1

Regulations for Undergraduate Provision validated by the Open University 2010-11

2

Contents Introduction 1 Admissions 1.1 Applicable to BA (Hons) and Foundation Degree programmes validated by the Open University 1.2 English Language Qualifications 1.3 Direct Entry Applicants 1.4 Applicable to BA (Hons) Level 6 (Top-up) courses validated by the Open University 1.5 Accreditation of Prior/Experiential learning (APEL) 2 Assessment Policy 2.1 The aim of assessment 2.2 General practices and procedures for assessment 3 Attendance and late submission of work

4 Non Payment of Debts Appendices Appendix A - Code of Practice on Assessment Appendix B - Appeals Policy and Procedures Appendix C - Plagiarism Policy and Procedures Appendix D - Mitigating Circumstances Policy and Procedures

3

Our Mission We shall continue to provide a distinctive education in Art, Design and the Crafts, enabling our students to progress to successful careers.

Introduction

These regulations apply to students undertaking Leeds College of Art higher education programmes validated by the Open University. The regulations contain the Code of Practice on Assessment and should be read in conjunction with information provided in the relevant Course Handbook. The Course Handbook concentrates on specific course matters and includes copies of the modules students will complete during the year. The Course Handbook provides information about the regulations relating to each programme. It also gives information about the processes used by tutors during assessment.

4

1 Admissions 1.1 Applicable to BA (Hons) courses and Foundation Degrees validated by the Open University

To qualify for admission to a higher education programme of study, applicants must demonstrate that they have appropriate qualifications and/or experience, supported by examples of practical work in a relevant discipline, which suggest that they have the potential to benefit from and succeed on the programme. Applicants need to have passed GCSE English Language, at grade C or above or alternatively Key Skills Communications Level 3 or Functional Skills in English Level 2. For mature students an Access to Higher Education qualification in art and design is also acceptable to demonstrate English Language ability. For mature students who are unable to provide formal evidence of an appropriate standard of English, the College may request completion of its own English Proficiency test. The standard minimum entry requirement for a BA (Hons) or Foundation Degree programme is 240 UCAS points achieved from: Either a Foundation Diploma in Art & Design and AS and A2 results plus a GCSE grade A*/C in

English Language or equivalent (see above). Or a BTEC National Diploma or Certificate in a relevant subject or a Creative and Media

Diploma (Level 3) plus a GCSE grade A*/C in English Language or equivalent (see above). Or AS and A2 qualifications. Two of which must be at A2 level, one of which should be in an art

and design or related subject plus GCSE grade A*/C in English Language or equivalent (see above).

Mature students may instead have achieved a recognised Access to Higher Education course specialising in art and design.

The College welcomes applications from students with a non-traditional educational background and from mature students, and in such circumstances considers relevant experience in lieu of standard qualifications, following the College's Accreditation of Prior or Experiential Learning procedures. In addition, a portfolio of relevant practical/academic work is normally required. Applications are considered on the basis of the information contained in a UCAS form. Places are offered on the outcome of a review of the application form and portfolio of work. This will usually take place through an interview. The admissions process is conducted according to the principles and procedures outlined in the College's HE Recruitment and Admissions Policy. The final decision on an application rests with the Dean of Faculty. 1.2 English Language Qualifications Home applicants are expected to hold GCSE English Language at grade C or above, or its equivalent, e.g. O level English, GCSE English Literature (post 1998), or Key Skills Communication Level 3 (post 2000). International students for whom English is a second language are expected to provide evidence of an appropriate level of English communication skills. This will normally equate to at least Cambridge Certificate of Proficiency grade C, or IELTS Level 6.0.

5

In circumstances where a home or international applicant is unable to provide formal evidence of an appropriate standard of English, the College may request satisfactory completion of its own English Proficiency Examination, taken in accordance with the College's standard examination regulations. 1.3 Direct Entry Applications Applications are considered for direct entry to Levels 5 and 6 of programmes from students who have satisfactorily completed previous levels on a related programme, within the College or in another institution. This includes students who have achieved HE Level 5 qualifications such as the BTEC Higher National Diploma or Foundation Degree in a relevant subject, who may apply for direct entry into Level 6 of a programme (subject to satisfactory matriculation). The College Accreditation of Prior or Experiential Learning procedures are applied in such cases, to ensure the relevance of previous learning to the requirements of the programme applied for. Please note some programmes may stipulate additional requirements. 1.4 Applicable to BA (Hons) Level 6 (top-up) courses validated by the Open University

To qualify for admission to a Level 6 higher education programme of study, applicants must demonstrate that they have appropriate qualifications and/or experience, supported by examples of practical work in a relevant discipline, which suggest that they have the potential to benefit from and succeed on the programme. The standard minimum entry requirement to a BA (Hons) Level 6 is: A Foundation Degree in the same subject from Leeds College of Art. and A satisfactory proposal for Level 6 independent study for Dissertation and Final Major Project. Or 240 credit units (of which 120 units must be at Level 5) equivalent of certificated learning from an HE course in a similar subject. and A satisfactory proposal for Level 6 independent study for Dissertation and Final Major Project. The College Accreditation of Prior or Experiential Learning procedures are applied in such cases, to ensure the relevance of previous learning to the requirements of the programme applied for. Where there is not a close match of experience to meet some of the requirements for Level 6, students may be required to undertake modules from the appropriate Foundation Degree before commencing the course. 1.5 Accreditation of Prior/Experiential Learning (APEL)

APEL is the acronym used for Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning. The policy relating to APEL is used if a student has already studied or had experience similar to that of any of the modules from the course applied for. This has to be proved through evidence of qualification certificates, a portfolio of work, or verified statements from previous employers. Whichever evidence or combination of evidence is used it is necessary to demonstrate that the previous learning matches the learning outcomes of the module/s. If there is a match the student can be exempted from having to undertake the module/s. 1.5.1. All students must be treated equitably – those with credit gained at Leeds College of Art and those with credit from other institutions should be treated the same.

6

1.5.2. Students receiving any award must have met in full the specified learning outcomes for that particular award. The learning outcomes for each award will reflect the current QAA Subject Benchmark Statement. All students including those wishing to import credit or receive advanced standing through APEL must meet the specific learning outcomes to be eligible for the named award. 1.5.3. The College will consider cases for entry at higher than Level 4 in accordance with the College’s admissions policy. 1.5.4. Credit should normally be eligible for transfer for a maximum of 5 years. 1.5.5. With the exception of admission to stand alone Level 6 Honours Degree programmes where up to 240 may be imported, a maximum of 180 undergraduate credits can be imported to a Bachelors Degree from an approved institution but 120 credits is the norm. 1.5.6 A maximum of 120 credits can be imported to a Foundation Degree from an approved feeder course but 60 credit units is the norm. 1.5.7 Imported credit must be either: (i) specific (i.e. against specific modules on the programme to allow the learning outcomes for the programme to be met) (ii) general (i.e. where specific subject learning outcomes have not been met but generic ones for the appropriate level have) 1.5.8 Credit imported from outside the institution and credit imported from within the institution will not normally be used for classification. In cases where advanced standing allows admission to Level 6 classification will be determined from that level only. 1.5.9 Students will not be asked to surrender any previous qualification awarded in good faith as a terminal qualification by this or another institution against which credit exemption is being given. 1.5.10 The student transcript should clearly identify credit exemption given together with the source of the credits. 1.5.11 Where a large number of requests are considered an Individual Programme Panel will be established to undertake this consideration and to ensure appropriate support is available for students wishing to claim APEL. 1.5.12 Students will be required to give clear evidence of how they have met the learning outcomes concerned through certificated qualifications and/or prior experience. 1.5.13 A charge may be made for consideration of APEL. 1.5.14 More information can be gained from the APEL Policy and Procedures.

