Page content

Quality frameworks for assessment

QAA guidance on assessment

Core quality attributes

  • validity
  • reliability
  • rigour
  • transparency
  • fairness
  • practicality

Assessment Design Frameworks

Programme Assessment Strategies

An holistic, programme team approach to assessment which will be captured in programme narratives and to include descriptions of:

  • Forms of assessment including their rationale for inclusion and expected standards of performance
  • Assessment load and schedule
  • Quality assurance methods
  • Alignment with quality standards and principles (and core qualities*)
  • Alignment with UU strategic vision

Assessment Methods

Diverse and inclusive methods encouraged.

One method should not dominate a programme.

High stakes/high pressure methods must include robust formative methods to enable practice and feedback.

Elements of assessment – either Coursework or Examination

No more than 2 elements per module.

Components of assessment – interrelated subtasks within a coursework element.

Assessment Weighting

The weighting of assessment elements will be declared on module descriptors.

Assessment elements, when calculated, will lead to the total module mark.

Assessment components, when calculated, will lead to a total element mark.

Assessment Timetabling

Programme teams indicate exam requirements on exam return forms, to enable Exams office to timetable and facilitate exams efficiently.

Further Information on Examination Timetables and  exam invigilation

Coordination of Assessments

All assessments within a Programme will be pre-approved by the EE.

CWK made available to EE before week 1 (e.g., via BBL module site)

Exam papers made available to EE by week 3, and submitted to Exams Office by week 8 or in last week of June for supplementary period or Sem 3.

Templates for exam papers available at Examinations website.

Programme Regulations and Exam Policies

General Programme Regulations are derived from University award regulations

Examinations policies and procedures, including appeals, EC1 procedures, and Academic Misconduct can be found on the dedicated Student Administration webpages.

Assessment Processes and Boards of Examiners

Information available from Student Administration webpages.

Changes to Assessment

If elements or weighting of elements to change then CA3 to be submitted via CMS for subsequent ASQEC approval.

  • Proposals to have included student consultation and Faculty approval
  • All approved assessment changes must subsequently correspond with details articulated on the CMS and updated on OLP.
  • Following CA3 ASQEC approval, the Strategic Marketing Unit, Central Admissions, Library, Module Office, Examinations Office, Timetabling Officer, Central Timetabling Unit and Banner Teams are notified as appropriate.
  • changes to coursework / examination weighting which have been recommended by the external examiner - not later than one month prior to the start of the semester for Semester 1 and Semester 2 modules, or by 14 June for Semester 3 modules.

Quality Review of Assessments

Internal Review of strategies and methods via:

  • Val/Reval panels (CA1 or CA6a submission),
  • prog/module revision CA3 process,
  • CAQE,
  • *School-level review of draft papers to be sent to EE
  • Annual review of programme performance (course committee annual monitoring meeting)

External Examiner Review of assessment:

  • MCs responsible for proof reading papers and following School level review process*.
  • CWK briefs, criteria/rubrics and draft exam papers and marking schemes to be shared with EE along with the programme assessment schedule
  • Programme Director signs off documentation when ready for sharing with EE. School/Dept office to facilitate communications with EE.
  • EE feedback to be shared with MCs.
  • HoS responsible for ensuring that all assessments once approved by the EE are held securely.

Accessibility and Special Arrangements

  • Inclusivity including student choice is to be woven through assessment designs
  • Assessment designs should be amenable to accommodations through e.g., amanuensis/extra time or alternative assessments – RARs will be communicated to Course Directors via student wellbeing.
  • AccessAbility Advisers can make reasonable adjustment recommendations
  • Assessment briefs/criteria etc simple, concise and clear
  • Assessment Co-design:
    • Assessment process made transparent to students
    • self assessment methods encouraged
    • Students taking on ‘assessor’ role through co-design of rubrics and peer assessment
    • Collaborative exam design via e.g. peerwise
    • Students choosing their own way of meeting the MLOs.
    • Robust student representation mechanisms with prog teams acting on feedback

