THE UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX

Document Sample
THE UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX Powered By Docstoc
					Handbook for
Postgraduate
Examiners and
Examination Boards
2006/07




Academic Office
September 2006
This handbook is published annually by the Academic Office.

If you have any queries or comments please contact:

Alan Soutter
Academic Information Manager
Sussex House

Tel 3732
Email: A.Soutter@sussex.ac.uk

September 2006
                                         CONTENTS


     SECTION A: GENERAL INFORMATION
1.   CONTACT INFORMATION                                                           1.
          Postgraduate Office                                                      1.1
          Schools                                                                  1.2
2.   REGULATIONS, GENERAL MATTERS AND GLOSSARY OF TERMS                            2.
          Regulations                                                              2.1
          General Matters                                                          2.5
                 Anonymity                                                         2.5
                 Confidentiality                                                   2.7
                 Protocol relating to personal interest and/or knowledge           2.8
          Glossary of key terms                                                    2.9
3.   EXAMINATION BOARDS, DUTIES OF OFFICERS, RESPONSIBILITY OF                     3.
     INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL EXAMINERS AND MARKS ASSURANCE
          Structure and role of examination boards                                 3.1
                 Subject examination boards                                        3.1
                 School examination boards                                         3.1
                 Terms of Reference                                                3.2
                 Composition                                                       3.2
                 Quoracy                                                           3.2
          Duties of Examination Board Officers                                     3.3
                 Chair of the subject examination board                            3.3
                 Deputy Chair of the subject examination board                     3.4
          Internal examiners                                                       3.11
          External examiners                                                       3.14
                 Core duties                                                       3.19
                 Guidelines for moderation                                         3.20
                 Powers of external examiners                                      3.25
                 Limits of external examiners’ powers                              3.27
                 Mitigation and misconduct cases                                   3.28
          External assessors                                                       3.29
          Guidance on the process of marks assurance and finalisation              3.30
                 The phasing of subject examination board work                     3.30
                 Guidance on identifying and dealing with aberrant sets of marks   3.34
                 What to do about a suspect set of marks                           3.40
                 Scaling                                                           3.42
          Procedure for amending marks                                             3.44

4.   PROGRAMME CONVENORS                                                           4.
5.   ASSESSMENT                                                                    5.
          Modes of assessment                                                      5.2
          Unseen examinations                                                      5.3
          Term Paper                                                               5.4
          Dissertation                                                             5.11
                  Length and format                                                5.12
                  Dissertation supervisor                                          5.16
6.   MARKING PROCEDURES FOR UNSEEN EXAMINATION PAPERS, TERM                        6.
     PAPERS AND DISSERTATIONS
          General marking procedure                                                6.1
          Verification of marks                                                    6.3
          Illegible scripts                                                        6.7

Contents
            Incomplete scripts                                                6.8
            Overlength scripts                                                6.10
            Overlapping material                                              6.13
7.    SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ARRANGEMENTS                                         7.
                    Ill health and impairment during the examination period   7.1
                    Long term medical conditions and disabilities             7.2
            Students with dyslexia and learning impairments                   7.3
                    Alternative assessments for disabled students             7.4
                    Submissions by dyslexic students                          7.6
            Religious festivals and holy days                                 7.10
8.    MITIGATING EVIDENCE                                                     8.
            Policy on submission of work                                      8.1
            Mitigating circumstances                                          8.2
            School Mitigating Evidence Committees                             8.3
                    Actions delegated to the Chair                            8.4
            Decisions and outcomes                                            8.6
                    Late submission                                           8.6
                    Very late submission                                      8.6
                    Non submission                                            8.6
                    Absence from an examination                               8.6
                    Submitted work subject to impairment                      8.6
            Actions: guidance for subject examination boards                  8.8
            Programme learning outcomes                                       8.10
            Coursework                                                        8.11
            Exemption for the late submissions policy                         8.12
            Impairment because of academic reasons                            8.15
            Failure of word processing/computing equipment                    8.16
            Recording decisions relating to Mitigating Evidence               8.17
                    Acceptable evidence                                       8.20
                    Not acceptable evidence                                   8.21
9.    FEEDBACK TO STUDENTS ON ASSESSMENTS                                     9.
            Work contributing to the award                                    9.1
            Feedback on dissertations/projects                                9.2
            Policy on feedback to students on coursework                      9.3
            Guidance to Graduate Centres in implementing the policy           9.5
10.   ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT                                                     10.
            General                                                           10.1
            Definitions                                                       10.4
                    Collusion                                                 10.4
                    Plagiarism                                                10.4
                    Misconduct in unseen examinations                         10.4
                    Fabrication of results                                    10.4
            Determination of major and minor cases of misconduct              10.6
                    No case                                                   10.8
            Misconduct Panel                                                  10.9
                    Investigating Officer                                     10.10
            Procedures for determining allegations of misconduct              10.11
                    Minor misconduct                                          10.16
                    Major misconduct                                          10.20
            Conduct of the hearing                                            10.25
                    Admission of accusation                                   10.25
                    Denial of accusation                                      10.25
                    Not guilty                                                10.25

Contents
                   Guilty                                                            10.25
                   Second offence                                                    10.25
            Penalties to be applied                                                  10.26
                   Minor misconduct                                                  10.28
                   Major misconduct                                                  10.29
            Effect of penalties                                                      10.30
            Subject Examination Boards                                               10.32
            Appeals                                                                  10.33
11.   VIVA VOCE EXAMINATIONS                                                         11.
            Procedure                                                                11.2
12.   FAILED STUDENTS, RESIT STUDENTS AND RESIT MARKS                                12.
            Failed students                                                          12.1
            Resit students                                                           12.7
            Resit marks                                                              12.8
13.   RESULTS AND APPEALS                                                            13.
            Publication of results                                                   13.1
                   Failed students                                                   13.2
                   Altered marks                                                     13.5
            Appeals                                                                  13.6
14.   PROCEDURES FOR INTERMISSION                                                    14.
15.   CRITERIA FOR AWARDS                                                            15.
            School of Humanities                                                     15.2
            School of Life Sciences                                                  15.5
            School of Science and Technology                                         15.8
            School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies                           15.11
            SPRU: Science and Technology Policy Research                             15.14
            Sussex Institute                                                         15.17
            Unacceptable outcomes of the rules for classification                    15.26
16.   CREDIT                                                                         16.1
            General Credit                                                           16.3
      APPENDIX A: SAMPLE PASS LIST                                                   A.
      SECTION B: MARKING PROCEDURES (SPECIFIED PROGRAMMES                            B.
      ONLY)
            Unseen examinations                                                      B.1
                   Despatch of answer books                                          B.1
                   Marking procedure                                                 B.3
                   Inability of the internal examiners to agree a mark               B.9
            Term-Papers                                                              B.10
                   Despatch of term papers                                           B.10
                   Marking procedure                                                 B.13
                   Failed term papers                                                B.15
            Dissertations                                                            B.16
                   Marking procedure                                                 B.16
                   Despatch of dissertations                                         B.20
                   Failure of internal examiners to agree on a mark                  B.24
                   Procedure after consideration by the external examiner            B.27
            Library copy of the dissertation                                         B.29
      SECTION C: TIMETABLE FOR EXAMINERS OF COURSEWORK AND                           C.
      DISSERTATIONS 2005/06 (SPECIFIED PROGRAMMES ONLY)

This edition of the Handbook is, as far as possible, accurate and up-to-date when published. The
Handbook is subject to change from time to time and you will be notified of any significant change.
Up-to-date information may be obtained from the Postgraduate Office, Sussex House.

Contents
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


1.     CONTACT INFORMATION

       Postgraduate Office

       1.1     The Postgraduate Office is situated on Level 3 of Sussex House. The main contact is:

               Linda Gee
               Room 332
               Sussex House
               Tel 3731
               Email: l.m.gee@sussex.ac.uk

       Schools

       1.2     The following are the contacts in the schools:

               HUMS                      Carmel Oxley
               LIFESCI                   Karen White
               SOCCUL                    Julie Carr
               SCITECH                   Richard Chambers: Mathematics and
                                         Engineering and Design,
                                         Linda Thomson or
                                         Lindsey Huckstep– Informatics and Physics
               SI                        Gill Carrell and Deborah Charman
               SPRU                      Carmen Long




Contact information                                                                                1
                                   Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

2.     REGULATIONS, GENERAL MATTERS AND GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS

       2.1     This Handbook concerns examiners and subject examination boards for the Degrees
               of Master of Arts (MA), Master of Research (MRes), Master of Laws (LLM), Master of
               Science (MSc), MPhil Development Studies and related Postgraduate Diplomas and
               Postgraduate Certificates.

       2.2     Subject examination boards are responsible, as appropriate, to Senate for the
               conduct of assessments.

       2.3     This handbook should be read in conjunction with any programme specific handbook
               or material which will be provided by the relevant subject examination board, the
               Graduate Centre within the School (GC) or the Postgraduate Office (PGO).

       2.4     Subject examination boards operate in accordance with Ordinance I: Higher Degrees,
               Ordinance III: Award of Degrees, Diplomas, Certificates and other Distinction.
               Regulations for the Degrees of MA, MA in Education, LLM, MPhil (Development
               Studies), MRes, MSc and Postgraduate Diplomas and Certificates which can be
               viewed at the following URL:

               http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/secretariat/ordregs/

       General matters

               Anonymity

       2.5     All student work submitted for assessment for taught programmes, with the exception
               of course work completed within the designated term of study or where the normal
               means of assessment precludes such a possibility (e.g. personal presentation), will
               be anonymised for the purpose of marking;

       2.6     Candidate numbers should be the sole means of identification of assessments;

               Confidentiality

       2.7     The following are general principles on confidentiality:

               (a)     the names of examiners of assessed work are, formally, confidential (although
                       clearly in contexts such as giving feedback on coursework, the identity of the
                       tutor may be evident);

               (b)     examiners are not permitted to inform students of their recommended
                       classification/award outcome before pass lists are published (this does not
                       preclude providing formative feedback to students, based on the assessment
                       criteria for the assessment work, indicating areas of strength and weakness);

               (c)     the content of unseen examination papers must not be revealed in advance to
                       students;

               (d)     the recommendations and discussions of examination boards are strictly
                       confidential;

               (e)     access to students’ marks before and after subject examination board
                       meetings should be restricted to members of staff who need that access in
                       their work capacity.



Regulations, general matters and glossary of key terms                                                2
                                   Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

               Protocol relating to personal interest and/or knowledge

       2.8     The following should be observed in relation to personal interest and/or knowledge of
               a student:

               (a)       If there is any personal interest, involvement or relationship between an
                         examiner and a student, the examiner should not mark the student’s work and
                         should declare the interest to the Director of Graduate Studies;

               (b)       Members of subject examination boards must likewise declare any such
                         connection with a student being assessed either in advance to the Chair of the
                         subject examination board or at the meeting before the student is considered.
                         The examiner must leave the meeting while the student in question is being
                         considered;

               (c)       Advocacy is not permitted on behalf of students about whom an examiner has
                         special knowledge (e.g. personal tutees). Board members’ knowledge of
                         mitigating circumstances affecting students should be fed in advance through
                         the Mitigating Evidence process of the School. If the evidence is relevant to
                         specific instances of late or non-submission, or absence from an exam, the
                         Mitigating Evidence process will take it into account in making its decisions. In
                         cases of more general impairment, the Mitigating Evidence Committee will
                         pass back to the subject examination board its view on the level of
                         seriousness of the impairment.

               Glossary of key terms

       2.9     The following is a glossary of the key terms used in this handbook and their meaning:

                Academic credit           Academic credit is awarded for the successful completion of
                                          a credit rated course.
                Assessment:               The formal work required in order to obtain a mark for a
                                          course. Assessment may take place during the term (often
                                          described as contributory coursework) or after the end of
                                          term or at the end of the year.
                Award:                    the academic award for the successful completion of a
                                          programme (e.g. MA, MSc, MRes, LLM, MSW, Postgraduate
                                          Certificate, Postgraduate Diploma).
                Candidate:                a formal term for a student while s/he is going-through the
                                          assessment process.
                Contributory              Assessment that contributes to the formal mark for a course.
                assessment:

                Course:                   A course of study which may or may not lead to the award of
                                          credit.
                Coursework:               Contributory assessment completed during the time that the
                                          course is being taught, or shortly afterwards.
                Degree:                   the term is often used as a synonym of ‘programme’ but
                                          technically relates to the level of award. Degrees are further
                                          defined as:
                                          Masters Degree
                General credit            Credit awarded by a subject examination board as
                                          compensation where a course has not been passed for
                                          academic credit.
                Level:                    Level refers to the difficulty of the course to which it applies.
                                          Foundation Year courses are offered at Level 0.

Regulations, general matters and glossary of key terms                                                        3
                                   Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                                          Undergraduate courses are offered at Level 1, Level 2, Level
                                          3. Postgraduate courses are offered at Level M.
                Non-contributory          ‘non-contributory work’ is a term used to describe exercises
                work:                     which are required to be undertaken as part of the learning,
                                          but for which the mark does not contribute to the mark
                                          received for the course. This form of work is an essential part
                                          of learning and in some courses the student will not pass
                                          unless the exercise is undertaken. It is sometimes referred to
                                          as non-formal or informal assessment.
                Programme:                a programme is an approved ‘programme of study’
                                          comprising a number of courses and credits which leads to
                                          an award of the University. Students are registered on a
                                          programme.
                Resit:                    A resit is an opportunity to retrieve an initial fail without
                                          repeating a course. Resit marks are capped.




Regulations, general matters and glossary of key terms                                                  4
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


3.      EXAMINATION BOARDS, DUTIES OF OFFICERS, RESPONSIBILITY OF INTERNAL
        AND EXTERNAL EXAMINERS, AND MARKS ASSURANCE
        Structure and roles of examination boards

        3.1     There are two types of examination board:

                (a)     Subject examination boards

                        Subject examination boards deal with examination matters in two Phases
                        (Phase 1: marks assurance and finalisation and Phase 2: determining
                        outcomes for students). Most subject examination boards are responsible for
                        both Phase 1 and Phase 2 but some subject examination boards (e.g. for
                        postgraduate interdisciplinary groups) only deal with Phase 1. Some Schools
                        have constituted a school-wide Phase 2 subject examination board.

                (b)     School examination boards

                        School examination boards perform a monitoring and policy-development role.

        3.2     The following are the Terms of Reference, Composition and quoracy of the subject
                examination boards:

                (i)     Terms of Reference

                        Phase 1 Marks assurance and finalisation

                        (a)      To set, conduct and ensure the marking of assessments from all
                                 courses for which the Department (or Interdisciplinary group) is
                                 responsible in accordance with the procedures determined by Taught
                                 Programmes Committee.
                        (b)      To approve question papers in consultation with the external
                                 examiner(s).
                        (c)      To monitor marks distributions for individual courses and to determine
                                 what action should be taken (if any) in respect of aberrant sets of
                                 marks.
                        (d)      To determine action to be taken in the case of question papers where
                                 there are errors or assessments about which there are complaints.
                        (e)      To confirm and maintain standards of assessments for all courses for
                                 which the Department (or Interdisciplinary group) is responsible in
                                 conjunction with the external examiner(s).
                        (f)      To finalise marks for each course for which the Department (or
                                 Interdisciplinary group) is responsible.
                        (g)      To transmit marks for courses to other examination boards in
                                 accordance with approved procedures and in consultation with the
                                 Examinations Section of the Postgraduate Office.