2 Assessment Policy 2.1 The aim of assessment is to:

Inform students of their individual progress.

Ensure that the required academic standards are met, maintained and monitored.

Develop the knowledge, skills and understanding of students.

Provide evaluative assessment and feedback.

Inform academic staff of the effectiveness of their teaching.

7

For further details about assessment, see Appendix A - Code of Practice on Assessment. 2.2 General practices and procedures for assessment a) To pass each level students must achieve 120 credits. b) Assessment of students’ work is based on the College devised assessment criteria. c) All programmes have a planned assessment process, which includes; timing and number of

assessments and/or assignments, assessment deadline dates and the number of days assessed work will be returned within.

d) Students will be given a statement of the assessment requirements for their programme and be inducted in these. (For students who have a declared disability which impacts on their learning an alternative assessment method/s may be negotiated through consultation with the Programme Leader, Student Advice and the Coordinator for Academic Support as appropriate.)

e) Assessments will be based upon clearly defined assessment and/or grading criteria to ensure that academic staff and students are aware of the requirements of the assessment.

f) The form and content of assessment will be approved by the External Examiner for each programme.

g) All assessments will be graded according to the assessment criteria set. h) Penalties for late submission will be explicitly stated in programme specifications and

information provided to students. i) Feedback will be given at a level and depth that ensures assessment is an integral and critical

part of the total learning process. j) Assessment Review and Moderation will be undertaken on all assessment/assignment briefs

according to College policy. k) Academic performance and progress on assessments are to be discussed with individual

students as an integral part of the tutorial programme. l) Assessment will form part of the discussion at programme team meetings as a standing agenda

item. m) Academic staff will keep up to date records of assessments for all their students and monitor

their progress on assessments. n) Accurate and up to date records of all student assessments will be kept and maintained as part

of the programme documentation o) Assessment outcomes will not be disclosed in any unauthorised manner to any unauthorised

individuals. p) Records of assessments will be secure and free from interference by unauthorised individuals. q) Programme teams must review assessments and assessment procedures/processes annually

to ensure that they are current and valid. r) Boards of Examiners will be convened and will confirm the integrity of the assessment process

and confirm the marks awarded for each individual candidate at the end of each level of each programme.

3 Attendance and late submission of work 3.1 Students must attend all timetabled classes. However, some students may qualify for authorised absence in exceptional circumstance such as certificated illness. In these circumstances students must have no less than 50% actual attendance at all timetabled classes or they will be classified as not having made a ‘serious attempt’ at the module. Students who fail to make a ‘serious attempt’ will not have their work assessed and resubmission will not normally be permitted. 3.2 A signing in system for all assessable work will be arranged by the tutor, e.g. with the Course Administrator. The student will sign against a standard Coursework Submission Form (CSF), adding the date and time of submission, in the presence of a tutor, course administrator or the College Examinations Officer. This standard form includes a declaration of academic integrity, which students will sign against, in order to reinforce the seriousness of plagiarism.

8

3.3 Work submitted after a set deadline loses 5 percentage points per day (i.e. 5 marks on an assessment marked out of 100), including days which fall over weekends, unless the student has informed the tutor in advance of illness or personal problems. In these circumstances, extensions will only be given by according to the Mitigating Circumstances Policy and Procedures. 3.4 If you submit work after a set deadline, you will lose marks at 5 a day until after two weeks you will receive 0. 3.5 If a penalty for lateness causes a project that would otherwise have passed to be awarded a mark below 40, the work will be given ‘automatic resubmission’, and a grade of 40. 3.6 Electronic evidence of date completed is not acceptable. Submission includes the process of handing in the work, as well as its completion.

4 Non Payment of Debts 4.1 The Open University will not confer a degree on a student if the College notifies it that the student has not paid, what are termed as ‘non-trivial’ debts. These include academic fees, library fines, non-return of library books or other equipment. Once the debt has been paid the College will notify the University who will then allow the degree to be conferred.

9

Appendix A - Code of Practice on Assessment Contents 1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of this document 1.2 Availability of other information

2 Details of Management of Assessment Process 2.1 Programme Leaders 2.2 External Examiners 2.3 Assessment Tasks 2.4 Pre Examination Board Meeting 2.5 Final Examination Boards 2.6 Responsibilities 2.7 Composition 2.8 Meetings of the School Board of Examiners 2.9 Minutes of the Meetings of the School of Board of Examiners

3 Assessment 3.1 Assessed Coursework 3.2 Assessment Review Peer

4 Submission of Work 4.1 Formative/Summative Assessment 4.2 Ownership and Retention of Coursework 4.3 Disclosure of Marks 4.4 Final Year Exhibitions 5 Attendance and late submission of work 6 Marking Guidelines 6.1 Assessment Grading Criteria 6.2 Moderation 6.3 Sample Moderation 6.4 Double Marking 6.5 Group Marking 6.6 Classification 7 Mitigating Circumstances 8 Work Placements and Study Abroad 9 Plagiarism 10 Appeals

10

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose This Code of Practice sets out information for undergraduate students, academic staff and External Examiners and provides a summary overview of procedures for examinations and other assessments for BA (Hons) and Foundation Degrees taught in the Faculty of Fine Art and Design and the Faculty of Media and Design Communication. This Code of Practice is written as guidance to reflect expected practice but in certain circumstances can be amended by Deans of Faculty where particular situations render the guidance as inappropriate or incomplete, or where the Open University require amended practice. Some of the information is extracted from the Regulations for Undergraduate Provision Validated by the Open University and Course Handbooks which should be referred to for more detail as appropriate. 1.2 Availability of other information Other College documents are provided in hard copy and can be accessed on the student portal of the College Intranet where appropriate .Key documents include:

Course Handbooks

Programme Specifications

Other sections within the Regulations for Undergraduate Provision Validated by the Open University

OU Handbook for validated Awards: Section F 2.3 ’Rights and responsibilities of External Examiners Open University External Examiners’ 2 Details of Management of Assessment Process