Module Assessment Parameters

  • No more than 2 elements of assessment for any module (departures from this parameter may be allowed if rationale is strong enough)
  • Assessments fairly distributed across semester/year to avoid bunching
  • Workload equivalence to be consistently applied (departures from this parameter may be allowed if rationale is strong enough).
  • Module handbooks will describe the assessment, weightings, schedule, format, submission method and deadlines. Rationale for assessment also provided.
  • statements of expected standards of performance at each level and mark/grade band (e.g. marking rubrics) to be provided for coursework tasks.
  • Timely formative activities with feedback to be provided
  • Class tests must be managed appropriately, giving consideration to exam conditions and student accommodations via RARs.
  • Individual component of group work will be 30% minimum. Higher weighting encouraged in final year. Group work activity designed into module contact time.

Assessment Information for Students

Module handbooks will include:

  • Module learning outcomes, assessment task, criteria/expected standards
  • Clear briefing incl weightings, wordcount and rubrics where appropriate
  • Schedule
  • Formative feedback methods
  • Deadline and submission information
  • Guidance on late submissions and extenuating circumstances
  • Submission information for physical artefacts
  • Tutorial schedule
  • Module team contact details and signposting to further support
  • Details on academic misconduct

Assessment Workload and Limits

  • Guidance provided via Workload Equivalence Guide,
  • Clear instructions re: format/structure to be provided as appropriate
  • Clear information provided on content excluded from word count (e.g. appendices etc.) prog teams to agree on exclusions.
  • Students to declare wordcount on submitted work where appropriate (if there is suspicion that a student has falsified the word count – scope for academic misconduct)

Exceeding Assessment Limits

  • Student self-penalises if under word limit as it is less likely they are fully meeting assessment criteria (so student likely to be marked down through rubric)
  • Flexibility of up to 10% over word limit – mark within rubric as normal
  • If word count is significantly over the +10% limit, the marker may stop marking and work will only be considered and marked up to that point. The student will then be self-penalising through missed content and not adhering to structural/writing style criteria as defined in a marking scheme. (so student likely to be marked down through rubric).

Coursework Submission

  • Monday - Friday.
  • Not during published vacation periods for the programme.
  • Not on Bank Holidays or a day that the University is closed.
  • All assessment submissions should be scheduled by 12pm (noon) UK time.

Online Submission

All coursework (where practical and feasible) to be submitted via BBL Ultra Sites. Students complete a self-declaration at the point of submission. Guidance provided by CDLE.

Non-electronic Submission

Where assessment could be submitted online, any exemptions should be agreed by discussion at the local level with the Head of School, and with Dean Learning Enhancement and PVC (AQSE). Requests can be made via assessment@ulster.ac.uk.

Where assessment artefacts are to be submitted in person, students must know:

  • Where, when and to whom work must be submitted.
  • Acceptable formats of submission and other procedural requirements.
  • Students must be issued with dated proof of submission.

Late Submission

Late work not considered (0 mark). EC process can be followed using EC1 form (EC process under review).

Changing Assessment Due Dates

Changes via CA3.

Last minute, temporary changes (due to unforeseen circumstances) to be approved by AD (AQSE) or Dean of Learning Enhancement.

Marking schemes

Ug pass mark – 40%, Pg pass mark – 50%. Extended Master’s degrees – students must achieve 50% to progress from the level 6 graduate certificate stage to level 7 Masters.

Marking schemes to be available for all forms of coursework and subject to internal and external scrutiny.

Video Recording Assessments

Encouraged for real-time, performative forms of assessment.

  • Students will be notified in advance that the assessment will be recorded.
  • Students will be informed about the purpose of the recording, its use, and the length of time it will be retained.
  • The recorded content will only be made available to those deemed necessary for marking and moderating student assessed work.
  • retention and disposal schedule 2.6.

Anonymous marking

Applied to exams, applied where feasible to coursework. Where appropriate, coursework assessment briefs to include:

“Due to the nature of this assessment, anonymous marking does not apply however all methods of assessment are subject to a process of moderation to ensure fair and consistent marking.”

Marking Moderation

moderation requires:

  • an explicit set of marking criteria
  • a set of weightings for each criterion
  • in many cases, an indication of the content of the answer (but not for example, in a dissertation); and an explanation of standards required e.g. for each degree classification

Moderation via various methods as appropriate: Dual marking, sampling, double marking, double blind marking. Arbitration applied as needed.