                        Phase 2: Progression and Classification

                        (h)      To determine, in accordance with the rules and procedures determined
                                 by Taught Programmes Committee, whether students for postgraduate
                                 certificates, diplomas or degrees have satisfied the rules for
                                 progression (where this applies) from one stage of the programme to
                                 the next.
                        (i)      To determine, in the event of failure of a stage or the award, the resit
                                 or repeat requirements.
Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks    5
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                        (j)      To make judgements in relation to general mitigating evidence
                                 submitted to the Board in determining progression and the final award
                                 outcomes for individual students.
                        (k)      To recommend to Taught Programmes Committee the award of
                                 postgraduate certificates, diplomas or degrees to those students who
                                 have satisfied the assessment requirements for these awards.
                        (l)      To report to the School Examination Board annually at the beginning of
                                 the Spring Term, on the conduct and outcomes of the previous year’s
                                 assessments.
                        (m)      To make recommendations, if appropriate, for consideration by the
                                 School Examination Board and Taught Programmes Committee on
                                 changes to rules for the conduct of assessments, and arrangements
                                 for progression, award, resit and repeat.

                (ii)    Composition:

                        Chair; Deputy Chair; the Head of Department or Director of the
                        Interdisciplinary group (who may be Chair); a representative group of the
                        internal examiners of the assessments to be conducted by the board as may
                        be appointed to it by Taught Programmes Committee, tenure normally being
                        for three years, approximately one third of the members retiring annually; the
                        external examiner(s). Examiners who are not members of the Board may be
                        invited to attend meetings or parts of meetings.

                        The Chair and Deputy Chair are nominated by the Dean of the School in
                        consultation with the Head of Department and the appointments are approved
                        by Taught Programmes Committee. The internal examiners are nominated in
                        the first place by the Head of Department or Director of the Interdisciplinary
                        group for approval by the School Examination Board and the appointments
                        are approved by Taught Programmes Committee.

                (iii)   Quoracy and attendance:

                        For Phase 1, the minimum quoracy is the Chair, Deputy Chair and External
                        Examiner(s). External Examiners are not required to attend meetings but
                        should be available for consultation if necessary.

                        For Phase 2 (where a final award is to be made), the Board must meet in full.
                        The quorum is one third of the appointed members of the Board (i.e. excluding
                        ex officio members). At least one external examiner should be present.

                        For Phase 2 (progression only) the minimum quoracy is the Chair and Deputy
                        Chair plus one other member. The External Examiner(s) is not required for the
                        Board to be quorate but should be available for consultation if necessary.

        Duties of Examination Board Officers

                Chair of the subject examination board

        3.3     The Chair of the subject examination board is responsible for:

                (a)     convening the meetings of the examination board;

                (b)     ensuring that the board functions in accordance with its Terms of reference as
                        set out in the Organisation of the University document;


Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks    6
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                (c)     ensuring the effective conduct of business;

                 Deputy Chair of the subject examination board

        3.4     A Deputy Chair should normally be appointed for all subject examination boards. In
                the exceptional absence of the Chair, the Deputy Chair will take over the
                responsibilities of the Chair. The Deputy Chair will assist the Chair in convening the
                meetings of the Board and ensuring its smooth functioning.

        3.5     The Deputy Chair of the subject examination board is responsible for:

                (a)     ensuring that the following information is published to students and examiners
                        in a timely manner:

                        (i)      rubrics for examination question papers;

                        (ii)     assessment criteria for all courses;

                        (iii)    changes to the format of examination question papers;

                        (iv)     updated and approved versions of relevant assessment criteria against
                                 which marking should be undertaken.

                (b)     managing (in consultation with the School Administrator (Curriculum)) the
                        production of examination question papers by the specified deadline in all
                        unseen examinations set by the Postgraduate Office including:

                        (i)      ensuring consistent style and correct question numbering;

                        (ii)     arranging for members of the examination board to vet draft question-
                                 papers;

                        (iii)    obtaining the approval of the external examiner;

                        (iv)     proof-reading prior to printing and final checking of printed papers;

                        (v)      ensuring that the rubric refers to any handout that should apply to the
                                 examination paper;

                        (vi)     ensuring that copies of rubrics are sent to School Administrators
                                 (Curriculum) and the Postgraduate Office and that any significant
                                 changes in format or rubric of question-papers are flagged to the
                                 Postgraduate Office;

                        (vii)    ensuring that the final proof-read versions of question papers are sent
                                 on disk or in hard copy ready for photocopy to the Postgraduate Office
                                 by the appropriate deadline.

                (c)     Being the main point of contact with the external examiner including:

                        (i)      providing departmental briefing and induction materials in accordance
                                 with the Policy on External Examining of Taught Programmes – to
                                 include a list of programmes/courses to be examined and their aims,
                                 objectives and learning outcomes; a copy of the previous external
                                 examiner’s report; a copy of the latest annual review monitoring; the


Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks      7
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                                 names of course convenors and tutors; all relevant marking schemes
                                 and assessment criteria;

                        (ii)     ensuring that the external examiner scrutinises at least 20% of the
                                 scripts in accordance with the core duties set out in the Policy on
                                 External Examining of Taught Programmes;

                        (iii)    providing scripts for adjudication in cases of disagreement amongst
                                 internal examiners and advising, where requested, on the reasons for
                                 internal marking disagreements;

                        (iv)     reviewing the scripts of borderline students (where appropriate);

                        (v)      providing external examiners with comments of internal examiners on
                                 marks assigned;

                        (vi)     despatching scripts with completed mark sheets, making it clear what
                                 the external examiner is being asked to do, and including relevant
                                 materials such as question-papers for unseen exams, and return
                                 envelopes;

                        (vii)    generally keeping accurate records of what has been sent to the
                                 external examiner;

                        (viii)   ensuring that any marks that require the external’s resolution are
                                 returned by the specified deadlines, to the appropriate office.

                (d)     ensuring the appointment of examiners for each course falling within the remit
                        of the examination board including:

                        (i)      securing the appointment of an experienced examiner to work with a
                                 new or inexperienced examiner;

                        (ii)     briefing all examiners;

                        (iii)    providing all examiners with the relevant marking schemes and
                                 assessment criteria.

                (e)     ensuring that the marking of scripts is undertaken in accordance (where
                        appropriate) with published timetables, with correct liaison with the
                        Postgraduate Office and oversight of relevant aspects of data-entry to the
                        central marks database, including:

                        (i)      returning a list of examiners for all courses by the deadline published
                                 by the Postgraduate Office;

                        (ii)     managing the timely collection and distribution of students’ scripts for
                                 marking by examiners;

                        (iii)    ensuring that internal marking Is completed and marks are entered on
                                 the central database and checked by the specified deadline;

                        (iv)     oversight of the process of local inputting of contributory coursework
                                 marks to the central marks database by the deadline specified, and
                                 responsibility for ensuring that mechanisms are in place to check and


Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks    8
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                                 confirm the accurate input of marks, and the correct flagging of
                                 late/non-submitted coursework items;

                        (v)      arranging for appropriate action to be taken.

                (f)     investigating complaints on question papers;

                (g)     ensuring the presentation of marks arrays, including relevant calculated mean
                        marks, for students on programmes falling within the remit of the subject
                        examination board, in respect of:

                        (i)      stage-to-stage progression;

                        (ii)     consideration for final award, and where relevant, classification.

                (h)     reviewing marks distributions across all the assessment units falling within the
                        remit of the examination board and identifying any aberrant sets of marks for
                        further investigation;

                (i)     liaising with the School Administrator (Curriculum) and the Postgraduate
                        Office in the resolution of issues relating to individual students;

                (j)     liaising with the School Mitigating Evidence committee about decisions and
                        advice relevant to the subject examination board.

        3.6     The Deputy Chair is also responsible for ensuring that:

                (a)     a formal agenda of the items of business is prepared and sent in advance of
                        the meeting to:

                        (i)      the members of the subject examination board;

                        (ii)     the external examiner(s);

                        (iii)    the Postgraduate Office.

                (b)     formal minutes of the decisions taken by the board are recorded and that a
                        copy of those minutes is sent to the Postgraduate Office.

                (c)     at the end of the meeting at which the results are finalised the marks list is
                        signed by the external examiner and the pass list is signed by the Chair of the
                        subject examination board. The Secretary must send a copy of the certified
                        marks list and the pass list to the Postgraduate Office for ratification by the
                        Chair of Taught Programmes Committee on behalf of Senate. The Secretary
                        should retain a copy. An example of the approved format for a Pass List
                        (which must be strictly adhered to) is set out in Appendix A.

                (d)     the Postgraduate Office is notified immediately after the meeting of the
                        subject examination board of the names and details of any candidates who
                        have failed, with or without a resit option, or any candidate who has been
                        granted an extension for the submission of work beyond the relevant deadline
                        for submission. The Postgraduate Office will send formal written notification to
                        such candidates.

        3.7     In cases where a final decision on a candidate has not been reached, (e.g. in cases
                of failure but where a candidate is given the opportunity to revise and resubmit an
Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks    9
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                assessment or where a candidate has been granted an extension for the submission
                of an assessment), the subject examination board must identify, at the subject
                examination board meeting, the minimum requirement for the student to be granted
                the award. In this way the board specifies in advance the conditions on which it would
                award the degree to the student. Provided the conditions, including any deadlines set,
                are met by the student, the Chair may sign the pass list on that basis. The external
                examiner will be required to assess any outstanding items in the normal way. It is very
                important in these circumstances that the minutes record explicitly what was agreed
                by the subject examination board.

        3.8     Subsequent to the subject examination board meeting, a student who does not meet
                the minimum conditions set by the full meeting of the subject examination board must
                have their case deferred for further consideration at the next available meeting of the
                subject examination board.

        3.9     Subject examination board decisions cannot be changed under delegated authority.

        3.10    If an urgent decision needs to be taken, i.e. one which has not been predetermined at
                a subject examination board meeting, then the opinion of each member of the board
                must be canvassed, or a special meeting convened.

                Internal Examiners

        3.11    Acceptance of appointment as an internal examiner entails a responsibility for
                meeting relevant marking deadlines, including those which apply to the marking of
                dissertations during the month of September.

        3.12    An internal examiner is responsible for independently marking each item of
                assessment for which they are responsible and for subsequently determining, in
                consultation with the other internal examiner, an agreed mark.

        3.13    Directors of Graduate Studies may use their discretion to impose within their School a
                restriction for any programme that the supervisor of a dissertation/project should not
                act as an internal examiner.

                External examiners

                Appointment

        3.14    For each programme, at least one external examiner is appointed by Senate on the
                recommendation of the head of the department or director of the interdisciplinary
                group. The recommendation must be endorsed by the School Curriculum Committee
                before forwarded to the Academic Office which will seek full approval from the Chair
                of Academic Policy and Standards Committee on behalf of Senate;

        3.15    Only persons of sufficient seniority and experience to be able to command authority
                should be appointed;

        3.16    An external examiner should not normally be appointed from a department in a
                university where a member of the inviting university department is serving as an
                external examiner;

        3.17    Former members of staff should not be invited to become external examiners before
                a lapse of at least three years or a sufficient time for students taught by that member
                of staff to have passed through the system, whichever is the longer;


Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks   10
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

        3.18    The appointment will normally be of four years' duration. In exceptional cases, a
                further extension of one year may be approved.

                Core duties

        3.19    The core duties of External Examiners are:

                (a)     To report on whether the standards set are appropriate for the University’s
                        awards, or award elements, by reference to published national subject
                        benchmarks, the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications,
                        programme       specifications    and     other      relevant   information.
                        Departments/interdisciplinary groups/partner institutions should agree with
                        their External Examiners how their judgements are expected to relate to
                        these agreed reference points and this should be explicitly documented as
                        part    of    the   material     sent    to    External     Examiners     by
                        departments/interdisciplinary groups/partner institutions;

                (b)     To report on the standards of student performance in programmes or parts
                        of programmes which they have been appointed to examine, and on the
                        comparability of the standards with those of similar programmes or parts of
                        programmes in other UK higher education institutions;

                (c)     To report on the extent to which processes for assessment, examination
                        and the determination of awards are rigorous, ensure equity of treatment
                        for students and have been fairly conducted in accordance with regulations
                        and guidance;

                (d)     To report whether the assessment processes enable students to
                        demonstrate the achievements of the intended learning outcomes;

                (e)     To report on the appropriateness of the published assessment criteria;

                (f)     To scrutinise and approve draft examination papers;

                (g)     To adjudicate in cases of unresolved disagreement between internal
                        examiners;

                (h)     To examine (confirm the mark of) postgraduate dissertations/projects
                        which are potentially distinction grade.

                        The external examiner is entitled to propose a change to the mark agreed
                        by the internal examiners. In such a case the external examiner must
                        consult with the internal examiner to reach an agreed mark but, if this is not
                        possible, ultimately the decision of the Chair of the subject examination
                        board shall be final.

                (i)     To moderate a representative range or sample of internal marking to
                        include a sample of scripts from each band of classification or marking;

                (j)     To scrutinise at least 20% of scripts through any of the activities set out in
                        (g), (h) or (i) above;

                (k)     To review the scripts of borderline candidates (as appropriate), where a
                        specific borderline category has been approved;
Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks   11
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                (l)     To be involved in the assessment of, or ratification of marks for, all courses
                        which contribute to the assessment of an award;

                (m)     To be a full member of and attend meetings of the relevant examination
                        board. To participate in the work of the board, including viva voce
                        examinations (restricted to borderline fail students only) and the final
                        assessment of candidates. External Examiners will be invited to but are not
                        required to attend examination board meetings which solely consider
                        progression. To sign marks sheets;

                (n)     To submit a report to the Vice-Chancellor at the end of each year of the
                        appointment.

                Guidelines for moderation

        3.20    It is University policy that all assessed items of work counting towards an award
                should be available for moderation by external examiners as part of the annual
                process of determining course results in each year of the student's programme.

        3.21    Part of the role of the external examiner is to moderate internal marking by reviewing
                a sample of the items of assessment. Programme Convenors should agree with their
                external examiners on the most suitable samples for this purpose, bearing in mind the
                object of providing the external examiner with a good overview of the full range of
                internal marks.

        3.22    When the external examiner, acting in their moderating capacity, reviews samples of
                work the agreed internal marks for those pieces of work making up the sample should
                not be changed. In the light of moderation, the external examiner may recommend
                that the overall level of marking for the whole cohort for that course be changed by a
                uniform margin.

        3.23    In order to recommend the alteration of an individual mark on a script submitted for
                moderation, the external examiner should first have reviewed all other scripts for that
                unit of assessment.

        3.24    The external examiner may request additional marking of students’ work, following
                consultation with internal colleagues responsible for examining.