2.1 Programme Leaders Programme Leaders are responsible for overseeing the assessment process, for checking that the procedures are being correctly implemented, and for the secure collation of module results, for presentation at the Final Examination Board. The College Examinations Officer oversees the arrangements for all written examinations, and also oversees the submission of dissertations at Level 6. The Programme Leader will manage the allocation of staff resources to examinations and assessment duties in consultation with the Dean of Faculty. In addition, he/she will facilitate the timely and accurate return of marks to inform classification and progressional decisions. The Programme Leader will attend the Final Examination Board and Pre Examination Board meetings. 2.2 External Examiners The responsibilities of External Examiners are set out by the Open University in the OU Handbook for validated Awards: Section F 2.3 ’Rights and responsibilities of External Examiners Open University External Examiners’. External Examiners conduct visits to the programme or modules to which they are assigned during the course of the Academic Year and attend the Final Examination Board for their assigned programme towards the end of the Academic Year. The Critical and Contextual Studies External Examiner will attend the Critical and Contextual Studies Final Examination Board and provide a summary overview of their findings for all other programme Final Examination Boards which will be reported by a member of the assessment team. External Examiners’ reports and Faculty responses to such reports are the responsibility of the Dean of Faculty through liaison with Programme Leaders. 2.3 Assessment tasks The Programme Leader and Head of Critical and Contextual Studies are responsible for ensuring the appropriateness of assessment tasks to meet the requirements of the learning outcomes for the programme/s, that deadlines for submission of assessed work are appropriately spread throughout the year so as to prevent over burdensome workloads of students. The Programme Leader and Head of Critical and Contextual Studies will also

11

ensure that briefs and assignments have been subjected to scrutiny and approved by an Internal Verifier. 2.4 Mitigating Circumstances Board A Board Meeting is held prior to the meeting of the Final Examination Board to consider any claims of Mitigating Circumstances pertaining to assessment to ensure that appropriate recommendations are made to the Final Examination Board. The meeting will consist of the Dean of Faculty (or nominee), the Programme Leader, a member of Critical and Contextual studies staff and an administrator to record the outcomes of the meeting. 2.5 Final Examination Boards Before an examination board is held the Dean of Faculty or nominee will oversee a clerical checking process to ensure accuracy of transcription onto the final marks spreadsheets. An examination board meeting (known as the Final Exam Board) will be held at the end of each Academic Year for each programme to confirm the marks for each module and subsequent progression and/or classification status for each student. For Contextual and Theoretical Studies a separate Exam Board will be held and the Contextual and Theoretical Studies element of each programme moderated by the Contextual and Theoretical Studies External Examiner. The results from the Contextual and Theoretical Studies Exam Board will then be collated within the overall student profile for consideration by the Final Exam Board for the programme. The Final Exam Board will be chaired by the Dean of Faculty or nominee. Its membership comprises the Programme Leader, assessors and the External Examiner/s. A nominee who may be delegated the role as Chairperson will have appropriate higher education experience and knowledge as to the regulations for BA Honours/Foundation Degree programmes and the requirements of the Open University. The final decision with regards progression status and/or classification of students will rest with the Final Exam Board for each programme. The examination result sheets will be approved and signed by the Programme Leader, the Chair of the Final Exam Board and the External Examiner and then forwarded to the Open University for confirmation. Following the Final Exam Boards the HE Sub-Committee will convene to consider all the results of those Boards in order to take a strategic overview of results, and to compare and evaluate any statistically significant factors or trends across the higher education provision as a whole. 2.6 Composition The Boards for programmes consists of a Dean of Faculty (Chair), the HE Administrator (Minutes secretary), External Examiner(s) (one for each programme of study, unless an examiner is appointed for multiple programmes), Programme Leaders and Module Leaders (for the programmes considered), the Head of Critical and Contextual Studies, the Electives Coordinator. The Board for Critical and Contextual Studies consists of a Dean of Faculty (Chair), the HE Administrator (Minutes secretary), the External Examiner, Critical Studies coordinators for levels 4, 5 and 6. (Levels 4, 5 and 6 normally correspond to Years 1, 2 and 3 of full time programmes, and years 1 and 2, years 3 and 4, and years 5 and 6 on part time programmes.) 2.7 Meetings of the Board of Examiners The Board/s of Examiners meet as necessary to coincide with Open University requirements for the return of module marks, classifications and progressional decisions. Normally there will be a Board at the end of the academic year (Final Examination Board) and an additional Board at the start of the following Academic year to consider the status of students who have been allowed by the Final Examination Board to resubmit work for examination over the summer period. 2.8 Minutes of the Meetings of the Board of Examiners Minutes of each meeting are circulated at the subsequent meeting for agreement and retained securely by the HE Administrator. Confirmed results from the Board are sent to the College’s

12

Examination Officer, and the Open University. Collated, summative results from the individual Boards are considered by the HE Sub Committee. 3 Assessment 3.1 Assessed Coursework This comprises work submitted for assessment by a deadline stated in the documentation for a particular module. Such work may be textual or practical in nature and will relate to the learning outcomes and methods of assessment detailed and approved in the relevant module descriptor, published on the College intranet and course handbooks. The assessment task is referred to as the brief. 3.2 Assessment Review An Assessment Review Peer, an experienced assessor from a different programme, is appointed for each course. Their role is to ensure that assessment processes are implemented fairly and consistently, following college guidelines. The Assessment Review Peer should check and approve all briefs before they are issued. All assignment tasks/briefs are also sent to External Examiners for approval. On the back of the brief, graded outcomes should be clearly mapped against the evidence to be submitted. The particular weighting of graded outcomes in relation to particular learning outcomes is at the discretion of the module leader, in consultation with the Programme Leader. All learning outcomes should be graded, but it is recognised that not all should necessarily be of equal value on every brief. When planning the programme specifications, care has been taken to ensure that the quantity of assessment evidence required is commensurate with the credit weighting of each module. If the evidence required has to be changed, to suit the particular circumstances of the brief, the new evidence should not be unduly different in quantity or type to that described on the module descriptor. The Programme Leader and Assessment Review Peer should approve any such change. Once issued, every effort should be made to abide by the information on the brief. Any changes which do have to be made, including changes of deadline, should be communicated to all students. Every module should have a module descriptor (taken from the course document). Briefs should be written on standard college forms. A copy of the brief must be submitted to the Programme Leader, who in turn will forward the brief to the programme internal verifier for approval, before the module is delivered. The module descriptors should be distributed to students as part of the Course Handbook at the start of the year, and referred to at the start of the module. The brief should be distributed at the start of the project. The assessment evidence required, the learning outcomes, the deadline, and the precise weightings of each piece of work, should be clear from the brief and module descriptor. The information given on the brief and module descriptor should be consistent. The wording of module learning outcomes should not be changed. Any changes to module and programme specifications should be passed to OUVS via the Dean of faculty/Quality & Standards Office.

4 Submission of Work

Details of all coursework for assessment will be provided in an assignment brief. All briefs will be reviewed prior to delivery.