  • All projects/dissertations to be double marked.
  • Sampling includes at least 10% of scripts across the grade boundaries
  • where there are fewer than 12 scripts in total, all scripts shall be selected
  • where there are 12 or more but fewer than 60 scripts in total, a minimum of 12 scripts shall be selected
  • where there are more than 150 scripts in total, normally a maximum of 30 scripts shall be selected
  • the scripts shall be selected in a random manner subject to at least two being selected from each of the classification bands
  • the sample shall include work at classification/grade boundaries, and all fails

An internal moderation form will be completed to confirm that:

  • marks are consistent, fair and appropriate for the level of study
  • appropriate feedback has been provided to all students including clear guidance on strengths, areas for development and the extent to which the learning outcomes have been achieved

Coursework feedback sheets/methods will indicate if and where moderation has taken place.

Moderation completed within the 20 working days marking window.

Issuing Marks and Feedback

  • Summative assessments recorded via Banner Faculty Grade Entry - guidelines for academic staff.
  • 20 working day marking/moderation window – marks/feedback returned after 20 working days
  • Assessment weighted component marks and overall element and module marks recorded in BBL Ultra (BBL Ultra – post grade option to control marks release).
  • Marks returned to the student cohort on the same date/time once all marks are populated.
  • All marks and Feedback via BBL Ultra Assignment, Turnitin, BBL graded discussions or journals.
  • Marks/feedback release to include: “Marks provided on Blackboard Ultra are subject to ratification by the Board of Examiners and may be subject to change. Please note that as these marks are provisional, they do not necessarily include any penalties applied for academic misconduct.”
  • HoS responsible for ensuring moderation is completed and marks released on time as per policy. HoS to apprise students if feedback is delayed.
  • AD(AQSE) notified by HoS if feedback is delayed.
  • Schools will have a mechanism to record and monitor the operation of issuing scheduled summative feedback and marks.

Feedback

  • formative feedback opportunities made available early in the module
  • Students receive digital feedback on coursework via BBL Ultra including internal feedback comments and an overall mark. (moderation must be transparent where applied).
  • Marking criteria/rubric to be included in feedback to indicate where marks are applied.
  • Principles of good feedback/feedforward to be followed
  • Considerate marking to be applied. Efficient methods of feedback to be considered. Methods to engage students with their feedback to be considered.
  • Feedback on examinations can be via student-staff tutorials. Staff to retain exam script. Group feedback on general exam performance (overall strengths/weaknesses) should be facilitated (e.g. online recording or scheduled F2F session). Marker comments can be applied to exam scripts.

Academic Misconduct

Academic Misconduct Policy (process under review). (see guidance on academic integrity

AI tools within assessment strategies, programme teams should liaise to identify categories of assessment where:

  • AI tools should not be used e.g., examinations.
  • AI tools may be used to assist assessment planning, e.g. writing support, support tutor, testing code, etc.
  • AI tools are integral to the assessment task e.g., generating and analysing AI content.

Acknowledging and referencing AI tools.

Menu of assessment methods to support authentic assessment methods

Reassessment

The nature and consequences of failure in assessment are identified within General Programme Regulations or within Programme Specifications.

  • Reassessment of coursework may be a resubmission of the original work or a new piece of work (to meet the same outcomes), depending on the nature of the assessment.
  • Resit examinations will require a new paper

Retention of Exam Papers

Student scripts retained for at least 6 months post BoE.

Marks retained for 6 years after module/programme completion.

Used exam papers shared with library at end of each semester after exam period and with a user ID and network password.

Exam papers can be searched by programme reference number (CRN), module number or keywords in the module description.

Retention of Coursework

  • Assessment papers - retained for current academic year + 5 years.
  • Individual student feedback on academic progress and general academic guidance – retained until end of student relationship +6 years.
  • Records documenting submitted/completed summative assessments – retained until confirmation of marks/grades +6 months.
  • External Examiner Liaison – retained for termination of appt + 1 year.
  • BoE and EE reports – retained for current academic year + 6 years.