                Powers of External Examiners

        3.25    External Examiners make judgements separately from internal examiners and act
                as moderators. They should only exceptionally act as additional markers on a par
                with internal examiners. In their independent capacity External Examiners have
                the power to:

                (a)     recommend the adjustment of marks or decisions for individuals or
                        students collectively, following consultation with internal examiners. In
                        order to recommend the alteration of an individual mark on a script
                        submitted for moderation, the External Examiner should first have reviewed
                        all other scripts for that unit of assessment.

                (b)     request and obtain reasonable access to assessed parts of any
                        programme, including evidence about a student’s performance on a
                        placement;
Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks   12
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                (c)     request additional marking of students’ work, following consultation with
                        internal colleagues responsible for examining.

                Note: The general rule that individual marks cannot be changed is intended to
                      secure fair treatment for all students in circumstances where only a sample
                      of the cohort is reviewed by the external examiner. It would be
                      inappropriate to privilege individual students whose work happens to fall
                      within the sample by allowing individual marks to be altered (either up or
                      down). In the case of raised marks, this would be unfair to students whose
                      work is not included in the sample; in the case of lowered marks this would
                      be unfair on students who are subjected to the additional level of scrutiny
                      (double jeopardy).

                        The university rules do however recognize that situations arise where the
                        external examiner moderation process will identify matters of concern; that
                        is its purpose. In these circumstances the external examiner has the option
                        of:

                        (i)      reviewing personally all scripts for the cohort and directly
                                 recommending a change of mark;

                        (ii)     referring the matter back to the internal markers for consultation and
                                 additional marking.

                        The principle in both instances is that any adjustment of the mark is carried
                        out in the knowledge of the performance of all candidates.

        3.26    In addition, External Examiners:

                (a)     should be consulted about the method for sampling students’ work for
                        external scrutiny taking account of the need to provide a representative
                        sample covering the full range of marking bands;

                (b)     should be entitled (and are encouraged) to meet students on programmes
                        and courses they are examining;

                (c)     should have the opportunity to meet with internal examiners;

                (d)     should liaise with the Deputy Chair of the Examination Board should they
                        require any information additional to that provided in the routine way
                        (Academic Policy and Standards Committee has agreed that any relevant
                        additional information, including the provision of a rationale for marks
                        awarded, must be made available if requested in advance).

                Limits of External Examiners’ powers

        3.27    Where an external examiner is unwilling to endorse the outcomes of the
                assessment process, the final decision on the outcome of assessment rests with
                the Chair of the subject examination board and not the external examiner. In such
                circumstances, the Chair must report the fact to the Vice-Chancellor immediately.
                External examiners retain the right to make a separate confidential report to the
                Vice-Chancellor on such occasions.

Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks   13
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                Mitigation and Misconduct cases

        3.28    The decisions of the panels determining the outcome of mitigation or misconduct
                are outside the immediate remit of examiners. The role of the external examiner in
                these instances is as a member of the subject examination board in determining
                the impact on progression or on the final award where such discretion is allowed
                by the decision of the mitigation or misconduct process. The external examiner
                may be consulted by the Chair or Deputy Chair of the subject examination board
                about the specific circumstances involved.

        External Assessors

        3.29    External Assessors may occasionally be appointed in addition to an external examiner
                to examine specific aspects of a programme.

        Guidance on the process of marks-assurance and finalisation

                The phasing of subject examination board work

        3.30    Most subject examination boards deal with two distinct stages:

                (a)     marks assurance and finalisation;

                (b)     determining outcomes for students.

        3.31    The exceptions are subject examination boards which do own courses but do not own
                any programmes where their role is restricted to marks assurance and finalisation.

        3.32    The University has agreed that it is good practice to have a distinct, preliminary,
                marks-assurance and finalisation stage, prior to determining final or progression
                outcomes.

        3.33    The specific quality-assurance and operational functions that are facilitated by having
                this separate initial phase are to:

                (a)     review marks distributions for courses and decide, with external examiners,
                        how to deal with any aberrant sets of marks;

                (b)     decide outcomes in cases of mitigating evidence relating to groups of students
                        taking courses ‘owned’ by the subject examination board;

                (c)     finalise marks, secure the recording of any changes, and make marks
                        available to other subject examination boards that require them.

                Guidance on identifying and dealing with aberrant sets of marks

        3.34    The general purpose of the marks assurance/finalisation phase of work is for each
                subject examination board to ensure and declare that the marks for the courses that it
                owns are fit for purpose, finalised and ready for the next step of determining
                classification or progression outcomes. Subject examination boards are very
                interdependent in this regard. The most urgent operational aspect of this is for boards
                to carry out a scrutiny for any seriously aberrant sets of marks, and to decide how to
                deal with any such cases that they identify.

        3.35    Where marks are held on the central database, each subject examination board will
                be provided with a statistical presentation of the marks set out as:
Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks   14
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                (a)     a summary presentation in the shape of a ‘box-plot’ graph;

                (b)     a summary listing of key data – one row per course;

                (c)     detailed reports for each course owned by the board, which seeks to provide
                        the information that the board would find useful in investigating a ‘suspect’ set
                        of marks.

        3.36    Subject examination boards accustomed to carrying-out this marks assurance role
                routinely will have locally-developed approaches but the approach below is suggested
                to board officers who are less familiar with the process:

                (a)     begin by surveying the boxplot diagram and the summary marks analysis list
                        for all courses in that subject + year of programme. The first pass is to look
                        for cases where either the box-plot or summary report shows that the mean
                        and/or median of a set of marks is clearly out of line with the norm for the
                        subject – e.g. a course with at least 10 students with a mean mark more than
                        10% different from the mean for the subject as a whole. Such cases are
                        flagged in the summary report. Note that overly high marks are in principle as
                        problematic as overly low marks;

                (b)     another, but less visually obvious, potential problem is where the mean mark
                        for the course may appear normal for the subject/year, but is actually
                        significantly out of line with the marks for the same group of students on their
                        other courses. To help Boards to spot such cases the centrally-provided
                        reports include a ‘T test’ score to measure the significance of the difference
                        between sets of marks for courses and the mean marks for the same
                        students’ other courses. T-test scores of greater than 4 are highlighted in the
                        summary report. The ‘T’ test works like this, in detail:

                        (i)      find the (positive or negative) difference between the mean mark for
                                 the suspect unit and the mean mark for that same set of students on
                                 their other courses. These values are provided;

                        (ii)     to check for significance, divide this difference by the standard
                                 deviation of the suspect set of marks, and multiply the result by the
                                 square root of n, the number of students. The resulting ‘T score’ is
                                 shown on the summary and detailed listings;

                        (iii)    the bigger the T score is (positive or negative), the more there is a
                                 case for asking whether the marks for that course as a whole are out
                                 of line. A T score bigger than 4 (or -4) warrants a close look at the
                                 detailed marks distribution information.

        3.37    It is vital to note that, although the two tests above may alert the subject examination
                board to problematic sets of marks, they do not in themselves justify immediate action
                in the shape of scaling, remarking etc.

        3.38    Cases where direct intervention in a set of marks is really necessary are unusual and
                the reasons need to be compelling. Subject examination boards need to guard
                against a natural tendency to focus on cases where students seem to be somewhat
                disadvantaged, which may overlook balancing cases that work somewhat to students’
                advantage. Even where there do appear to be some grounds for concern about a
                teaching and learning issue with a particular course, it is often more appropriate not
                to intervene to adjust a set of marks, and to opt instead for the issues identified to be
Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks   15
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                followed-up later in a measured way, by reviewing assessment strategies and the
                extent to which markers are sharing the same interpretations of marking criteria. It is
                expected that the subject examination board will formally minute any deliberations it
                has about sets of marks.

        3.39    The data reports provide other indicators (minimum/maximum marks, standard
                deviation, historical mark patterns) that are useful context, but none of these would in
                themselves be likely to deliver a reason for regarding a set of marks as ‘unsafe’
                enough to need urgent intervention. It is also worth noting that the fact that a set of
                marks appears to be compliant with historical norms and min/max values does not in
                itself show that the marks are ‘safe’.

                What to do about a suspect set of marks

        3.40    If a set of marks has been identified that is prima facie suspect, scrutiny should move
                to the detailed report level and the views of the examiners involved should be
                ascertained to identify possible causes. For instance:

                (a)     to see whether it is apparent that the problem lies with particular assessments
                        (e.g. the marks for coursework are normal but the marks for the Unseen exam
                        indicate a problem). In doing this one needs to be alive to the fact that
                        different assessment modes produce different typical mean marks, e.g. it is
                        common for mean coursework marks to be 10%+ higher than mean unseen
                        exam marks, reflecting the different assessment circumstances. Therefore it
                        may be meaningful to compare the mean marks for a ‘suspect’ sub-
                        assessment unit with other mean marks of the same mode from other
                        courses: this information is available in the reports;

                (b)     to see whether there may have been a problem for specific group(s) of
                        students – this can be gauged by looking at the distribution of students in the
                        detailed report according to which programmes they come from, or if they are
                        Visiting or Exchange (V or E) students;

                (c)     to consider the possibility of administrative error – e.g. incorrect data entry.

        3.41    If the problem looks serious the external examiner should be involved.

                Scaling

        3.42    Scaling a whole set of marks is an intervention not to be gone into lightly. It is only
                appropriate if there is a serious problem which has affected all students more or less
                equally. If scaling does seem to an appropriate response to a problem, the
                appropriate scaling value/approach needs to be determined by considering the scale
                of difference between what the suspect marks are and what they might have been
                expected to be (relative to subject mean or mean mark for other courses). For
                example:

                (a)     it may be the case that a simple percentage adjustment to the whole set of
                        marks suggests itself, but this may not be the case;

                (b)     another approach (sometimes called ‘linear interpolation’) is to proceed by
                        deciding first which "raw" mark in the problematic set of marks corresponds to
                        the merit/distinction (or pas/distinction where there is no merit) border and
                        convert that to distinction and similarly agree the marks equivalent to the other
                        borderlines, and perform those conversions. Then do another pass to


Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks        16
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                        arithmetically convert and interpolate the remaining marks between these
                        established borderline-points.

        3.43    If a subject examination board decides that a scaling solution is needed and has
                arrived at a specific proposal, the board officers are asked to submit it to the
                Postgraduate Office by email. This is intended to give a sounding-board in terms of
                the proposed action being not out of line with the approach being taken by other
                similar subjects. It is also to offer a service: for boards using marks on the central
                database, the office will do the inputting of the marks-changes requested, which will
                enable outputs like marks arrays to be re-run with corrected marks as soon as
                possible. It also helps to keep a record of boards’ decisions in case of the need for
                later review.

        Procedure for amending marks

        3.44    Where a change to a set of marks is proposed, the Deputy Chair of the subject
                examination board should send an email request to the Postgraduate office
                containing the following information:

                (a)     the name of the subject examination board;

                (b)     the course code and title;

                (c)     an outline of the nature of the problem identified and rationale for action
                        proposed including a list of the revised marks for each student.

                (d)     the exact proposal for action from one of the following options:

                        (i)      rescale the marks either by a standard proportion, or by the ‘linear
                                 interpolation’ approach;

                                         (Note: Where a Board decides to rescale a set of marks it
                                         should be regarded as normal that changing the final/conflated
                                         overall marks will break the arithmetical ‘audit-trail’ back to the
                                         underlying marks for the various assessment elements. This is
                                         inevitable except where the Board has identified a problem with
                                         a specific sub-assessment unit, in which case it might re-scale
                                         the marks for that sub-unit only, and re-conflate corrected final
                                         marks for the unit.

                                         The correct approach to scaling a set of marks that contain
                                         lateness penalties is to remove the effect of the lateness
                                         penalties, perform the scaling operation, and then re-apply the
                                         lateness penalties).

                        (ii)     set the marks aside;

                                         (Note: In principle the set of marks as a whole can be set aside,
                                         or if there is a specific problem with a particular assessment,
                                         the marks for that item can be set aside, and corrected final
                                         marks re-conflated. BUT NOTE:

                                         (a)     setting-aside overall course marks can create serious
                                                 problems in the context of credit-accumulation-based
                                                 progression and classification rules. It needs to be seen
                                                 as even more an option of last resort than scaling;
Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks      17
assurance
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                                         (b)     if setting-aside a set of assessment marks leaves in
                                                 place the marks for another assessment mode (e.g. just
                                                 the Coursework marks are left), it is not recommended
                                                 to ‘rescale’ the remaining marks based on a perception
                                                 of normal performance bias for that mode of
                                                 assessment).

                        (iii)    flag those students who have been subject to a clear marking problem
                                 but for whom it was decided to leave the marks unchanged such that if
                                 they turn out to be in discretionary situations (either for classification or
                                 progression), this information may be used by the subject examination
                                 board.

                (e)     explicit confirmation that the external examiner, or a majority of external
                        examiners, agree with what is proposed. If the subject examination board
                        chooses to overrule the external examiner(s) advice, clear reasons must be
                        given for this;

                (f)     flag the deadline by which updates to the marks need to be done in order to
                        present updated marks to the relevant subject examination boards to enable
                        them to make recommendations on classification or progression;

        3.45    The email from the Deputy Chair of the subject examination board will provide a good
                basis of a formal minute by the board. In the event that the Postgraduate Office has
                concerns about what a subject examination board is proposing to do or there is
                disagreement between the office and the subject examination board officers, the
                matter will be adjudicated by the Chair of the relevant School Examination Board.




Examination boards, duties of officers, responsibility of internal and external examiners and marks        18
assurance
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


4.    PROGRAMME CONVENORS

      4.1    The Programme Convenor is the academic manager for the programme within the
             Graduate Centre. The duties of the Programme Convenor include the following:

             (a)      providing the assessment criteria for the programme to internal and external
                      examiners and students;

             (b)      sending the required items of assessment to the external examiner;

             (c)      liaising with the external examiner about the range of items of assessment to
                      be used as the basis for moderation of internal marking;

             (d)      approving study plans;

             (e)      checking on the progress of students and liaising with the external examiner
                      about problem students including sending all the scripts of those students in
                      danger of failing the award;

             (f)      providing formal feedback on assessment items to students;

             (g)      in consultation with the Deputy Chair of the subject examination board,
                      ensuring that the necessary arrangements are made with the external
                      examiner about the subject examination board meeting;

             (h)      providing the external examiner with information establishing the basis of the
                      internal examiners’ marks for each item of assessment (normally by ensuring
                      that examiners disclose how a proposed mark has been determined) and
                      providing such additional information as may be required on request;

             (i)      approving a list of essay titles, obtained from the course tutor for each
                      student. Checking the essay titles to avoid duplication in the subject matter.




Programme Convenors                                                                               19
                               Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

5.    ASSESSMENT

      5.1    Each programme consists of courses which are formally assessed and which
             contribute to the award. Programme Convenors must ensure that students know the
             formal assessment requirements for their programme of study i.e. modes, weightings,
             deadlines etc. This can be viewed on Department web pages at the following URL:

             http://www.sussex.ac.uk/departments

             Select the department, then ‘Teaching’ and either ‘Course Directory’, or ‘Programme
             Specifications’.