13

Hand-in requirements should be clearly stated including the date, time and location of submission. To reinforce the seriousness of plagiarism/ cheating, students at the point of enrolment sign a ‘Declaration of Academic Integrity’ and when submitting work for assessment sign a Coursework Submission Form which further confirms the integrity of the work submitted. This is signed in the presence of a tutor, administrator or Examinations Officer. It is the responsibility of the Module Leader or their delegate (in cases where the work is to be submitted to the Course or Critical Studies/ Electives office) to record the receipt of coursework and once received make sure that work is secure. 4.1 Formative/Summative Assessment Formative Assessment Formative assessment, sometimes referred to as ‘Monitoring of Progress’ or ‘Formative Feedback’ consists of guidance given to students during the module. This feedback may be oral, given on a one to one basis, or deriving from Critiques or group sessions. Where oral feedback is given the onus should be on the student to note down the feedback. Module Leaders should identify and communicate to students for each module appropriate methods of formative feedback such as individual verbal feedback, group feedback and critiques, formative tests and exercises and in some cases written feedback. The emphasis may be on the student to note down this feedback for their own records. Formative assessment on substantial projects/ modules e.g. Final Project, should be planned into module delivery by Programme/ Module Leaders and recorded on tutorial forms, signed by the member of staff and the student. This written formative feedback should be constructive, focusing on areas of strength and identify areas that could be improved. Provisional grades will not be given in formative feedback, though if in the opinion of the member of staff the student’s progress is judged to be deficient and the student is at risk of not meeting learning outcome/s for the module, this should be made clear in the written feedback in order that the student can focus on improving aspects of their work before the final assessment deadline. Summative assessment Summative assessment and feedback is provided following the final assessment of course work and serves to provide students with a judgement on the quality of work submitted and a provisional grade which is subject to confirmation at the Examination Board. Summative feedback for Modules which are subject to assessment at the very end of the course, typically including the Final Project and Dissertation will be limited to the mark/s achieved, However, students may request informal oral feedback or written feedback can be requested if they have failed one of these modules, providing that the Examination Board has allowed resubmission. Summative feedback should be written and relate to the learning outcomes of the module and the assessment criteria for each level which are published in the Course Handbook. Summative feedback should be provided in written form for all modules and for substantial briefs within modules which in themselves account for more than 10 credits. Students should be made aware of this at the time the coursework brief/ assignment is set along with the timescale for the return of feedback. A record of summative feedback will be retained in course files. 4.3 Ownership and Retention of coursework Work executed as part of the course is the property and copyright of the College. Generally the College will not keep work permanently, but students may be expected to allow work to be kept for a short period, for example, to satisfy the College’s Quality Assurance Procedures, or to be exhibited. If any work were to be retained permanently the student would be compensated for any exceptional costs incurred during its making. For logistical reasons where it is not practical to retain the physical work, the work may be recorded photographically or archived as a digital file. Retained evidence of oral presentations should be in the form of a

14

PowerPoint presentation or a written report. The College may need to arbitrate over the ‘ownership’ of ideas, for example between students, between tutor and student or between student and someone outside of the College. Submitted course work on College premises will normally be kept in a locked storage area, accessible only by assessors. Students should be advised for each module when course work is to be returned following assessment and it is the students’ responsibility to ensure that work is collected at the stated time. 4.4 Disclosure of marks Communication of marks for module components and overall module results before the final examination board is a valuable form of feedback. The mark/s should be given as a percentage, though will be given with the following statement ‘Provisional Marks – students are reminded that these marks can go up or down as part of the normal collective consideration of module assessment by the Board of Examiners and will not be finalised until after the Board.’ Communication of marks to individual students should be private and not published on noticeboards unless the marks are anonymised by use of the student ID number. Following the Examination Boards meetings and after students have taken down their final exhibition, final year students may be issued with their provisional overall classification. The classification will be given in writing, in a sealed envelope marked ‘Provisional result- Subject to formal ratification by the Open University’. Once ratified a letter and transcript will be sent to each student during the summer detailing their grades and classification. Similarly, students who are not in their final year will be advised of their marks and whether they are able to progress to the next level of study. Where students have not achieved the learning outcomes for a module/s course areas will communicate whether they are allowed to resubmit, what assessment needs to be done, and by when. 4.5 Final Year Exhibitions All students who have presented work for the Final assessment have the opportunity of exhibiting their work at the end of the year exhibition and/or Fashion Show at the College, unless their Programme Leader decides that the work is not of a high enough standard. The programme leader has the authority to make the ultimate decision, although of course she/he will consult with the student and with colleagues. 5 Attendance and late submission of work Unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as certified illness, students whose attendance on a module falls below 50 % will be deemed not to have made a serious attempt and their work will not be marked and resubmission will not normally be permitted. Penalties for late work are in accordance with University regulations as stated in the ‘Regulations for Undergraduate Provision Validated by the Open University’. Work submitted after a set deadline loses 5 percentage points per day (i.e. 5 marks on an assessment marked out of 100) including weekends, unless the student has informed the tutor in advance of illness or personal problems which have been considered and approved as part of the Mitigating Circumstances process. Electronic evidence of date completed is not acceptable. Submission includes the process of handing in the work, as well as its completion. Any penalties should be applied to marks before they are submitted for consideration by the Board of Examiners with a record placed on the Module Assessment Record regarding the circumstances leading to the penalty. If a penalty brings an otherwise passable project to below 40 the work will be given an ‘automatic resubmission’ and a maximum grade of 40 on resubmission following reassessment. If time allows students are allowed one opportunity to resubmit work before the June Examination Board. If time does not allow for a resubmission before the June Examination Board a date for resubmission will be set by the Examination Board for August submission.

15

6 Marking Guidelines All assessed work on BA (Hons) courses is graded on a marking scale of 0-100

GRADE CLASS RANGE

70-100 1 Excellent

60-69 2.1 Very Good

50-59 2.2 Good

40-49 3 Satisfactory

0-39 Fail Unsatisfactory

All assessed work on Foundation Degrees is graded on a marking scale of 0-100

70+ Distinction

60-69 Merit

40-59 Pass

0-39 Fail

6.1 Assessment Grading Criteria Every module has specified learning outcomes and skills that are approved as part of the validation process applied by the Open University. The Grading Criteria for BA (Hons) and Foundation Degrees are published in the Course and Critical Studies Handbooks and are used to determine how well module learning outcomes have been achieved. All learning outcomes are graded. In some modules Learning Outcomes are given equal weighting, in others there may be a differential weighting between Learning Outcomes at the discretion of Module Leader. Students are advised of assessment weightings at the start of the module. In some larger modules the evidence required for assessment may be divided into more than one assessable component (e.g. more than one brief/assignment) which are assessed independently against specified module outcomes as a mark out of 100. If this is the case the Module Leader in calculating the overall module grade will add all the component marks together, weighted by the percentage of the module that the components represent. 6.2 Moderation At levels 4 (BA & FD) and Level 5 (BA) a sample of at least 10% across the grade range should be moderated by another tutor, with a good understanding of the subject. At Level 6 (BA) and Level 5 (FD) all work should be assessed by at least two tutors. The moderator may mark ‘blind’ and then moderate, or may check the first assessor’s grade against their own judgement of the quality of the work. For projects jointly assessed by more than one tutor, at least 10% must include independent judgements of assessors, moderated by discussion. Evidence of moderation should be retained as back-up to the Module Assessment Record. For undergraduate dissertations: Dissertations from each supervisor (the first marker) will be double marked by an allocated second marker and the two sets of marks will be considered. Any moderation required to the supervisor’s marks will be agreed and applied. Where the marks between the two assessors varies by more than nine marks a third marker will determine the final mark. External Examiners are responsible for scrutiny of assessment processes and will sample and make a judgement on the integrity of assessment decisions across levels with a particular

