a) students do not meet the requirements of T43.5 and 6 or

b) they do not provide an explanation for why they did not follow the MC procedure or their statement is incongruent with their evidenced MCs or

c) the MCF is not submitted within the necessary timeframes (see below for exceptions)

6. Note the ‘normally’ in T43.3: it may be reasonable to accept retro MCs outside of 7 calendar days in some circumstances. If there is a compelling explanation for why the deadline could not be met, and if accepting the MC does not give the student an unfair advantage over other students (e.g. release of feedback), you can exercise judgement in accepting it

7. However, MCs submitted after results have been released cannot be considered; an academic appeal is a student’s only recourse at this stage

8. Seek a second opinion on all retro MCs18

Communications and follow-up

• Timeframes: Facs should establish a protocol for communicating outcomes to students within the necessary timeframe (normally within 7 calendar days of MCF being submitted)

• In communicating an outcome, follow the College’s guidance on sending emails to students

• If an MC includes information that identifies a serious risk to a student’s health and wellbeing, seek confidential advice on follow-up from the College’s Students at Risk process

• Emails notifying a student of their outcome should encourage a student to meet with Personal Tutor, especially if their difficulties are likely to be ongoing

• Emails should also routinely include information signposting the DAS and other support services

19

Case 1: difficult personal circumstances• On the MCF: a student discloses recent financial difficulties: her parents have separated and

for the last two months have been unable provide any financial support towards her living expenses. The student has had to take on a considerable amount of part-time work to pay her rent in London. She explains that this situation is causing stress and anxiety and is impacting on her ability to engage with the course. She has applied to see a College counsellor.

• Request: the student says she cannot take the exams in May and requests she sits in August instead

• Evidence: a letter of support from a caseworker in the College’s Student Advice service. The student also supplies a copy of her application to the Hardship Fund.

• Assessment: these circumstances meet the definition of mitigating circumstances. The student also explains the impact these are having on her ability to study.

• Evidence: the letter complies with that requested for acute personal difficulties in the guidance table. Additional medical evidence of her anxiety is not required

• Outcome: the MCF should be accepted

• Follow up: the student is encouraged to talk to her personal tutor as these difficulties may be ongoing if her financial situation does not improve.

20

Case 2: a long-term condition with King’s Inclusion Plan (KIP)• On the MCF: a student discloses a recent cluster of migraines (with dates) and

requests an extension of 2 weeks for her coursework

• Evidence: the MCF is supported by a King’s Inclusion Plan (KIP) which corroborates the student’s account of their condition and confirms a clinical diagnosis of the student living with migraines as long-term condition. The KIP explicitly states that it can be used as supporting evidence for MCs

• The MCF and KIP confirm that the student meets the definition of mitigating circumstances

• The KIP provides all the evidence required as per the guidance table: no further medical evidence is necessary

• NB: if the KIP does not include a statement indicating it can be used to support an MCF, or the KIP outlines a condition that is different form that disclosed on the MCF, it should be rejected

• Outcome? In this situation, the MCF should be accepted

• Follow up: the student is encouraged to talk to her personal tutor21

Case 3: low mood and anxiety

• On the MCF: a student submits an MCF disclosing poor mental health characterised by a low mood and anxiety. He is requesting an extension of 2 weeks for his coursework. He explains that he has been seeing a College counsellor for the past few weeks

• Evidence: a letter from the College Counselling Service that corroborates the student’s statement about his mental health difficulties and the support he’s receiving

• The MCF and support letter confirm that the student meets the definition of mitigating circumstances

• The support letter provides all the evidence required according to the evidence table in the Student Guidance: no additional medical evidence is necessary

• Outcome? In this situation, the MC should be accepted• Follow up: the student is encouraged to talk to his personal tutor,

particularly if these difficulties persist 22

Case 3a: low mood and anxiety (retrospective MCF)• A student takes an exam in May and within 7 days submits an MCF disclosing poor

mental health characterised by a low mood and anxiety. He explains that he has applied to see a College counsellor and is waiting for an appointment. He requests that his first attempt at the exam is deferred to the August exam period.

• Evidence: the student submits an email exchange from three weeks ago describing his difficulties to his personal tutor. At this point his personal tutor signposted him to the Counselling Service.

• In section 5 of the MCF form, he writes ‘see attached email exchange with personal tutor’

• Outcome? This MCF should be rejected. It does not include an adequate explanation for why the MCF was not submitted earlier (section 5 of the MCF and the ‘good reason’ required in the regulations). Additionally, the application is not support by suitable third-party evidence in accordance with the Student Guidance document.

• Follow up: a clear explanation for why the MCF cannot be approved should be supplied. Additionally, this student should be strongly encouraged to keep in touch with their personal tutor and to talk to them, in good time before the August exam period, about their difficulties – especially if they are persisting.

23

Case 3b: low mood and anxiety(retrospective MCF)

• A student takes an exam in May and within 7 days submits an MCF disclosing poor mental health characterised by a low mood and anxiety experienced over the last few weeks. He explains that he has applied to see a College counsellor and is waiting for an appointment. He requests that his first attempt at the exam is deferred to the August exam period.

• Evidence: the student supplies a note from his GP, dated from the same week as the exam, which states that “X has been experiencing a low mood and anxiety for around 4 weeks, which has been disruptive for his studying and is causing insomnia. It could be a sign of depression and X has been told to come back to the see a GP in 2 weeks if he is not feeling better”

• In section 5 of the MCF form, the student explains how his mood and anxiety are causing insomnia, and that this is having an impact on his motivation and personal organisation. He states that he did not submit an MCF before the exam as he hadn’t realised how much he was struggling until the week of the exam, when he became very agitated and was advised by his friend to see his GP

• Outcome? This MCF should be accepted. The evidence provided is suitable and the student explains why he did not submit the MCF before taking exam: this is the ‘good reason’ required in the Regs. It is reasonable to recognise how the disclosed difficulties would have an impact on decision-making, and this is corroborated by the GP’s note. A clinical diagnosis of depression not required.

• Follow up: a this student should be strongly encouraged to keep in touch with their personal tutor and to talk to them, in good time before the August exam period, about their difficulties – especially if they are persisting.

24