      Modes of assessment

      5.2    The approved modes of assessment for taught postgraduate programmes (with
             descriptors) is set out in the following URL:

             http://www.sussex.ac.uk/academicoffice/modesofassess

      Unseen Examinations

      5.3    The following procedures for the conduct of unseen examinations must be followed:

             (a)    each draft question paper must be set by at least two internal examiners and
                    the draft approved and signed by both examiners. Questions set must take
                    account of the courses taught to students;

             (b)    the Programme Convenor is responsible for checking that the examination
                    paper is complete and sequential. The Programme Convenor must receive
                    written approval, from the relevant external examiner, of the examination
                    paper and then must counter-sign the final draft of each paper before
                    submission, by the published deadline, to the Postgraduate Office in its final
                    typed form;

             (c)    students are advised that answers must be written legibly in English, except
                    where specific provision exists for the use of another language.

      Term-Paper

      5.4    A Term Paper consists of a written piece of work normally concerned with aspect(s)
             of academic work covered in a single term.

      5.5    The title must be agreed between the student and the tutor for the course by the end
             of the term in which the course is taught. In agreeing a title, a tutor must be satisfied
             that:

             (a)    the subject is relevant to the course;

             (b)    the title is as specific as possible and is academically sound;

             (c)    the principal sources on the Term Paper subject are available to the student.

      5.6    Term-papers must be written legibly by the student in English.

      5.7    Tutors must remind students that duplication in the subject matter of their various
             assessment units is not permitted.

Assessment                                                                                          20
                               Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


      5.8    Tutors must submit consolidated lists of essay titles for approval by the Programme
             Convenor.

      5.9    Examiners may penalise over-length Term Papers by the loss of a mark (or marks).

      5.10   Students in most programmes will also be required to complete coursework which
             does not contribute to the formal assessment. The requirement for this is prescribed
             by the Programme Convenor.

      Dissertation

      5.11   A dissertation consists of a major written work reporting the results of a substantial
             research project (typically conducted over more than one term), providing a coherent
             argument about the topic addressed and aiming to incorporate an element of
             originality in the argument and/or the evidence used to sustain it.

             Length and format

      5.12   Masters students are required to prepare a dissertation or project of a prescribed
             length and format.

      5.13   The length of the dissertation includes the footnotes, but does not include the
             bibliography or appendices. Examiners may penalise over-length dissertations by the
             loss of a mark (or marks).

      5.14   Each copy of a dissertation must contain:

             (a)     a summary of approximately 100 words;

             (b)     a short preface outlining the purpose of the dissertation and the main
                     problems to be discussed, the principal sources used and, where relevant, the
                     extent to which the dissertation is based upon secondary authorities. It must
                     also indicate the extent to which the author is indebted to the Supervisor and
                     other individuals for assistance;

             (c)     a signed declaration (printed on the cover sheet) stating that the student has
                     read and understood the definition of 'Plagiarism' as set out in the General
                     Assessment Handbook for Postgraduate Students and stating that the
                     dissertation is their own work.

      5.15   A dissertation must be typewritten in English (except where specific provision exists
             for the use of another language). It must have a title, a table of contents, a
             bibliography of sources consulted, properly organised footnotes and references and
             (where appropriate) appendices of a technical nature, such as computer programs.
             Where a dissertation is divided into chapters, each chapter must have a title.

             Dissertation Supervisor

      5.16   A dissertation is written under the guidance of a Supervisor appointed by the
             Programme Convenor on behalf of the relevant Director of Graduate Studies.

      5.17   Each student is required to fill in a Certificate of approval for dissertation outline and
             title. The dissertation Supervisor must complete the Certificate confirming approval.




Assessment                                                                                          21
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

6.     MARKING PROCEDURES FOR UNSEEN EXAMINATION PAPERS, TERM PAPERS AND
       DISSERTATIONS

       General Marking Procedure

       6.1     Assessment criteria are statements of the characteristics of assessed work that
               attract different ranges of marks. They are produced by Departments and vary in
               ways appropriate to different disciplines but are kept under review by school
               curriculum committees. Every year students should receive, or be directed to, a set
               of up-to-date criteria relevant to their assessed work.

       6.2     Directors of Graduate Studies, in consultation with Programme Convenors, should
               ensure that subject specific criteria are made available to examiners, subject
               examination boards and students.

       Verification Of Marks

       6.3     The marking of assessments contributing to classification/an award must be
               conducted by two examiners. Marks proposed by a first examiner should be verified
               by a second examiner. The purpose of verification is to ensure that marking is carried
               out appropriately and consistently and a number of methods of verification may be
               employed. These include blind double-marking (most commonly used for extended
               written assessments), mark checking (where set answers are available to the
               markers), and sampling with verification against established marking criteria (which
               may be deployed across a wide range of assessments, including essays). Where no
               alternative method of verification has been approved by a school curriculum
               committee, the default method is blind double-marking. In certain instances the
               requirements of external accreditation may prescribe blind double-marking.

       6.4     In all cases it should be clear that a second examiner/verifier has the right (and the
               responsibility in cases of disagreement) to re-open all the proposed marks.

       6.5     In order to support transparency in assessment, all formally assessed work must
               include a clear indication setting out the basis on which the proposed mark is being
               awarded. This information should be made available as a matter of routine to external
               examiners moderating, reviewing or otherwise scrutinising assessments.

       6.6     The following guidelines relate to methods of verification other than blind double-
               marking.
               (a)     the process of verification must address the full range of marks deployed and
                       must be linked to clearly published marking criteria. The sample must be
                       adequate in size. In all cases the first marker must indicate clearly (by marking
                       on the script or the use of a proforma) how the mark has been derived.

               (b)     it is acceptable for all assessment exercises in a given year/stage to be
                       verified rather than double-marked provided that:

                       (i)     the method of verification and marking criteria are approved by the
                               School Curriculum Committee;

                       (ii)    examiners for each exercise are appropriately briefed.
               (c)     school curriculum committees may specify that all marks within a specific band
                       are subject to verification in addition to the core sample (normally this will apply
                       to first class/distinction and fail marks).



Marking procedures for unseen examinations, term papers and dissertations                               22
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

               (d)     assessments comprising quantitative work, where it is possible to provide
                       model answers and a well-defined mark scheme (so that in principle anyone
                       with a knowledge of the subject could mark the work and marks by two such
                       markers would be identical) will commonly use a method of verification other
                       than blind double-marking. Examples include: problem sheets; mid-term and
                       end-of-term quizzes; multiple-choice tests.

       Illegible scripts

       6.7     If a script is illegible the Chair of the subject examination board will arrange with the
               student for the script to be typed (or rewritten) under supervision and at the student's
               expense. Students and typists will be issued with instructions for the typing of illegible
               scripts by the Postgraduate Office and will be required to indicate, by signing a
               declaration, that these have been fully followed.

       Incomplete scripts

       6.8     Where a student is required to answer a specific number of questions and one or
               more has been left wholly unanswered, a zero or dash must be entered for each
               question not attempted. The mark for the whole paper must be arrived at taking these
               zero marks into account.

       6.9     When one or more questions have been answered only in part (the answer(s) being
               unfinished or written in note form), the examiner must mark the incomplete answers
               as they stand and should not try to estimate what mark might have been merited had
               they been answered in full. In arriving at the mark for the paper as a whole, the marks
               for these incomplete answers must be treated in exactly the same way as marks for
               completed answers.

       Overlength scripts

       6.10    The maximum length for assessments is specified in course material. Excessive
               length may be penalised.

       6.11    If the Examiners consider that a student has gained an unfair advantage by
               exceeding the given length for an exercise they must reduce the mark for that
               exercise.

       6.12    In the case of a student exceeding the maximum length of a Term Paper or
               dissertation the mark for the exercise will be reduced in proportion to the advantage
               gained. The reduced mark must be agreed by the examiners and the first examiner
               must notify the Programme Convenor. The Programme Convenor must in turn notify
               the Chair of the subject examination board of the extent of, and reasons for, any such
               reduction.

       Overlapping material

       6.13    Unless specifically allowed in course or programme documentation, the use of the
               same material in more than one assessment exercise will be subject to penalties.

       6.14    If examiners detect substantial overlap or repetition in the subject matter of a
               student's assessed coursework, essays, dissertations, and/or projects submitted
               within a single course they must adjust the marks of the two (or more) exercises
               involved so that the student does not receive credit for using the same material twice.
               The circumstances must be set out in a letter to the Chair of the subject examination
               board.

Marking procedures for unseen examinations, term papers and dissertations                             23
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


       6.15    Where the same material is used, or there is substantial overlap or repetition of the
               subject matter of a student’s assessed coursework, essays, dissertations and/or
               projects submitted for two or more courses, the matter should be reported by the
               Programme Convenor to the Chair of the subject examination board. Where the
               overlap or repetition of material is proven, the work will be subject to penalties.

       6.16    Examination questions should take into account the full range of the course. Where
               examination questions touch on previously assessed material, the examination
               question should be constructed in such a way that a sufficiently different line of
               argument or mode of analysis is necessitated by way of answer. It should be noted
               that, in unseen examinations, students are free to choose the questions to be
               answered within the limits set by the rubrics. Any overlap detected between unseen
               papers and assessed coursework, essays, dissertations, and/or projects, and not
               forbidden by such unseen examination rubrics, cannot, therefore, be penalized by
               examiners.




Marking procedures for unseen examinations, term papers and dissertations                           24
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

7.     SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ARRANGEMENTS

       NB:    These arrangements apply to all assessments as appropriate not just unseen
              examinations.

              Ill-health and impairment occurring during the examination period

       7.1    During examination periods, the University provides sheltered accommodation for
              those students who, on medical recommendation, need to sit their papers outside the
              main examination centre. Students who believe they need this facility should first see
              their Student Advisor to discuss the problem and inform the Postgraduate Office as
              soon as possible. The medical report should be copied to both the Student Advisor
              and the Postgraduate Office.

              Long-term medical conditions and disabilities

       7.2    Special arrangements will be made for students with long-term medical conditions or
              disabilities who can show medical evidence or a special needs assessment. Medical
              reports and special needs assessment reports for candidates should be sent to the
              Postgraduate Office by no later than Week 6 of the Autumn Term. The Postgraduate
              Office will inform the candidate of what arrangements have been made.

       Students with dyslexia and learning impairments

       7.3    In order to maintain a consistent approach to dealing with the assessment issues
              relating to dyslexia and similar conditions that affect students’ ability to express
              themselves, dyslexic students should arrange an assessment with the Student
              Support Unit. Special assessment arrangements can only be arranged on the written
              recommendation of the Student Support Unit – previous diagnoses and arrangements
              will not be taken as proof of need for current circumstances. The special needs
              assessment report for students should be sent to the Postgraduate Office by no later
              than Week 6 of the Autumn Term.

              Alternative assessments for disabled students

       7.4    Where a student with a disability feels that they are substantially disadvantaged by
              the existing assessment for a course, they should contact the Student Support Unit by
              no later than Week 6 of the Autumn Term. The Student Support Unit will make an
              initial judgement as to whether there is a reasonable basis for the request and, if so,
              will initiate a process involving the student’s home department, subject examination
              board, Director of Student Support and the Teaching and Learning Development Unit
              to consider possible alternative modes of assessment that would provide an
              equivalent test of the same learning outcomes of the course without compromising
              academic standards. An alternative mode of assessment may be approved by the
              chair of the subject examination board. The procedures will operate as set out at the
              following URL:

       http://www.sussex.ac.uk/equalities/documents/alternativemodesofassessment.pdf

       7.5    A student may appeal against the decision to retain the original assessment or if they
              remain concerned that the additional support will not obviate a perceived
              disadvantage.




Special assessment arrangements                                                                     25
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

              Submissions by dyslexic students

       7.6    Students assessed by the Student Support Unit as dyslexic will be supplied with
              stickers indicating that the work submitted is that of a dyslexic student and
              consequently spelling and grammar errors are to be disregarded. It is the student’s
              responsibility to attach these stickers to their submitted work (including unseen
              examinations) – where stickers are left off a submission, for whatever reason, it
              cannot be guaranteed that the examiner will give particular consideration to errors
              symptomatic of dyslexia.

       7.7    When marking dyslexic students’ scripts, examiners are asked to focus on the clarity
              of the argument, rather than on details of expression. Try to separate marking of
              transcription errors and marking of content. However, while sympathetic treatment of
              assessed work submitted by dyslexic students implies the disregarding of errors of
              spelling and grammar, the communication itself must be effective. If academic
              standards are to be safeguarded, sympathetic treatment cannot extend to written
              expression so poor that coherence and intelligibility are at issue. In effect, examiners
              ought not to penalise errors that a good copy editor could put right.

       7.8    The written work of students with dyslexia may be characterised by one, or in some
              cases, several, of the following:

                       omitted words or punctuation;
                       excessive or misplaced punctuation;
                       repeated information or phrases – this would not be detected by a
                        spellchecker or by a dyslexic student proofreading their own draft;
                       unsophisticated language structures – in order to avoid grammatical errors,
                        many dyslexics adopt simplified language structures, which do not necessarily
                        denote unsophisticated thinking;
                       simplified vocabulary – in order to avoid spelling errors, many dyslexics
                        students adopt a simplified vocabulary when writing;
                       difficulties with sequencing or word-finding may produce a stilted style of
                        writing which may not match the student’s oral performance in seminars etc.

       7.9    Although assessed work, other than examination scripts, is likely to be word-
              processed and spell-checked, examiners should be aware of the limitations of a
              spellchecker. Some of the problems likely to remain in dyslexic students’ work after
              spell-checking include:

                       homophone substitutions (e.g. there/their, effect/affect, course/coarse);
                       phonetic equivalents (e.g. frenetic for phonetic, homerfone for homophone);
                       incorrect word substitution (distance for disturbance);
                       American spelling (e.g. colorful, fueling).

       Religious festivals and holy days

       7.10   Special arrangements will be made for candidates in the event of religious festivals or
              holy days (which preclude normal work being undertaken by the candidates)
              coinciding with a scheduled examination period. If necessary, arrangements may be
              made for candidates to sit papers scheduled for such days at an alternative time, in
              accordance with the following procedures:

              (a)       students should notify the Postgraduate Office by week 6 of the Autumn Term
                        if they wish to request special arrangements to be made, or exemption for
                        examinations, on the prescribed days of a religious festival;


Special assessment arrangements                                                                       26
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

              (b)    suitable arrangements will then be made for students to remain
                     incommunicado for the period whilst religious devotions are practiced and for
                     the duration of any examination sat at an alternative time until such time as
                     the student is able to return to the normal examination timetable;

              (c)    the student must sign a document stating that they will not discuss the
                     contents of the paper(s) until the other students have taken the paper(s);

              (d)    the decision about whether a student should take their paper(s) after the
                     majority would depend on the student’s individual exam timetable and
                     reasonable operational constraints.




Special assessment arrangements                                                                     27
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

8.      MITIGATING EVIDENCE

        Policy on submission of work

        8.1     The university’s policy on the submission of work is as follows:

                (a)    no extensions to published deadlines are permitted;

                (b)    if an assessment (or a sub-unit of assessment) consists of more than one part
                       and one part is submitted on time, but the other part after the deadline, the
                       whole assessment (or sub-unit of assessment) will be considered as a late
                       submission, very late submission or non submission as the case may be.