16

focus on final year assessments. If the External Examiner disagrees with assessment decisions he/she may request further consideration and moderation by internal assessors. Explanations of marking styles are given below: 6.3 Sample Moderation The first marker should select a sample of examples of work to represent candidates within the marks range. These are given to the second marker or External Examiner with indications which classification banding they fall within. If there are any major disagreements on classification the whole batch (not just the sample) must be moderated. 6.4 Double Marking Each student’s work must be marked independently by the two markers before any discussion takes place. The two markers then meet and agree a final mark for each candidate. If disagreements occur, which cannot be solved by negotiation the appropriate Dean of Faculty should be notified. 6.5 Group Marking Assessment of studio work, portfolios and project based work may be considered by a group of assessors, of which one, where possible, should not have had prior involvement in supervising the candidates work under assessment, reaching a consensus agreement as to a mark. The group must record their decision and provide summative feedback against the assessment criteria for the coursework component. 6.6 Classification Marking Schemes, Progression and Classification – BA (Hons) BA(Hons) Programmes – Module Assessment All assessed work will be graded to the following criteria and conventions: The scale of grades used is from 0-100 Grade range Class 70-100 1 Excellent 60-69 2.1 Very Good 50-59 2.2 Good 40-49 3 Satisfactory 0-39 Fail Unsatisfactory Where a candidate achieves a mark less than the minimum pass mark, and has made a non-serious attempt at a module - a re-sit will not normally be permitted. A non-serious attempt includes failure to attend a module where an attendance requirement is specified, and failure to present for stage or end assessment for a given module. The maximum mark that can be awarded in the case of re-sit is 40%, unless mitigating circumstances have been accepted. Normally the same brief or the same section of the brief will be set for the resubmission. However there could be circumstances when this is not possible. If this is the case then equivalent work will be set which will as far as possible meet the requirements of the learning outcomes or where this is not possible work will be set that involves work of similar quantity and complexity. Level 4: Certificate in Higher Education At the end of Level 4, candidates will be required to have accumulated all 120 Level 4 credits in order to be awarded a Cert HE or to proceed to Level 5.

17

A candidate, who has accumulated fewer than 120 credits, but no fewer than 80 credits, may be allowed to resubmit or re-sit work for an agreed deadline in August, or during or at the end of the subsequent session as an internal or external candidate at the Board of Examiners discretion. Only one year during the total period of study (two years in the case of a part time student) may be taken as an external candidate to achieve the required credit tariff in order to proceed to the next level or to achieve the award. All modules taken except electives will normally be at Level 4. Level 5: Diploma of Higher Education At the end of Level 5, candidates will be required to have accumulated all 120 credits during Level 5 in order to be awarded a Dip HE or to proceed to Level 6. Most modules will be at Level 5, but up to 20 credits may be taken from the elective programme at Level 4, subject to individual course requirements. A candidate, who has accumulated fewer than 120 credits, but no fewer than 80 credits, may be allowed to resubmit or re-sit work for an agreed deadline in August, or during or at the end of the subsequent session as an internal or external candidate at the Board of Examiners discretion. Only one year during the total period of study (two years in the case of a part time student) may be taken as an external candidate to achieve the required credit tariff in order to proceed to the next level or to achieve the award. Level 6: Honours At the end of Level 6, candidates will be required to have accumulated all 120 Level 6 credits to be awarded BA (Hons). A candidate, who has accumulated fewer than 120 credits, but no fewer than 80 credits, may be allowed to resubmit or re-sit work in August, or during or at the end of the subsequent session as an internal or external candidate at the Board of Examiners discretion. Only one year during the total period of study (two years in the case of a part time student) may be taken as an external candidate to achieve the required credit tariff in order to proceed to the next level or to achieve the award. To be eligible for BA (Hons) a student must have accumulated no fewer than 360 credits and have a minimum average grade of 40%. Where a candidate achieves a mark less than the minimum pass mark, and has made a non-serious attempt at a module- a re-sit will not be permitted. A non-serious attempt includes failure to attend a module where an attendance requirement is specified, and failure to present for stage or end assessment for a given module. The final classification for the award will be based on averages of Level 6 and Level 5 at a ratio of 2:1 i.e. the final classification grade will constitute 66.66 % of the Level 6 average and 33.33% of the Level 5 average. Final classification will normally be based on the same grade ranges as module assessment (see 2.9.1). Level 6: Honours (direct entry Level 6 candidates) At the end of Level 6, candidates will be required to have accumulated all 120 Level 6 credits and have a minimum average of 40%. A candidate, who has accumulated fewer than 120 credits, but no fewer than 80 credits, may be allowed to resubmit or re-sit work in August, or during or at the end of the subsequent session as an internal or external candidate at the Board of Examiners discretion. Only one year during the total period of study (two years in the case of a part time student) may be taken as an external candidate to achieve the required credit tariff in order to proceed to the next level or to achieve the award. Normally the same brief or the same section of the brief will be set for the resubmission. However there could be circumstances when this is not possible. If this is the case then equivalent work will

18

be set which will as far as possible meet the requirements of the learning outcomes or where this is not possible work will be set that involves work of similar quantity and complexity. The maximum mark that can be awarded in the case of re-sit is 40%. Where a candidate achieves a mark less than the minimum pass mark, and has made a non-serious attempt at a module - a re-sit will not be permitted. A non-serious attempt includes failure to attend a module where an attendance requirement is specified, and failure to present for stage or end assessment for a given module. The final classification for the award will be based on the average of Level 6 only. Borderline Students (Final Award) Students on the borderline between grades who have achieved an overall average of a minimum of 39.50, 49.50, 59.50 and 69.50 respectively will automatically be considered for the higher award. In determining the average applicable for upgrading there will be no rounding up, i.e. 69.49 does not become 69.50. Discretion will also be considered where a student has achieved an overall average up to 0.50 below 49.50, 59.50 and 69.50 (49.00, 59.00, 69.00). In determining the average applicable for upgrading there will be no rounding up, i.e. 68.90 does not become 69.00. In such cases the Final Examination Board will consider the higher award if:

a) there is evidence of serious medical or personal problems disclosed to and discussed by the Final Examination Board, and which may be sufficient as to require additional consideration beyond that already given at module level.

Or

b) The average grade at Level 6 is higher than the average grade at Level 5 or the grade in a significant Level 6 module or modules is within the higher banding.