        Mitigating circumstances

        8.2     There are several circumstances where mitigating evidence might be submitted by a
                student:

                (a)    late submission of work (i.e. work submitted up to 7 days after the submission
                       deadline);
                (b)    very late submission of work (i.e. work submitted more than 7 days but less
                       than 14 days after the submission deadline);
                (c)    non-submission of work;
                (d)    absence from examinations;
                (e)    work which has been submitted but where circumstances may have impaired
                       the student’s performance.

        School Mitigating Evidence Committees

        8.3     Each school (including SPRU) has established a Mitigating Evidence Committee
                (hereinafter referred to as a School MEC), chaired by the Director of Student Support
                and supported by Student Advisors and other academic members. In addition there is
                a University Mitigating Evidence Committee which monitors the consistency of
                decision-making across the school Mitigating Evidence Committees, determines
                unclear cases, and recommends policy to Taught Programmes Committee. Where
                evidence relates specifically to circumstances involving study or work placements
                abroad, input from expert groups of colleagues will be sought.

                Actions delegated to the Chair

        8.4     Taught Programmes Committee has agreed that the Chair of the School MEC be
                empowered to approve the following on behalf of the School MEC:

                (a)    urgent cases, where the timing of a subject examination board meeting means
                       that a decision on the acceptability of evidence must be made before a
                       meeting of the school MEC can be convened;

                (b)    where, in exceptional circumstances, there were compelling welfare reasons
                       to give a rapid decision on whether or not the evidence is acceptable.

        8.5     Each School website has a section on mitigating evidence together with a
                downloadable version of the mitigating evidence form. This form together with any
                supporting evidence is considered by the School Mitigating Evidence Committee
                (School MEC).




Mitigating evidence                                                                                 28
                                 Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

        Decisions and outcomes

        8.6     It is the role of the School MEC to consider mitigating evidence and to decide, for
                each of the above categories, whether such evidence is acceptable or not. There are
                three outcomes:

                (a)    For late submission or very late submission, the school MEC decides
                       whether the evidence is acceptable or not and also decides the outcome by
                       either condoning the lateness or not at which point the penalty may or may not
                       be waived. Taught Programmes Committee has agreed that the decision of
                       the school MEC be recorded on the central database as soon as possible
                       after the meeting. The marks array presented to the subject examination
                       board takes account of the school MEC decision. If the School MEC does not
                       condone the lateness the following penalties will apply:

                       Late submission

                       (i)     a penalty deduction of 5 percentage points (not 5% of the actual mark)
                               shall be applied to work submitted up to seven days late although the
                               application of such penalties shall not reduce the overall mark below
                               the minimum pass mark. This means that such penalties cannot in
                               themselves prevent progression or require a student to resit
                               assessments that they have academically passed (NB this applies only
                               where a student has passed a course. The late submission penalty is
                               not applied to a student who has failed a course);

                       (ii)    a penalty deduction of 10 percentage points (not 10% of the actual
                               mark) shall be applied to work submitted more than seven and up to
                               fourteen days late although the application of such penalties shall not
                               reduce the overall mark below the minimum pass mark. This means
                               that such penalties cannot in themselves prevent progression or
                               require a student to resit assessments that they have academically
                               passed (NB this applies only where a student has passed a course.
                               The late submission penalty is not applied to a student who has failed
                               a course);

                               Very late submission

                        (ii)   a mark of zero will be recorded for work submitted more than fourteen
                               days late. Such work will be marked but it will be treated as a non-
                               submission, unless mitigating evidence is accepted and authorisation
                               is given for the actual mark to be included in the array, subject to
                               marks being agreed by the marks input deadline. There are no limits to
                               the impact of zero marks on progression or classification (unless
                               mitigating evidence is accepted);

                (b)    For non-submission or absence from an examination, the school MEC
                       decides whether the evidence is acceptable or not but does not decide the
                       final outcome. The school MEC flags on the central database whether the
                       advice is that the non-submission or the absence should be condoned or not
                       but the subject examination board decides the outcome (i.e. in this way the
                       subject examination board takes into account whether the course is
                       mandatory etc). The flag on the central database must therefore specify that
                       the decision is provisional until the meeting of the subject examination board.




Mitigating evidence                                                                                29
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                (c)       For submitted work which is subject to a claim of impaired performance, the
                          school MEC decides whether the evidence is acceptable or not and, if so,
                          categorises the impairment into serious, significant or limited. The subject
                          examination board decides the outcome.

        8.7     Where assessments are marked on a pass/fail scale, a penalty system which
                operates on the basis of deduction of marks cannot apply. These programmes will
                continue to use a system of extensions to deadlines agreed in advance. Where
                evidence submitted is not acceptable, an extension will not be permitted, and the
                assessment in question will be failed (with an option to resubmit).
        Actions: guidance for subject examination boards

        8.8     The School MEC, having reviewed the evidence and considered that there is a case,
                (NB this applies only to non submission of work, absence from an examination or for
                submitted work) may advise the subject examination board on the extent and relative
                seriousness of the impairment into one of the following categories:

                         Serious Mitigation
                         Significant Mitigation
                         Limited Mitigation

        8.9     The following is offered as guidance to subject examination boards:

                (a)       Serious mitigation: Subject examination boards should always consider the
                          effect of setting aside marks flagged "serious”. The subject examination board
                          should take into account the programme learning outcomes and should satisfy
                          itself that the overall academic standard of the programme can still be secured
                          notwithstanding the setting aside of any marks. Where reclassification is
                          proposed, the class must not be raised by more than one level.

                (b)       Significant mitigation: Where a student is within or close to a borderline,
                          subject examination boards should consider the effect of setting aside marks
                          flagged "significant". The subject examination board should take into account
                          the programme learning outcomes and should satisfy itself that the overall
                          academic standard of the programme can be secured notwithstanding the
                          setting aside of any marks. Where reclassification is proposed, the class must
                          not be raised by more than one level.

                (c)       Limited mitigation: Where a student is within a borderline and the overall
                          pattern of marks is such that the board is considering reclassification, "limited"
                          evidence may be taken into account. The subject examination board should
                          take into account the programme learning outcomes and should satisfy itself
                          that the overall academic standard of the programme can be secured
                          notwithstanding the setting aside of any marks.

                          NB:    Mandatory-for-programme and mandatory-for-progression courses
                                 must be passed for the award regardless of mitigating evidence and
                                 therefore cannot be set aside.

        Programme learning outcomes

        8.10    By setting aside marks, either for a particular assessment or for an accumulation of
                assessments, some programme learning outcomes (as opposed to specific course
                learning outcomes or for mandatory courses) might not be achieved. In such cases,
                the subject examination board must judge whether the overall academic standards
                have been met. In cases where the subject examination board judges that key

Mitigating evidence                                                                                      30
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                programme (or course) learning outcomes are not met, the subject examination board
                should enable a further sit opportunity.

        Coursework

        8.11    The condoned non-submission or absence of Coursework is normally deemed to be
                irretrievable. Where the absence of marks from the Coursework is the sole cause of a
                student falling, a ‘sit’ mode of assessment should be offered which provides an
                alternative test of the learning outcomes that the original coursework sought to test.

        Exemption from the late submissions policy

        8.12    A School Curriculum Committee, upon a formal request signed by the Head of
                Department responsible for the course (or other delegated academic officer, e.g.
                Chair of a Teaching Committee), may exempt from the standard policy on late
                submissions the following types of coursework and assessments:

                (a)    an individual element of coursework contributing 10% or less to the mark for
                       the course as a whole;

                (b)    assessments (e.g. in the form of classroom tests) where the correct answer to
                       the assessment is made public within 48 hours of the assessment being
                       undertaken.

        8.13    In all cases exemption shall mean that work that is submitted late shall receive a
                formal mark of zero. The existence of the exemption must be stated explicitly in
                course handbooks and must be recorded on course templates and relevant data
                systems.

        8.14    The School Curriculum Committee is not obliged to grant exemption even where the
                course meets either of the above criteria, and may not grant exemption where neither
                criteria are not met.

        Impairment because of academic reasons

        8.15    Where impairment is considered to be as a result of academic reasons (e.g. where it
                is alleged that there problems in the teaching of a course), the student should
                contact, in the first instance, their student advisor and also write direct to the Director
                of Graduate Studies for transmission to the Chair of the relevant subject examination
                board.

        Failure of word-processing/computing equipment

        8.16    Submission deadlines are real deadlines. Delays in typing or the unavailability or
                failure of word-processing or printing facilities will not constitute acceptable reasons
                for failure to meet deadlines. However, subject examination boards may take into
                consideration the systematic failure of university computing facilities which prevented
                submission (NB this does not apply to printing backlogs on the day of submission).
                Failure of personal computer equipment should not be considered an excuse for late
                submission as it is the student’s responsibility, through proper data management, to
                have backups of work.




Mitigating evidence                                                                                     31
                                 Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

        Recording decisions relating to mitigating evidence

        8.17    The School MECs will have made a decision as to whether the evidence is acceptable
                or not prior to the meeting of the subject examination board.

        8.18    The codes AB (for absence), NS (for non-submission), LA (late submission, i.e. 7 or
                14 days) will be entered in the database against the relevant assessment in the
                student’s assessment record by the office which recorded the mark in the first
                instance.

        8.19    The decisions of the School MEC are recorded by student service co-ordinators or
                the Postgraduate Office (as appropriate) against each item of assessment.

                Acceptable evidence

        8.20    Where the School MEC has judged the evidence acceptable, an ‘X’ is entered against
                the AB, NS or LA flag changing values to XAB, XNS, XLA.

                Not acceptable evidence

        8.21    Where the School MEC has judged the evidence for absences or non submission is
                not acceptable a zero mark will already have been recorded for the relevant
                assessment(s). For late submissions 5 or 10 percentage points will be deducted from
                the marks for the assessment(s) (NB For courses comprising several assessments,
                presentational limitations may preclude these details being displayed in standard
                marks arrays, and it may be necessary for a subject examination board to look at a
                special display of the full detail of assessment information in cases where, for some
                reason, this becomes germane to the decision the Board is seeking to reach).




Mitigating evidence                                                                                32
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

9.     FEEDBACK TO STUDENTS ON ASSESSMENTS

       Work Contributing Towards the award

       9.1    The Programme Convenor should provide students with academic feedback on
              formal assessments throughout the coursework period as follows:

              (a)     precise marks on work submitted should always be given in writing to students
                      as part of the University's duty to inform students of their progress;

              (b)     the mark should be communicated in writing using a standard form (drawn up
                      by the Postgraduate Office) to avoid misunderstanding and to ensure that the
                      conditions attached to the release of marks are properly conveyed to students;

              (c)     the form should state explicitly the following conditions:

                      (i)     that all marks are provisional and subject to external examination until
                              ratified by the relevant examination board;

                      (ii)    marks are not appealable until ratification;

                      (iii)   names of internal examiners should be released only with their explicit
                              consent.

              (d)     after the pass list is published the Director of Graduate Studies or their
                      nominee may, on request, disclose to students their final marks. The Director
                      of Graduate Studies should not divulge marks to anyone else except as
                      necessary to a member of the academic faculty who requires such information
                      in their official capacity.

       Feedback on Dissertations/Projects

       9.2    Written feedback on dissertations can be provided on a programme by programme
              basis at the discretion of the relevant Director of Graduate Studies.

        Policy on feedback to students on coursework

       9.3    Comments and (where appropriate) grades on coursework should be communicated
              to students no later than 15 term-time working days from submission or the date for
              submission, whichever is the later. Whenever possible, however, the response time
              should be shorter. There can be no guarantee that coursework submitted after the
              date set for submission will be returned within the period specified above. Where
              there is good reason, exceptions to this policy may be made for specific items of
              coursework with the approval of Taught Programmes Committee, in which case the
              period of time for return of comments (and grades, where appropriate) will be
              communicated to students.

       9.4    This policy relates to work submitted or undertaken during the teaching of a course
              and not to work submitted in a subsequent term after the conclusion of the course.
              Thus it does not apply for instance to MA Term Papers, nor to some (e.g. BES)
              Laboratory Reports.

       Guidance to Graduate Centres in implementing the policy

       9.5    The following is guidance to Graduate Centres in implementing the policy:



Feedback to students on assessments                                                                33
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

              Coursework takes many forms (whether or not it counts towards an award or
              classification). It can be defined as work completed and submitted or delivered during
              the course. Course documentation must make clear:

              (a)     what coursework is required;
              (b)     what, if any, of that work will be included in formal assessment.

       9.6    Whatever its form, coursework should be "returned" to the student both marked and
              commented upon (where coursework is not written but, for example, spoken, there
              should still be commentary, formative in nature, by the tutor).

       9.7    A mark must be given where the coursework contributes to the formal assessment of
              an award. The mark should be communicated to the student in writing using a
              standard form of advice (in accordance with the policies detailed by Taught
              Programmes Committee) which explicitly states the following conditions under which
              such provisional marks are released:

              (a)     that all marks are provisional and subject to external examination until ratified
                      by the relevant Examination Board;
              (b)     marks are not appealable until ratification.

       9.8    Where the coursework does not contribute to the formal assessment for an award, an
              indication of level or grade, rather than a precise mark, may be given.

       9.9    Students should be clearly informed:

              (a)     of the status of any mark or grade;
              (b)     that where the coursework contributes to the assessment for the award the
                      mark is provisional, and subject to external examination, until ratified by the
                      relevant examination board;
              (c)     that where the coursework does not contribute to the assessment for the
                      award, the grade given is based on the work completed and is not a prediction
                      of future performance;
              (d)     of the central importance of the comments making up the formative
                      assessment of the work.

       9.10   Graduate Centres should consider developing cover sheets on which to provide
              formative feedback. Comments on strengths and weaknesses could be
              supplemented in tutor/student discussions. Any cover sheets used should be lodged
              with School Curriculum Committees.

       9.11   Graduate Centres are asked to ensure that feedback is specifically related, at least in
              part, to assessment criteria (either the approved generic assessment criteria or the
              assessment criteria for that assessment mode).

       It is an important responsibility of the Programme Convenor to ensure that those students
       whose marks and/or late submissions penalties place them in danger of failure are made
       aware of their situation as early as possible.




Feedback to students on assessments                                                                 34
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

10.    ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT

       General

       10.1   It is an offence for any student to be guilty of, or party to, attempting to commit or
              committing collusion, plagiarism, or any other misconduct in an examination or in the
              preparation of work which is submitted for assessment.

       10.2   Misconduct in assessment exercises, examinations or in the presentation of marks
              achieved elsewhere, is conduct likely to be prejudicial to the integrity and fairness of
              the examination process.

       10.3   Students found guilty of misconduct should be penalised more severely than those
              who simply did not submit a piece of work.

       Definitions

       10.4   The following are the approved definitions of academic misconduct:

              Collusion

              (a)     Collusion is the preparation or production of work for assessment jointly with
                      another person or persons unless explicitly permitted by the examiners. An act
                      of collusion is understood to encompass those who actively assist others as
                      well as those who derive benefit from others. Where joint preparation is
                      permitted by the examiners but joint production is not, the submitted work
                      must be produced solely by the student making the submission. Where joint
                      production or joint preparation and production of work for assessment is
                      specifically permitted, this must be published in the appropriate course
                      documentation.

              Plagiarism

              (b)     Plagiarism is the use, without acknowledgement, of the intellectual work of
                      other people, and the act of representing the ideas or discoveries of another
                      as one’s own in written work submitted for assessment. To copy sentences,
                      phrases or even striking expressions without acknowledgement of the source
                      (either by inadequate citation or failure to indicate verbatim quotations), is
                      plagiarism; to paraphrase without acknowledgement is likewise plagiarism.
                      Where such copying or paraphrase has occurred the mere mention of the
                      source in the bibliography shall not be deemed sufficient acknowledgement;
                      each such instance must be referred specifically to its source. Verbatim
                      quotations must be either in inverted commas, or indented, and directly
                      acknowledged.

                      Further information can be obtained at the following URL:

                      http://www.sussex.ac.uk/academicoffice/plagiarism

              Misconduct in unseen examinations

              (c)     Misconduct in unseen examinations includes having access, or attempting to
                      gain access, during an examination, to any books, memoranda, notes,
                      unauthorised calculators, or any other material, except such as may have
                      been supplied by the invigilator or authorised by official university bodies. It
                      also includes aiding or attempting to aid another student, or obtaining or

Academic misconduct                                                                                35
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                      attempting to obtain aid from another student, or any other communication
                      within the Examination Room. All instances of plagiarism, collusion, fabrication
                      of results, or misconduct in an unseen exam are serious failures to respect the
                      integrity and fairness of the examination process.

              Fabrication of results

              (d)     Fabrication of results or observations in practical or project work.

       10.5   Students who attend more than one unseen examination without their registration
              cards, or other officially sanctioned means of identification, will be reported to the
              Investigating Officer and such a report will result in an investigation of misconduct.

       Determination of major and minor cases of misconduct

       10.6   The Investigating Officer should bear in mind the following when defining misconduct
              as either major or minor:

              (a)     the assessment impact is not a relevant issue. For example, cheating will not
                      be condoned just because the work in question is not heavily weighted in
                      terms of the overall mark for the unit, or the course itself is not a significantly-
                      weighted course within the programme. Level of study is not germane to the
                      decision;

              (b)     the extent of the misconduct is a key factor: a piece of work which has been
                      downloaded verbatim from the internet will inevitably be regarded as a prima
                      facie case of major misconduct whereas the lack of proper citation in one or
                      two articles or where it is incorrectly formatted might be seen as a minor case
                      of misconduct;

              (c)     consideration of the extent of the pre-meditated intention involved in the
                      misconduct. Where the evidence suggests the student has been sophisticated
                      in their use of unattributed material, e.g. deliberate minor editing of plagiarised
                      text to give the impression that it is their own work, what appears initially to be
                      a quantitatively minor breach might instead be deemed major. Conversely, a
                      large but single and un-edited example of non-attribution within an essay
                      which is otherwise properly referenced might justify deeming an apparently
                      major case as minor.

       10.7   Where the Investigating Officer is unable to decide whether a case is either major or
              minor misconduct they should refer the case to the Misconduct Panel.

              No case

       10.8   If the Investigating Officer believes that the evidence presented does not constitute a
              prima facie case, they will return the material to the examiner with a request for more
              information. If this is not forthcoming, the Investigating Officer will not proceed with
              the case.

       Misconduct Panel

       10.9   The Misconduct Panel is a sub-committee of Taught Programmes Committee.
              Members of the Misconduct Panel are appointed by Taught Programmes Committee
              for periods of three years and are expected to consider both Postgraduate and taught
              postgraduate cases of misconduct.



Academic misconduct                                                                                    36
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

              Investigating Officer

       10.10 An investigating officer is appointed for each School and for SPRU. Investigating
             Officers may act as Panel members in cases where they have not determined the
             prima facie case. Where Investigating Officers believe misconduct has occurred in
             work done by students they have taught or by their personal tutees, they will pass the
             consideration of allegations to the Investigating Officer of another School.

       Procedures for determining allegations of misconduct

       10.11 Where it is suspected that a student has committed misconduct in the preparation
             and/or presentation of their work, the examiner should take appropriate steps to
             identify all instances of misconduct in the assessment exercise and highlight these for
             easy reference.

       10.12 If the suspected assessment is coursework undertaken, submitted, and returned
             during the course, the examiner should photocopy the exercise, retain the original,
             give the copy to the student with coversheet etc and inform the student that the
             exercise is being investigated for possible misconduct.

       10.13 In all cases, the assessment should be given a mark which reflects the examiner’s
             opinion of the work, as far as possible with the suspicion of misconduct set aside. The
             marked-up original should be sent to the Investigating Officer.

       10.14 The Investigating Officer may consult with examiners, relevant subject examination
             board officers, invigilators (where allegations relate to unseen exams), and will
             determine whether or not a prima facie case for suspecting a student of misconduct
             has been presented.

       10.15 If a prima facie case has been presented, the Investigating Officer shall determine
             whether the alleged misconduct is either a minor or major case of misconduct.

              Minor misconduct

       10.16 For minor misconduct, the Investigating Officer shall send the details to the Secretary
             of the Misconduct Panel who will then send the case to the relevant Dean for
             consideration and determination. The Investigating Officer will initiate a review of the
             student’s other work, for other similar instances of misconduct. Any further instances
             of misconduct thereby discovered will be fed into the process underway, as
             appropriate. The Dean may nominate another member of academic faculty to
             undertake the task of dealing with all minor misconduct cases. The Dean (or
             nominee) will consider the case presented and interview the student about the
             allegation. The Dean may dismiss the case or may apply a penalty as set out in
             10.28.

       10.17 The application of penalties which would result in the overall failure of the course are
             reserved for Major breaches and must be administered by Panels. If a Dean (or
             nominee) feels minded to apply such a penalty, they must refer the case to the
             Misconduct Panel.

       10.18 The way that the range of penalties open to the Dean (or nominee) relate to those
             available to Panels is outlined in paragraphs 10.27-10.29. The student may also be
             directed to undertake some form of remedial academic skills coaching. The Secretary
             to the Misconduct Panel will formally inform the student of the outcome, and record
             the penalty on the marks database. A formal record will be kept in the student’s file.
             The evidence file from the case will be returned to the Panel Secretary for archiving.


Academic misconduct                                                                               37
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

       10.19 Where the case is not proven, the Dean (or nominee) will dismiss the allegation. No
             record of the incident will appear in the student’s file. The original copy of the
             suspected exercise will be returned to the student.

              Major misconduct

       10.20 For major misconduct, the Investigating Officer shall send the details to the Secretary
             of the Misconduct Panel who will inform the Chair of the subject examination board. A
             provisional mark will have been entered on the student’s marks array for any
             assessment under suspicion. The Chair of the subject examination board will then, if
             required by the Investigating Officer, supervise a second scrutiny of all other
             assessments in the current academic year and ask the examiners to communicate
             their findings directly to the Secretary of the Misconduct Panel.

       10.21 The Secretary of the Misconduct Panel will organise a misconduct hearing which will
             comprise a Chair and two members from the membership of the Misconduct Panel.
             The examiner who initially identified the alleged misconduct will normally act as
             Presenter at the hearing. In cases where the examiner cannot be the Presenter they
             will be asked to identify an appropriate substitute Presenter.

       10.22 The student shall be informed in writing by the Secretary of the date and purpose of
             the misconduct hearing which will be at least 5 days (including weekends) from the
             date of the letter. The student will be provided with notice of the allegation made
             against them stated in broad terms and shall be directed to the relevant sections of
             the Handbook for Students. The student has a right to be accompanied at the hearing
             by a member of faculty, a Student Advisor or an officer of the Student’s Union (it is
             anticipated that Student Advisors will accompany or represent students only in cases
             where the defence relies upon mitigating circumstances; Student Advisors are not
             generalist student representatives).

       10.23 Students are entitled (but not required) to attend a hearing. The student shall notify
             the Secretary at least 48 hours in advance of the hearing whether they will attend the
             hearing and who will accompany them. If the student does not attend they may
             submit a written statement. The evidence file will be available at an appropriate place
             for inspection by the student and their representative prior to the hearing and copies
             of the evidence will be provided to the student on request. Hearings may proceed in
             the absence of the student unless the panel decides the student’s presence is key to
             reaching a conclusion.

       10.24 An anonymised set of misconduct case histories will be circulated to the Chairs of
             Misconduct Panels for information and guidance on an annual basis. Panel members
             are required to familiarise themselves with the evidence before the panel in advance
             of the hearing – the hearing must not depend entirely on the presentation of the case
             on the day of the Hearing. At the hearing, panel members will establish the facts and
             come to a conclusion as to whether or not misconduct has taken place.

       Conduct of the hearing

       10.25 The hearing will be conducted as follows:

              (a)     the Chair will explain to the student the procedure of the hearing. It will be
                      made clear that the panel will seek, initially and as far as possible, to exclude
                      the issue of ‘intent’ from the stage of determining whether misconduct has
                      occurred or not, and will reach a decision on that point on the basis of the
                      facts presented. The panel may consider ‘intent’ as a legitimate factor in
                      considering mitigation or aggravation;


Academic misconduct                                                                                 38
                                   Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

              (b)     the Chair will read out the accusation, including the relevant definitions of
                      misconduct, and will then ask the student whether they admit or deny the
                      accusation;

              Admission of accusation

              (c)     if the student admits the accusation, the hearing will be concerned with
                      assessing the gravity of the offence and considering any evidence in
                      mitigation. The presenter will be invited to assess the extent of the
                      misconduct. The student will be invited to respond with the help of their
                      representative.

              Denial of accusation

              (d)     if the student denies the accusation, the hearing will first be concerned to
                      establish whether misconduct has taken place. The presenter will make the
                      case against the student. The student will defend their case with the help of
                      their representative. Members of the panel may intervene from time to time to
                      raise a question;

              (e)     once the Chair deems that all the relevant evidence has been heard, they will
                      invite the student, the student’s representative and the presenter to withdraw,
                      while the panel members reach a conclusion (by simple majority vote in the
                      absence of unanimity). The Chair will then ask the student, the student’s
                      representative and the presenter to return and hear the panel’s conclusion on
                      whether the student has been found guilty or not guilty;

                      Not guilty

              (f)     if the student is found not guilty, the provisional mark awarded will stand and
                      be used for progress and classification purposes. The student will be told, at
                      the end of the hearing, the outcome and the Secretary to the hearing will so
                      inform the student, in writing, within ten working days from the date of the
                      hearing.

                      Guilty

              (g)     if the student is found guilty the panel will then hear evidence in mitigation.
                      Once the student, the student’s representative and the presenter have left the
                      room, the panel will agree an appropriate penalty.

              (h)     The student will be told, at the end of the hearing, the penalty to be applied.
                      The panel reserves the right to defer its decision for a short period but the
                      student will be informed informally as soon as possible once a decision has
                      reached. The Secretary to the hearing will formally inform the student, in
                      writing, within ten working days from the date of the hearing of the penalty (if
                      any) and will give the student a copy of the report sent to the subject
                      examination board.

              (i)     the decision of the panel will then be sent to the subject examination board for
                      application and will not be open for revision.

                      Second offence

              (j)     If a student is found guilty of a second offence of misconduct, the hearing will,
                      in determining the penalty for the subsequent offence, take into account any


Academic misconduct                                                                                  39
                                 Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                      previous offence(s) and reserve the right to disqualify the student from the
                      award of a degree.

       Penalties to be applied

       10.26 Students found guilty of misconduct should be penalised more severely than those
             who simply did not submit a piece of work.

       10.27 The penalties that may be applied vary depending on whether the misconduct is
             minor or major.

              Minor Misconduct

       10.28 The following penalties are applied by the Dean but they are also available to the
             panel for application:

              (a)     for cases which are technically proven but believed to be unintentional/trivial,
                      no further action than a caution and/or reprimand;

              (b)     for cases in which the work should be resubmitted: the student to correct work
                      by including references, etc., and the examiner to reassess;

              (c)     reduction of mark to an extent that is short of causing overall failure of the
                      course.

              Major Misconduct

       10.29 The following penalties are available to the panel for application:

              (a)     deduction of marks such as to cause course failure;

              (b)     directly reducing the mark for the course to zero;

              (c)     reduction of Grand Mean for the programme by up to 10%;

              (d)     reduction of degree classification by one or more classes;

              (e)     disqualification from candidature for the award of a degree.

              Penalty (e) should normally be reserved for cases of multiple misconduct in one exam
              diet or a serious second offence after being found guilty of misconduct in a previous
              diet. They are not normally used for a single example of a first offence.

       Effect of penalties

       10.30 Where a penalty causes a course failure in a stage the student will be allowed to resit
             the course for academic credit to enable progression but the original fail mark will
             stand for classification.

       10.31 Where a penalty causes a course failure which results in the student failing a degree,
             the student may be allowed by the subject examination board to retrieve that failure
             (alongside any other non-misconduct-related fails) via a resit. If the resit mark for the
             misconduct course is a pass it will be capped at the minimum pass mark for purposes
             of determining an overall programme result.




Academic misconduct                                                                                40
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


       Subject Examination Boards

       10.32 Subject examination boards will not proceed to confirm progress or determine
             classification whilst an allegation of academic misconduct is outstanding in relation to
             a student.

       Appeals

       10.33 If dissatisfied, a student may appeal. The 21-day period in which the appeal must be
             lodged will commence from the date of the formal letter notifying the student of the
             Misconduct Panel’s decisions. An appeal against an Exam Board decision which was
             affected by a misconduct finding, lodged after the Exam Board has applied the
             penalty decided by the Panel, will be considered for admissibility on the merits of the
             case.




Academic misconduct                                                                               41
                                 Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

11.    VIVA VOCE EXAMINATIONS

       11.1    Viva voce examinations may be held where a student is in danger of failing a
               programme either because their dissertation has been marked as a fail or because
               their aggregate mark is below a pass. Such examinations are normally only held
               where the student is a borderline pass/fail.

               Procedure

       11.2    Viva voce examinations should normally be conducted by at least two (but normally
               not more than two) examiners of whom one should be the external examiner. The
               Chair of the subject examination board is responsible for appointing the internal
               examiner, arranging the time and date of the viva voce examination and informing the
               student of the purpose of the viva voce examination (including, inter alia, notification
               of the title(s) of the scripts(s) to be examined).

       11.3    The examiners of the viva voce examination should be given specific instruction by
               the Chair of the subject examination board as to the purpose of the examination.




Viva voce examinations                                                                              42
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

12.     FAILED STUDENTS, RESIT STUDENTS AND RESIT MARKS

        Failed students

        12.1    Students who fail to satisfy the examiners may, at the discretion of the subject
                examination board, be invited to present themselves for further examination at a time
                prescribed by the subject examination board during the twelve month period
                immediately following the first attempt. The subject examination board has discretion
                over the precise requirements for any re-examination.