Marking Schemes, Progression and Classification – Foundation Degrees All assessed work will be graded to the following criteria and conventions: The scale of grades used is from 0 - 100 70+ Distinction 60-69 Merit 40-59 Pass 0-39 Fail A Foundation Degree is not awarded an overall classification (1st, 2.1, 2.2 etc.) but is awarded an overall grade. Foundation Degree grades for the award will be based on averages of Level 5 and Level 4 at a ratio of 2:1. The final grade will constitute 66.66% of the Level 5 average and 33.33% of the Level 4 average. The Foundation Degree is awarded as follows: 70+ Award with Distinction 60-69 Award with Merit 40-59 Award with Pass 0-39 Fail

19

Level 4 At the end of Level 4, candidates will be required to have accumulated all 120 Level 4 credits in order to be awarded a Cert HE or to proceed to Level 5. A candidate, who has accumulated fewer than 120 credits, but no fewer than 80 credits, may be allowed to resubmit or re-sit work for an agreed deadline in August, or during or at the end of the subsequent session as an internal or external candidate at the Board of Examiners discretion. Only one year during the total period of study (two years in the case of a part time student) may be taken as an external candidate to achieve the required credit tariff in order to proceed to the next level or to achieve the award. Normally the same brief or the same section of the brief will be set for the resubmission. However there could be circumstances when this is not possible. If this is the case then equivalent work will be set which will as far as possible meet the requirements of the learning outcomes or where this is not possible work will be set that involves work of similar quantity and complexity. The maximum mark that can be awarded in the case of re-sit is 40%. Level 5 At the end of Level 5, candidates will be required to have accumulated all 120 Level 5 credits and have a minimum average of 40%. A candidate, who has accumulated fewer than 120 credits, but no fewer than 80 credits, may be allowed to resubmit or re-sit work in August, or during the subsequent session as an internal or external candidate at the Board of Examiners discretion. Only one year during the total period of study (two years in the case of a part time student) may be taken as an external candidate to achieve the required credit tariff in order to proceed to the next level or to achieve the award. Normally the same brief or the same section of the brief will be set for the resubmission. However there could be circumstances when this is not possible. If this is the case then equivalent work will be set which will as far as possible meet the requirements of the learning outcomes or where this is not possible work will be set that involves work of similar quantity and complexity. The maximum mark that can be awarded in the case of re-sit is 40%. Where a candidate achieves a mark less than the minimum pass mark, and has made a non-serious attempt at a module - a re-sit will not be permitted. A non-serious attempt includes failure to attend a module where an attendance requirement is specified, and failure to present for stage or end assessment for a given module. Borderline Students (Final Award) Students on the borderline between grades must have achieved an overall average of a minimum of 39.50, 59.50 and 69.50 respectively will automatically be considered for the higher award. In determining the average applicable for upgrading there will be no rounding up, i.e. 69.49 does not become 69.50. Discretion will also be considered where a student has achieved an overall average up to 0.50 below 59.50 and 69.50 (59.00, 69.00). In determining the average applicable for upgrading there will be no rounding up, i.e. 68.90 does not become 69.00.

In such cases the Final Examination Board will consider the higher award if: a) there is evidence of serious medical or personal problems disclosed to and discussed by the

Final Examination Board, and which may be sufficient as to require additional consideration beyond that already given at module level.

Or

20

b) The average grade at Level 5 is higher than the average grade at Level 4 or the grade in a

significant Level 5 module or modules is within the higher banding. 7 Mitigating Circumstances Mitigating circumstances procedures comprise two separate processes, one process for extensions to deadlines that may be granted during the course of the Academic Year, the other process for mitigating circumstances that need to be considered at a Mitigating Circumstances Board. The Mitigating Circumstances Policy and Procedures can be found in appendix D of the Regulations for Undergraduate Provision Validated by the Open University. 8 Work Placement and Study Abroad The College’s policy on Work Placements details the requirements for supporting students on placements. Assessment of work completed on placements is not included as a requirement of any module on a BA (Hons)/Foundation Degree programme. Some modules, however, do include the preparation for placements, and/or the evaluation of the placement both of which are completed at College, as assessable elements, and follow the College’s standard assessment procedures. The procedures for international study exchanges are detailed in the College’s policy document, International Exchanges and Placements. The College takes part in Socrates-Erasmus student mobility programmes, and is working toward the implementation of the Bologna agreement. Students cannot, however, import credit from overseas institutions into their programmes of study at the College. Students engaged on exchanges complete a contract which details which modules or projects from their programme they will complete while abroad. Formative assessment is given by e-mail and telephone contact. 9 Plagiarism Plagiarism is defined by the University as presenting someone else's work as your own. Work means any intellectual output, and typically includes text, data, images, sound or performance. Plagiarism is a serious matter which can attract severe penalties including being excluded permanently from the College. Students are asked to sign a Declaration of Academic Integrity at the start of the course and sign a Coursework Submission Form which further confirms the integrity of the work submitted. The Plagiarism Policy can be found in appendix C of the Regulations for Undergraduate Provision Validated by the Open University and is also explained through inductions at course level. 10 Appeals Candidates for an Open University award are entitled to appeal if the appellant is dissatisfied with the decision of the College. A student may not appeal against academic judgement. Detail of the Appeals Policy and Procedures can be found in appendix B of the Regulations for Undergraduate Provision Validated by the Open University.

21

Appendix B - Appeals Policy and Procedures Policy Candidates for an Open University award are entitled to appeal if they are dissatisfied with the decision of the College. An appeal to the College can only be made if the decision is related to: (i) final award; (ii) progression from one stage or level of the programme to the next; (iii) assessment on the programme; (iv) admission to the programme. Grounds for appeal must be founded on one or both of the following: (i) that performance was affected by factors which the student was unable, or for valid reasons unwilling, to divulge before the decision that causes dissatisfaction was reached; (ii)that there has been a material administrative error or that the decision was not made in accordance with the current regulations for the programme, or that some other material irregularity has occurred. Disagreement with the academic judgment made in assessment or at an Examination Board cannot in itself constitute grounds for appeal i.e. a student cannot appeal against academic judgement. Procedure STEP 1 Prior to taking a final decision as to whether to appeal or not, a student is advised to: (i) speak to his/her tutor and Programme Leader informally to attempt to resolve the issue at department level; (ii) speak to a member of the Student Advice Team and seek further advice. An appellant may not have a degree conferred which is the subject of an appeal until the appeals procedure has been concluded. An appeal cannot be initiated once the degree has been conferred. Students who wish their degree to be conferred at a ceremony but who are considering whether or not to appeal are advised to seek advice as above immediately on receiving their result. STEP 2 If the student decides to appeal, the following procedures will apply: The appellant must initiate the appeal in writing no later than 7 days after the formal publication of their results by writing to the College Registrar setting out details of the perceived injustice. The College Registrar should inform the appropriate Dean of Faculty and request a written response from the relevant Programme Leader in appropriate detail to the appellant’s letter. Where necessary the response should make reference to, and confirm the operation of, the declared rules on classification and/or progression. The College Registrar will consider the evidence taking steps to secure additional information as he/she deems fit and will determine whether or not there is a prima facie case. If it is confirmed that there is no prima facie case the appeal procedure will end. However, the appellant may appeal to the College Principal within 7 days of receiving the College Registrar’s decision not to uphold the prima facie case. If the College Principal determines that there is no prima facie case and the appellant still remains dissatisfied then the appellant may appeal to the Open University using their formal appeals procedures. If the College Registrar and Secretary uphold the prima facie case, they shall request the College to convene an appeal hearing. STEP 3 Where it is judged that there is a prima facie case the appeal will be progressed as follows:

22

Within seven days, the College Registrar shall convene a meeting of the Appeals Committee that shall take place no later than four weeks following the decision to uphold the prima facie case. At least 14 days notice, in advance of the meeting, will be given to the appellant and the Appeals Committee. All evidence of the assessment process relevant to the case, and any correspondence entered into will be submitted to the Appeals Committee, which has the powers to consider the appeal and decide upon it. The Principal or nominee should chair the Appeals Committee and consider the appeal and may require the appellant to appear before it. The appellant may be accompanied by a person of his/her choice who may or may not be a member of the College. The supporter may not be a member of any Committee/Board of Examiners, which has considered at any time the work of the appellant. If called before the Appeals Sub Committee, the appellant or his/her supporter may make a statement and the Appeals Committee may question the appellant. The appellant or the supporter may respond to the questions. The Appeals Committee may also require the Programme Leader or his/her nominee and/or any other member of the College staff involved in the relevant events to appear before the Appeals Committee to answer questions. The appellant and the Programme Leader will appear separately. The appellant (and supporter) and the Programme Leader or nominee will be required to withdraw during the Appeals Committee deliberations, while a decision is being formulated. A decision may not necessarily be formulated at the time of the appellant appearing before the Appeals Committee. If it is necessary to reconvene a meeting of the College Appeals Committee as a decision has not been reached this shall be undertaken in no less than 3 weeks following the initial hearing. The outcome of the decision will also be conveyed by the College to the appellant within seven working days of when the decision is made. STEP 4 If the appellant is dissatisfied with the decision of the College Appeals Committee, he/she may write directly to the Open University under their formal appeals procedures. An appeal will not be considered unless it is initiated and progressed by the student personally. (This does not affect an appellant’s right to a supporter.) No substantive correspondence or discussions will be entered into by the College or by the Open University with a third party unless the student specifically requests this in writing. NB: An appellant may not have the degree conferred which is the subject of an appeal until the procedure has been concluded.

23

Appendix C - Plagiarism Policy and Procedures Policy Plagiarism Plagiarism is defined as ‘Presenting someone else’s work as your own. Work means any intellectual output, and typically includes text, data, images, sound and performance’. This definition is further explained in the College’s Plagiarism Policy as follows: a) Copying directly from a text (book, magazine or printed source) without reference to its author,

or using an appropriate referencing system. b) The word ‘copying’ can mean copying a sentence or paragraph verbatim without

acknowledgement, or simply replacing a few verbs. Paraphrasing is also copying if sources are not acknowledged at any stage and if the general sense of the text is not taken further in terms of conceptual analysis.

c) The use of electronic sources (internet, web pages, images etc.) without reference to the original source, and/or suggesting that these are the student’s own work.

d) Direct facsimile of an image, a sound or performance without due acknowledgement of its source.

Any of the above can be constituted as plagiarism regardless of whether there is a proven intention to cheat. It is important to realise that the College and the Open University takes plagiarism very seriously, and that the penalties are severe, especially at Levels 5 and 6. During Induction plagiarism and how to denote ownership of written passages, ideas or images which are not your own, is explained to you. You are then asked each year to sign a statement confirming that all work produced will be your own. In addition, when you submit coursework you will be asked to sign a further declaration, that this work is your own, and does not contain unacknowledged work from other sources. Obviously you do obtain ideas from other sources during your research and will adapt these ideas to your own requirements. The distinction between this and plagiarism is often quite difficult to define, and this is why your research books and files are so important, because these show the development of your ideas and sources of inspiration, so that your tutors can trace your train of thought. For essays, seminar papers and dissertations your Contextual and Theoretical Studies tutors will explain the conventions you use to denote ownership (e.g. if you copy whole sentences or paragraphs this must be clearly shown by enclosing them in quotation marks and giving the source, using the Harvard referencing system). For practical work (image, sound, performance) your tutors will guide you on the correct form of referencing to use. Cheating As there are very few examinations at the College, there is little likelihood of copying from each other or from notes. However, where exams do take place, any kind of cheating will be subject to the same penalties as for serious cases of ‘plagiarism’. You should also take great care not to submit for assessment any coursework which has been previously submitted for a previous module. Similarly, be careful to declare fully the roles of any other people who might have been involved in the production of collaborative work, whether they are fellow students or not. If you are unsure of what is acceptable, always ask your tutor(s) for advice before proceeding.

Authenticity of work can be challenged, particularly if it has been carried out away from College. The best proof that it is your own work is again your evidence in sketchbooks or research files, or the progress which has been noticed at tutorials, or during daily studio contact.

Procedures

If a student is suspected of plagiarism the tutor concerned informs the student of the allegation and permits him/her an opportunity to justify the work. If the tutor is not satisfied, a panel will be

24

convened to investigate. The panel will consist of a senior member of staff (who is not part of the programme team) and the College Plagiarism Adviser. The Programme Leader will normally present the case to the same panel. In serious cases, the Open University Academic Reviewers and Dean of Faculty will also be a member of the Panel. They may use an appropriate plagiarism detection service to aid this investigation. As part of the investigation, they will require the student to attend a meeting, with at least 5 days written notice, at which the evidence will be presented to the student, and their response recorded. The student is entitled to be accompanied by a Student Union representative, parent, friend or fellow student. If, at the end of the investigation, it has been found that the student has not been guilty of plagiarism, nor poor academic practice, the College will write to inform them of this outcome, and the case will be closed. Penalties Please note that these are maximum penalties that can be imposed. The severity of the penalty will

depend on the individual circumstances prevailing.

In the case of a first offence of a Level 4 student, if, following this investigation, it is considered that plagiarism has been proven, but is a relatively minor case (or a case of poor academic practice), then the Programme Leader may issue an official warning* to the student. This will be in writing, and will be kept on the student’s file until the completion of their course. The student may also be requested to submit for the project concerned again, as a first attempt. If it is considered that the case of plagiarism is proven, and of a substantive nature, a repeat offence, or is minor but involves a Level 5/6 student, then the panel will determine a penalty. At Level 5 the lightest penalty available would be referral for the work, with a maximum grade of 40 on resubmission. At Level 6, the student would at the very least be required to resubmit and to pass, but would still only be awarded 0 on the results sheet. In the most serious cases, the student might be excluded permanently from their course of study. The decision will be communicated directly to the student. 1. A requirement that the candidate re-submit the relevant piece(s) of work by a specific deadline

(if the work is not submitted by the deadline set, the matter may be referred to the Chair of the College Board of Examiners), or

2. The minimum pass mark for the relevant piece(s) of work may be assigned, or 3. A mark of ‘0’ for the relevant piece(s) of work may be assigned, or 4. A mark of ‘0’ for all coursework components of the relevant course may be assigned. 5. (For Undergraduate only) Degree class to be reduced by one class (unless doing so a ‘pass’

would be turned into a ‘fail’) 6. Degree class to be ‘capped’ at a certain level 7. Suspension from the College for a period of not more than two years 8. Dismissal from College

Circumstances Guidelines for possible penalties according to circumstances of offence (see penalties above).