        12.2    There is a normal expectation that failed students may be given an opportunity to
                redeem their failure. Such permission shall not be granted more than once to the
                same student.

        12.3    Students invited to present themselves for further examination may be required to
                pursue a further course of study for a specified period which shall not exceed three
                terms and shall be required to pay the prescribed fees.

        12.4    Students who are permitted to present themselves for further examination and whose
                second attempt again fails to satisfy the examiners shall not again be eligible to be
                students for the award.

        12.5    Students who are not permitted to present themselves for further examination, shall
                not again be eligible to be students for the award.

        12.6    Strict application of penalties for late submission may in certain cases accumulate to
                produce an overall result unacceptable to a subject examination board. In such cases
                the board may exercise its discretion to set aside the effect of the penalties and
                determine an award on the merits of the case. Students should not normally fail solely
                as a result of lateness penalties.

        Resit students

        12.7    Subject examination boards should note the following guidelines for resit students:

                (a)      if a resit student is required to re-register by the subject examination board on
                         a full-time or part-time basis then the resit student should expect to receive
                         supervision and have access to the facilities accorded to them by that status.
                         The student must pay the appropriate fees;

                (b)      if a resit student is required to re-register by the subject examination board on
                         continuation status in order to resit an examination or to revise and resubmit
                         an assessment, then the student should expect to receive advice about the
                         resit requirement but no further supervision and will have limited access to
                         University facilities. The student must pay the continuation fee;

                (c)      students for resit will have their entitlement to academic support specifically
                         explained in the official letter from the Subject Examination Board so that they
                         may make an informed choice within one calendar month whether to accept
                         the offer from the subject examination board to retrieve their failure;

                (d)      any further facilities accorded to a resit student on continuation status will be
                         at the discretion of the Graduate Centre.




Failed students, resit students and resit marks                                                        43
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

        Resit Marks

        12.8    A resit assessment will receive a full mark which will appear on the student transcript,
                but a mark of no more than 40% (or the minimum stated pass mark for the course
                where percentage marking is not used) will be carried forward for classification
                purposes. A resit cannot be taken in order to raise a transcript mark where the pass
                mark has been achieved at the sit.

        12.9    A student will not be required to undertake a resit for a failed course where the
                minimum progression (or completion) requirements for the programme have been
                achieved.




Failed students, resit students and resit marks                                                       44
                                 Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

13.    RESULTS AND APPEALS

       Publication of results

       13.1    The following principles apply to the publication of results:

               (a)    Pass Lists are provisional until ratified by the Chair of Taught Programmes
                      Committee on behalf of Senate.

               (b)    Pass Lists will be published on Graduate Centre notice-boards within 7 days
                      of the subject examination board;

               (c)    students may contact the Director of Graduate Studies of their school if they
                      wish to obtain more detailed information, including individual marks.
                      Assessment information which does not relate to other students or which does
                      not disclose the identities of examiners will be disclosed on request;

               (d)    where a student’s marks are held on the central PGT assessment database, a
                      formal transcript/diploma supplement will be issued automatically; for all other
                      PGT student’s, a formal transcript/diploma supplement may be obtained from
                      the Student Systems Office on request.

               (e)    The minutes of the subject examination board should be passed to the
                      Postgraduate Office in order that the resit options and requirements be
                      checked and confirmed. This process should be completed no later than
                      fourteen days from the meeting of the Board.

               Failed students

       13.2    In respect of failed students, Chairs of subject examination boards are advised that
               the subject examination board has seven days in which to:

               (a)    record, under the Chair's signature, the list of approved decisions of the
                      meeting including the specification of the resit options and requirements of all
                      failed students (this must be copied to the Postgraduate Office);

               (b)    publish the pass list;

               (c)    write an individual letter to all failed students (copied to the Postgraduate
                      Office) informing them of the outcome and also informing them that they will, if
                      necessary, receive further information within a further fourteen days.

       13.3    Within twenty-one days of the meeting of the subject examination board, the Chair of
               the subject examination board will, if necessary, send a second letter setting out
               details of the mode and timing of the re-sit. The Postgraduate Office will write to
               confirm re-registration requirements.

       13.4    Although the onus is on the students themselves to ascertain their results, not all
               students may be in a position to be physically present when the results are posted.
               Therefore Schools should make available and publicise a telephone facility for
               students to obtain information about their result and marks. This facility should be
               available during office hours for five working days following publication of pass lists.




Results and appeals                                                                                 45
                                 Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

              Altered marks

       13.5   Where students have been given an informal indication of a mark (i.e. before it has
              been ratified by the Examination Board) and that mark is subsequently altered during
              the examination process, the Programme Convenor, on behalf of the Examination
              Board, should inform the student within 7 days of the publication of the pass list.

       Appeals

       13.6    Regulations for appeals are set out in the Regulations for the Award of Master of Arts,
               etc. at the following URL:

               http://www.sussex.ac.uk/secretariat/1-2-15.html

               Further information on the appeals process may be found at:

               http://www.sussex.ac.uk/secretariat/1-2-1.html

       13.7    To be admissible, an appeal must be based on one of a number of specific grounds.
               There is no right of appeal against the academic judgement of the examiners. Before
               lodging an appeal, the student must first discuss the allegation with the Director of
               Graduate Studies. The appeal should be submitted to the Registrar & Secretary,
               stating the grounds of the appeal, ensuring that this arrives within twenty-one days of
               the publication of the decision against which the appeal is made.

       13.8    If the appeal is deemed admissible the appeal will proceed to being heard. Subject
               examination board officers will be notified of the appeal and may be asked to provide
               information which may include providing a specific response relating to the grounds
               of the appeal.

       13.9    All appeals are heard by four-member Appeals Panels, drawn from the Appeals
               Board; Panels consist of two academic faculty members and one student member,
               and are usually chaired by a Pro-Vice-Chancellor. Where an appeal appears to be
               readily decidable in favour of the appellant on the basis of the written evidence
               available, the Panel may reach a decision without the need for a hearing. Otherwise,
               the case will be examined at a hearing at which the appellant is entitled to attend (and
               be accompanied).

       13.10 The Appeals Panel, whose decision shall be final, shall either:

               (a)    determine that the appeal is not upheld and that the decision of the Exam
                      Board should stand, and inform the appellant and the relevant Exam Board
                      accordingly; or

               (b)    uphold the appeal and determine a remedy appropriate to the circumstances,
                      which can include determining a student’s degree class – and will inform the
                      appellant and the Exam Board accordingly.




Results and appeals                                                                                 46
                                   Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

14.     PROCEDURES FOR INTERMISSION

        If at any time a student wishes to intermit, the following procedures should be followed:

        14.1    A student who wishes to intermit will inform the Programme Convenor specifying the
                reason for intermission and the proposed period of intermission.

        14.2    The Programme Convenor will complete a form (available from the Postgraduate
                Office) recommending approval (or not) for the period of intermission and stating the
                expected date of return and whether there are any conditions for the return of the
                student. The Programme Convenor will pass the form to the Director of Graduate
                Studies (or equivalent officer) for approval.

        14.3    The director will pass a copy of the form to the Postgraduate office which will inform
                the student in writing on the outcome of the application. If approved, the Postgraduate
                office will inform the student of the anticipated date of return to the University and
                whether there are any conditions to be fulfilled before they return, for example, the
                submission of an outstanding assessment.

        14.4    In completing the form the convenor should take account of the following:

                (a)     the study pattern and assessment timetable for the programme; the convenor
                        should consult the Postgraduate Office to determine how much of the
                        programme the student has formally completed;

                (b)     intermission can only be granted in units of whole terms;

                (c)     whether the programme will still exist in the current format when the student
                        plans to return, i.e. that there are no major revisions to the programme
                        anticipated;

                (d)     intermission is not a right;

                (e)     intermission is normally granted for a period of up to one year. Any extension
                        to this period should be for exceptional reasons only, at the discretion of the
                        relevant Director of Graduate Studies, on the recommendation of the
                        Programme Convenor.




Procedures for intermission                                                                          47
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

15.     CRITERIA FOR AWARDS

        15.1    Criteria for awards are approved by Taught Programmes Committee.

        School of Humanities

        15.2    This applies to the following programmes:


                MA             Aesthetics
                MA             American History SUSPENDED
                MA             American Literature: Critical Reading
                MA             Applied Linguistics
                MA             Art History
                DIP(PG)        Byzantine Art and Text SUSPENDED
                MA             Byzantine Art and Text SUSPENDED
                MA             Cognitive Linguistics
                MA             Colonial and Post-Colonial Cultures
                MA             Contemporary History
                MA             Creative and Critical Writing
                MA             Critical Theory
                MA             Digital Media
                MA             Early Modern History 1500-1800
                MA             Early Modern Literature and Culture
                DIP(PG)        English Language Teaching
                MA             English Language Teaching
                MA             English Local and Regional History
                MA             Film Studies
                MA             History
                MA             Intellectual History and the History of Political Thought
                DIP(PG)        International English Language Teaching
                MA             International English Language Teaching
                MRES           Linguistic Methods
                MA             Literature, Film and Visual Culture
                MA             Literature, Religion and Philosophy
                DIP(PG)        Media and Cultural Studies
                MA             Media and Cultural Studies
                MA              Modern and Contemporary Literature Culture and Thought
                MA             Modern European Jewish History, Culture and Thought
                MA             Modernism
                MA             Music
                MA             Nineteenth Century Literature and Culture
                MA             Opera and Music Theatre
                DIP(PG)        Philosophy
                MA             Philosophy
                MA             Sexual Dissidence in Literature and Culture

                Alignment of marking scales

        15.3    The following is the marking scale used in the departments of the School of
                Humanities:

                Category         All
                                 departments
                                 in Humanities

                Excellent        A+       95
                                 A        90
                                 A-       85
                Good             B+       80
                                 B        75
                                 B-       70
                Satisfactory     C+       65

Criteria for Awards                                                                                   48
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                                C       60
                                C-      55
                Pass            D+      50
                                D       45
                                D-      40
                Fail            E+      35
                                E       15
                                F       0

                Criteria for awards

        15.4    The following is the criteria for awards in the School of Humanities:

                Pass

                        MA programmes, MRes in Linguistics Methods

                        An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category including a pass in the
                        dissertation. More than one fail mark entails failure (NB account will be taken
                        of marks with a weight other than one unit).

                        Postgraduate Diplomas

                        An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category. More than one fail
                        mark entails failure (NB account will be taken of marks with a weight other
                        than one unit).

                Merit

                        MA programmes/MRes in Linguistic Methods

                        The School of Humanities has agreed that the award of merit shall be
                        available for all taught programmes.

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or

                               the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory zone and the student's major project/dissertation is
                               marked 'Good’ and there are no fail marks;

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course (excluding the dissertation), the
                               subject examination board may recommend the award of merit.

                        Postgraduate Diplomas

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or




Criteria for Awards                                                                                   49
                                       Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                          (b)     where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                                  distinction but has failed one course, the subject examination board
                                  may recommend the award of merit.

                Distinction

                          MA programmes/MRes in Linguistic Methods

                          (a)     an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                                  and there are no fail marks;

                                  or

                          (b)     the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                                  zone and the student's major project/dissertation is marked 'Excellent'
                                  and there are no fail marks.

                          Postgraduate Diplomas

                          (a)     an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                                  and there are no fail marks;

        School of Life Sciences

        15.5    This applies to the following programmes:

                MSC             Applied Social Psychology
                MSC             Biodiversity Survey
                DIP(PG)         Bioinformatics
                MSC             Bioinformatics
                DIP(PG)         Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience
                MSC             Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience
                DIP(PG)         Developmental Cell Biology
                MSC             Developmental Cell Biology
                MSC             Experimental Psychology
                DIP(PG)         Genetic Manipulation and Molecular Cell Biology
                MSC             Genetic Manipulation and Molecular Cell Biology
                MSC             Health Psychology
                MSC             Organic Synthesis
                MSC             Organic Synthesis (Sandwich)
                MSC             Organometallic Chemistry
                DIP(PG)         Plant Conservation (Seed Banking)
                MSC             Plant Conservation (Seed Banking)
                DIP(PG)         Psychological Methods
                MRES            Psychological Methods
                DIP(PG)         Substance Misuse
                MSC             Substance Misuse

                Alignment of marking scales

        15.6    The following are the marking scales used in the departments of the School of Life
                Sciences:

                Category          Biochemistry        Biology and         Chemistry   Psychology
                                                      Environmental
                                                      Science

                Excellent         ≥ 70%               ≥ 70%               ≥ 70%       ≥ 70%
                Good              60%<70%             60%<70%             60%<70%     60%<70%
                Satisfactory      50%<60%             50%<60%             50%<60%     50%<60%

Criteria for Awards                                                                                      50
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                Pass            40%<50%           40%<50%          40%<50%       40%<50%
                Fail            <40%              <40%             <40%          <40%

                Criteria for awards

        15.7    The following is the criteria for awards in the School of Life Sciences:

                Pass

                A pass in each course and a pass in the literature review and dissertation/project.

                Merit

                        The School of Life Sciences has agreed that the award of merit shall be
                        available for all taught programmes.

                        MSc programmes/MRes in Psychological Methods

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold, a
                               mark of ‘Good’ in the literature review and project/dissertation and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or

                        (b)    the subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                               recommend the award of merit where the following has been
                               achieved:

                               an overall weighted mean mark in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory’ category, a mark of ‘Good’ in the literature review and
                               project/dissertation and there are no fail marks;

                        Postgraduate Diplomas

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                Distinction

                        MSc programmes/MRes in Psychological Methods

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold, a
                               mark of ‘Excellent’ in the literature review and project/dissertation and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or

                        (b)    the subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                               recommend the award of distinction where the following has been
                               achieved:

                               an overall weighted mean mark in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                               category, a mark of ‘Excellent’ in the literature review and
                               project/dissertation and there are no fail marks.