Case of Plagiarism Case of Plagiarism Poor Academic Practice

Poor Academic Practice

Level 4 1st offence Repeated offence 1st offence Repeated offence

Minor * Written warning 4 *Written warning 3

Moderate 3 4 2 3

Extensive 4 7 3 4

Level 5 1st offence Repeated offence 1st offence Repeated offence

Minor 3 4 1 3

Moderate 4 5 3 4

Extensive 4 8 3 4

Level 6 1st offence Repeated offence 1st offence Repeated offence

Minor 4 5 3 4

Moderate 6 8 4 6

Extensive 8 8 4 6

25

Appendix D - Mitigating Circumstances Policy and Procedures 1 Introduction Mitigating circumstances procedures comprise two separate processes, one process for extensions to deadlines that may be granted during the programme of the Academic Year, the other process for mitigating circumstances that need to be considered at an Examination Board. Mitigating circumstances may include illness or personal problems. It is important that if such circumstances have been considered in the assessment process, this is clearly recorded, and reported to the Final Examination Board, so that compensation is not inadvertently given twice. Compensation in assessment, or variations to a brief, including extensions to deadlines, can only be granted by completing a Mitigating Circumstances Form. This must be signed by the Programme Leader, and by the student (if necessary in retrospect). Where a Programme Leader completes a Mitigating Circumstances Form for a student covering several briefs or modules, all relevant teaching staff will be informed of the existence of mitigating circumstances, but not of the personal details involved. All relevant Mitigating Circumstances Forms, (or copies), will be kept with the Module Assessment Records, and made available at the Final Examination Board meeting. 2 Mitigating circumstances claim for an extension Requests for extensions based on Mitigating Circumstances are considered at local level by Programme Leaders following completion of a form which should be signed by the student, considered and signed by the tutor to confirm the detail of the decision. Submission of Mitigating Circumstances for an extension must be submitted before the stated deadline for assessment. In reaching a decision to allow or decline an extension tutors should refer to the information sheet titled ‘Reason for Mitigating Circumstances Claim’.

Through dialogue and the provision of evidence by the student, to support the request, a decision is arrived at by tutors as to whether there are sufficient grounds to allow extensions. If an extension is allowed the student is provided with confirmation of the decision. Once the decision to grant an extension has occurred, the Mitigating Circumstances prevailing are considered to be ‘spent’. In other words the granting of an extension is judged to be the resolution of the matter. If the same circumstances continue, reoccur, or other circumstances arise which impact significantly on the student’s ability to complete subsequent assessments on time, the student needs to submit a new claim for an extension to be considered for a different module assessment. However, towards the end of the year there is normally insufficient time to allow an extension to end of year assessment because of the regulatory need to report achievement to the end of year Examination Board, the date of which is fixed in advance and requires assessment and associated administration to be completed to a set schedule. A different procedure therefore applies (see section 3). It is the student’s responsibility to complete and submit the form if they wish a claim to be considered. In exceptional circumstances a claim may be made by a member of staff on behalf of a student if there is unequivocal evidence that the student is unable to complete the claim for themselves. E.g. severe illness or incapacity though a trauma of some kind. 3 Mitigating Circumstances claim for Board of Examiner consideration The form titled ‘Mitigating Circumstances Claim Form for Board of Examiner consideration’ is available from course administrators or Student Advice. It must be completed by the student, listing all the modules (including electives and critical studies) which they believe have been affected by significant personal circumstances. Evidence to support the claim e.g. medical certificate, statements/ letters/ certificates from professional individuals or organisations must be attached to

26

the claim form (other advice on how to complete is provided on the form). Forms must be submitted to course administrators by a set date, normally the 1st June. A receipt will be issued. The individual submitting the claim will be advised whether the claim has been accepted as soon as possible after the examination board meeting. The examination board needs to make a decision as to whether the student can progress to the next level (year) of study or to determine the degree classification. The Board also needs to consider whether there were any significant extraneous factors which may have prevented the student from submitting work for assessment on time or had a significant negative impact on the quality of the work submitted. A meeting takes place per programme before the examination board to consider claims for mitigating circumstances. If claims are accepted, recommendations for compensation are made which are then presented and considered at the full examination board. NB: The personal circumstances relating to the claim are only known to the staff at the pre meeting and not discussed or shared at the full examination board to ensure as much confidentiality as possible. If the Mitigating Circumstances claim is considered to be justified the Examination Board, for example, may require the student to submit work to a new deadline as a first attempt or allow resubmission of work as a first attempt. The stipulated deadlines for submission may be by a date in August of the same year or at a future date within the following academic year. This will depend on how much work is required, availability of resources or other contributory factors. Mitigating Circumstances that may be considered broadly fall into the following categories:

serious medical condition

bereavement; trauma

court attendance

other miscellaneous reasons such as jury service Students should think very carefully about whether the circumstances are significant before submitting a form. Table 1 at the end of this policy is for Mitigating Circumstances Claim gives examples of reasons that are acceptable, reasons that may be considered and more importantly reasons that are likely to be unacceptable. It also provides examples of typical evidence that would need to be submitted to substantiate your claim. This table is for guidance only and will be referred to by staff when arriving at decisions. It is the student’s responsibility to complete and submit the form if they wish a claim to be considered. In exceptional circumstances a claim may be made by a member of staff on behalf of a student if there is unequivocal evidence that the student is unable to complete the claim for themselves. E.g. severe illness or incapacity though a trauma of some kind. Notwithstanding the regulations set out with regard to Mitigating Circumstances, the Board of Examiners may, having due regard to the standard of the award, the programme objectives and the programme assessment regulations, exceptionally and at its discretion, allow a student’s overall performance to compensate for partial failure in the assessment of the award.

27

Table 1 Reason for Mitigating Circumstances Claim

Reason for Extenuating Circumstances Claim

Category A: Acceptable reason for claim

Category A Evidence Required

Category B: Reasons for Claim that may be considered

Category B: Evidence Required

Category C: Unacceptable reason for claim

Serious Medical Condition

Serious personal injury or medical condition preventing attendance or completion of assessment or submission of work

Written evidence from a registered medical practitioner

Serious injury or illness to child or close relative (parent); or Serious worsening of an ongoing medical condition

Written Evidence from a medical practitioner; and Evidence of the impact to the claimant such as written report from a medical practitioner

Ongoing Medical conditions

Minor illness (such as colds, sore throats, headaches, hay fever)

Minor accidents or injuries

Bereavement

Death of parent, (including step-parents and legal guardian) child, siblings, spouse or common law partner

Written evidence from a professional such as undertaker, Coroner or Registrar; or Death Certificate

Death of close relative (not identified in Category A) or friend

Evidence identified in Category A; and Evidence of the impact to the claimant such as written report from a registered medical practitioner

Trauma Victim of serious crime (e.g. rape, assault, mugging) Theft of work required for assessment Direct experience of terrorist incident Natural Disaster Major Fire in residence

Written corroboration of the reported crime from Police or other investigating authority Written Evidence from a registered medical practitioner Written evidence from Police of Fire service Report from University Department

Family Breakdown (such as divorce)

Evidence from a Solicitor; and or Evidence of the impact to the claimant such as written report from registered medical practitioner

Minor Crime

Financial problems

Accommodation problems

General domestic/family problems

House Moves

Assessment Exam Stress

Court Attendance

Jury Service Attendance in Court or Tribunal as a witness, plaintiff or defendant

Official correspondence from Court of Tribunal Authority

Supporting friend or relative at Court or Tribunal

Misc Any circumstances which have not clearly impacted on academic performance or do not clearly relate to the timing of assessment

Failing of IT equipment

Private or public transport failure

Employment difficulties

Holidays or booked travel arrangements

The above table is for guidance only and provides examples of factors that may or may not be acceptable for mitigation. The examples cited are not meant to be exhaustive . Other reasons not listed above will also be considered as necessary.