                        Postgraduate Diplomas

Criteria for Awards                                                                                   51
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                              and there are no fail marks;

        School of Science and Technology

        15.8    This applies to the following programmes:

                       DIP(PG)      Advanced Mechanical Engineering
                       MSC          Advanced Mechanical Engineering
                       DIP(PG)      Aerospace Technology
                       MSC          Aerospace Technology
                       MSC          Astronomy
                       CERT(PG)     Automotive Engineering
                       DIP(PG)      Automotive Engineering
                       MSC          Automotive Engineering
                       DIP(PG)      Communications and Space Systems
                       MRES         Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence
                       MSC          Cosmology
                       DIP(PG)      Creative Design
                       MSC          Creative Design
                       CERT(PG)     Digital Electronics
                       DIP(PG)      Digital Electronics
                       MSC          Digital Electronics
                       DIP(PG)      E-Learning Design
                       DIP(PG)      E-Learning Design (Professional Practice)
                       CERT(PG)     Embedded Digital Systems
                       DIP(PG)      Embedded Digital Systems
                       MSC          Embedded Digital Systems
                       DIP(PG)      Evolutionary and Adaptive Systems
                       MSC          Evolutionary and Adaptive Systems
                       DIP(PG)      Human-Centred Computer Systems
                       MSC          Human-Centred Computer Systems
                       DIP(PG)      Information Technology for E-Commerce
                       MSC          Information Technology for E-Commerce
                       DIP(PG)      Intelligent Systems
                       MSC          Intelligent Systems
                       MSC          Mathematical Methods for Finance
                       MSC          Mathematics
                       DIP(PG)      Mechanical Engineering
                       MSC          Mechanical Engineering
                       CERT(PG)     Modern Communication Technologies with Business Management
                       DIP(PG)      Modern Communication Technologies with Business Management
                       MSC          Modern Communication Technologies with Business Management
                       CERT(PG)     Modern Digital Communication Systems
                       DIP(PG)      Modern Digital Communication Systems
                       MSC          Modern Digital Communication Systems
                       DIP(PG)      Multimedia Applications and Virtual Environments
                       MSC          Multimedia Applications and Virtual Environments
                       DIP(PG)      Philosophy of Cognitive Science
                       MA           Philosophy of Cognitive Science
                       MSC          Physics
                       MSC          Satellite Communications and Space Systems
                       MSC          Scientific Computation
                       MSC          Theoretical Particle Physics
                       DIP(PG)      Turbomachinery
                       MSC          Turbomachinery




                Alignment of marking scales

        15.9    The following are the marking scales used in the departments of the School of
                Science and Technology:


Criteria for Awards                                                                                 52
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                Category       Engineering   Informatics    Mathematics    Physics       Philosophy
                               and Design                                  and           of
                                                                           Astronomy     Cognitive
                                                                                         Science

                Excellent      ≥ 70%         ≥ 70%          ≥ 75%          ≥ 75%         A+   95
                                                                                         A    90
                                                                                         A-   85
                Good           60%<70%       60%<70%        65%<75%        65%<75%       B+   80
                                                                                         B    75
                                                                                         B-   70
                Satisfactory   50%<60%       50%<60%        50%<65%        50%<65%       C+   65
                                                                                         C    60
                                                                                         C-   55
                Pass           40%<50%       40%<50%        40%<50%        40%<50%       D+   50
                                                                                         D    45
                                                                                         D-   40
                Fail           <40%          <40%           <40%           <40%          E+   35
                                                                                         E-   15
                                                                                         F    0

                Criteria for awards

        15.10 The following are the criteria for awards in the School of Science and Technology
              (excluding programmes in Automotive Engineering and Digital Electronics which are
              awarded under the University of Brighton general examination and assessment
              regulations):

                Pass

                       MSc programmes in Informatics, Mathematics, Physics and Astronomy, MRes
                       in Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence

                       An overall weighted mean mark at or above the pass threshold including a
                       pass in the dissertation/project and no more than 30 failed credits.

                       Postgraduate Diplomas in Informatics

                       An overall weighted mean mark at or above the pass threshold and no more
                       than 30 failed credits.

                       MSc programmes in Engineering and Design

                       An overall weighted mean mark at or above the pass threshold including a
                       pass in the dissertation/project and no more than 15 failed credits.

                       Postgraduate Diplomas in Engineering and Design

                       An overall weighted mean mark at or above the pass threshold and no more
                       than 15 failed credits.

                       Postgraduate Certificates in Engineering and Design

                       An overall weighted mean mark at or above the pass threshold.

                       MA in the Philosophy of Cognitive Science

Criteria for Awards                                                                                   53
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                        An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category including a pass in the
                        dissertation. More than one fail mark entails failure (NB account will be taken
                        of marks with a weight other than one unit).

                        Postgraduate Diploma in the Philosophy of Cognitive Science

                        An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category. More than one fail
                        mark entails failure (NB account will be taken of marks with a weight other
                        than one unit).

                Merit

                        The School of Science and Technology has agreed that the award of merit
                        shall be available only for MSc programmes in the Departments of
                        Engineering and Design, Informatics and Physics and Astronomy and the
                        MRes in Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence (i.e. there is no merit
                        award for postgraduate certificates or diplomas or for any awards in the
                        Department of Mathematics).

                        MSc programmes in the departments of Engineering and Design, Informatics
                        and Physics and Astronomy and the MRes in Computer Science and Artificial
                        Intelligence

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks. For the Department of Informatics a mark of
                               ‘Good’ in the project/dissertation is also required;

                               or

                        (b)    the subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                               recommend the award of merit where the following has been
                               achieved:

                               an overall weighted mean mark in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory’ category, a mark of ‘Good’ in the project/dissertation and
                               there are no fail marks;
                               or

                        (c)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction   but     has    failed  one    course   (excluding the
                               project/dissertation), the subject examination board may recommend
                               the award of merit.



                        MA in the Philosophy of Cognitive Science

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or

                               the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory zone and the student's major project/dissertation is
                               marked 'Good’ and there are no fail marks;

Criteria for Awards                                                                                   54
                                   Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                       (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                              distinction but has failed one course (excluding the dissertation), the
                              subject examination board may recommend the award of merit.

                       Postgraduate Diploma in the Philosophy of Cognitive Science

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                              there are no fail marks;

                              or

                       (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                              distinction but has failed one course, the subject examination board
                              may recommend the award of merit.

                Distinction

                       MSc programmes in the departments of Engineering and Design, Informatics
                       and the MRes in Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold, a
                              mark of ‘Excellent’ in the project/dissertation and there are no fail
                              marks;

                              or
                       (b)    the subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                              recommend the award of distinction where the following has been
                              achieved:

                              an overall weighted mean mark in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                              zone, a mark of ‘Excellent’ in the project/dissertation and there are no
                              fail marks.

                       Postgraduate Diplomas

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                              and there are no fail marks;

                       Postgraduate Certificates

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                              and there are no fail marks;

                       MSc programmes in the departments of Mathematics and Physics and
                       Astronomy

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold, a
                              mean mark at or above the ‘Excellent’ threshold for the courses and a
                              mark of ‘Excellent’ in the project/dissertation and there are no fail
                              marks;

                              or
                       (b)    the subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                              recommend the award of distinction where the following has been
                              achieved:

Criteria for Awards                                                                                  55
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                             an overall weighted mean mark in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                             zone, a mark of ‘Excellent’ in the project/dissertation and there are no
                             fail marks.

                      MA in the Philosophy of Cognitive Science

                      (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                             and there are no fail marks;

                             or

                             the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                             zone and the student's major project/dissertation is marked 'Excellent'
                             and there are no fail marks.

                      Postgraduate Diploma in the Philosophy of Cognitive Science

                      (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                             and there are no fail marks;

                      Automotive Engineering

                             Programmes in Automotive Engineering abide by the rules of GEAR
                             (General Examination and Assessment Regulations for taught
                             courses) operated by the University of Brighton.

                      MSc in Automotive Engineering

                      (a)    a total of 180 CATS points at M level are required for the award of a
                             Master of Science in Automotive Engineering. The modules passed
                             must include the project.

                      (b)    a Master of Science in Automotive Engineering with distinction may be
                             awarded if the student has achieved a weighted mean mark of at least
                             70% with a minimum of 70% in the project.

                      Postgraduate Diploma in Automotive Engineering

                      (a)    a total of 120 CATS points at M level are required for the award of a
                             Postgraduate Diploma in Automotive Engineering.

                             These credits may be accumulated by passing either:

                             (i)        eight of the taught modules offered as part of the postgraduate
                                        programme in Automotive Engineering, or

                             (ii)       four of the taught modules and the project.

                      (b)    a Postgraduate Diploma in Automotive Engineering with distinction
                             may be awarded if the student has achieved a weighted mean mark of
                             at least 70%.

                      (c)    a student registered for the Postgraduate Diploma may progress to the
                             Master of Science once they have successfully obtained 120 CATS
                             points at M level.

Criteria for Awards                                                                                   56
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                      Postgraduate Certificate in Automotive Engineering

                      (a)    a total of 60 CATS points at M level are required for the award of a
                             Postgraduate Certificate in Automotive Engineering.

                             These credits may be accumulated by passing any four of the taught
                             modules offered as part of the postgraduate programme in Automotive
                             Engineering.

                      (b)    a Postgraduate Certificate in Automotive Engineering with distinction
                             may be awarded if the student has achieved a weighted mean mark of
                             at least 70%.

                      (c)    a student registered for the Postgraduate Certificate may progress to
                             the Postgraduate Diploma once they have successfully obtained 60
                             CATS points at
                             M level.

                      Digital Electronics

                      Programmes in Digital Electronics abide by the rules of GEAR (General
                      Examination and Assessment Regulations for taught courses) operated by the
                      University of Brighton.

                      MSc in Digital Electronics


                      For the award of MSc a student must normally obtain a total of 180 credits at
                      level M, with 120 being obtained from the taught modules and 60 from the
                      project phase (i.e. DGM09 and DGM10). Not more than 50% of the total
                      credits achieved, and none of those in the project phase, may be derived from
                      the accreditation of prior learning (APL).
                      The award of MSc with Distinction will normally be given to a candidate who
                      has satisfied the above requirement and has also achieved a weighted mean
                      mark (weighted as for the credit weighting) from the taught modules and
                      project modules of at least 70%.

                      Postgraduate Diploma in Digital Electronics

                      For the award of Postgraduate Diploma a candidate must normally obtain a
                      total of at least 120 credits at level M. This means that at least eight 15-credit
                      modules must be passed. Not more than 50% of the total credits achieved
                      may be derived from APL.
                      The award of Postgraduate Diploma with Distinction will normally be given to a
                      candidate who has passed the required number of taught modules with a
                      weighted mean mark of at least 70%.

                      Post-Graduate Certificate in Digital Electronics

                      For the award of Postgraduate Certificate a candidate must normally obtain a
                      total of at least 60 credits at level M from study of taught modules (DGM01-
                      09). This means that at least four 15-credit modules must be passed. None of
                      the total credits achieved may be derived from APL.
                      To obtain the award a candidate must have accrued credits at level M from at
                      least TWO of the core modules; - i.e. Digital Signal Processing (DSP;
                      DGM02), Real-Time Software Development (RTSD; DGM03), Programming
                      Hierarchy in Computer Systems (PHiCS; DGM04), Advanced Network
Criteria for Awards                                                                                  57
                                 Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                       Technologies (ANT; DGM05), Embedded Microprocessor Systems Design
                       (EMSD; DGM06) and High-Level IC Design (HLICD; DGM07).

        School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies

        15.11 This applies to the following programmes:

                MA          Anthropology
                MA          Anthropology (Africa)
                MA          Anthropology (Europe)
                MA          Anthropology (South Asia)
                MA          Anthropology of Conflict, Violence and Conciliation
                MA          Anthropology of Development and Social Transformation
                MSC         Coastal and Estuarine Management
                CERT(PG)    Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods
                DIP(PG)     Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods
                MSC         Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods (Anthropology)
                MSC         Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods (Development Studies)
                MSC         Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods (Gender Studies)
                MSC         Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods (Human Geography)
                MSC         Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods (International Relations
                            and Politics)
                MSC         Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods (Migration Studies)
                MSC         Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods (Sociology)
                MA          Contemporary European Studies
                DIP(PG)     Contemporary European Studies (European Public Policy)
                MA          Contemporary European Studies (European Public Policy)
                MA          Development Economics
                MPHIL       Development Studies (SUSPENDED)
                DIP(GRAD)   Economics
                DIP(PG)     Environment, Development and Policy
                MA          Environment, Development and Policy
                MA          European Economic Integration
                MA          European Politics
                MA          Gender and Development
                MA          Gender and Media
                MA          Gender Studies
                MA          Global Political Economy
                MA          Globalisation, Ethnicity and Culture
                MA          Governance and Development
                MA          Human Rights
                MA          International Economics
                MA          International Relations
                MA          Landscape History and Culture
                MA          Medical Anthropology
                MA          Medicine and Health Studies
                MA          Migration Studies
                MA          Participation, Power and Social Change
                MA          Rural Development
                MA          Social and Political Thought
                MRES        Social and Political Thought
                MA          Social Development
                CERT(PG)    Social Research Methods
                DIP(PG)     Social Research Methods
                MSC         Social Research Methods (Economic and Social History)
                MSC         Social Research Methods (Education)
                MSC         Social Research Methods (Legal Studies)
                MSC         Social Research Methods (Media and Cultural Studies)

                MSC         Social Research Methods (Social Work and Social Care)
                MA          War, Violence and Security

                Alignment of marking scales

        15.12 The following are the marking scales used for programmes in the School of Social
              Sciences and Cultural Studies:


Criteria for Awards                                                                                    58
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                Category       All programmes
                               in SOCCUL
                               (including IDS)

                Excellent      A+        95
                               A         90
                               A-        85
                Good           B+        80
                               B-        75
                               B         70
                Satisfactory   C+        65
                               C         60
                               C-        55
                Pass           D+        50
                               D         45
                               D-        40
                Fail           E+        35
                               E         15
                               F         0

                Criteria for awards

        15.13 The following is the criteria for awards for programmes in the School of Social
              Sciences and Cultural Studies

                Pass

                       MA programmes and MRes in Social and Political Thought

                       An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category including a pass in the
                       dissertation. More than one fail mark entails failure.

                       MPhil in Development Studies

                       An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category including a pass in the
                       dissertation. More than two fail marks entails failure.

                       MA in Participation, Power and Social Change

                       An overall mean mark in the "Pass" category, including a pass in the
                       Synthesis paper. More than one course failure entails failure

                       MSc in Social Research Methods and MSc in Comparative and Cross Cultural
                       Research Methods

                       An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category including a pass in the
                       dissertation. More than one fail mark entails failure.

                       Postgraduate Diplomas (excluding the Postgraduate                 Diploma    in
                       Contemporary European Studies (European Public Policy))

                       An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category. More than one fail
                       mark entails failure.

                       Postgraduate Certificates


Criteria for Awards                                                                                 59
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                        An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category. More than one fail
                        mark entails failure.

                        Graduate Diploma in Economics

                        For each course, students must receive a percentage mark: the pass mark is
                        40%. To obtain a Pass, a student must:

                        (a)    achieve an average of 40%;
                        (b)    have a weight of failure that does not exceed 18 credits.

                        Students who fail the Diploma are eligible for resits, to be taken in September
                        following the Diploma course.

                Merit

                        The School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies has agreed that the
                        award of merit shall be available to all taught programmes (except for the
                        Postgraduate Certificates).

                        MA/MPhil/MRes (except MA in Participation, Power and Social Change)

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or


                               the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory zone and the student's major project/dissertation is
                               marked 'Good’ and there are no fail marks;

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course (excluding the dissertation), the
                               subject examination board may recommend the award of merit.

                        MA in Participation, Power and Social Change

                        (a)    an overall mean mark at or above the 'Good' threshold and there are
                               no fail marks;

                               or

                               the overall mean mark is in the upper quarter of the 'Satisfactory zone
                               and the synthesis paper is marked 'Good' and there are no fail marks;


                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course (excluding the synthesis paper),
                               the subject examination board may recommend the award of merit.

                               MSc in Social Research Methods and MSc in Comparative and Cross
                               Cultural Research Methods



Criteria for Awards                                                                                   60
                                   Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark of 70% (which entails that at least one
                              mark is above that threshold) and there are no fail marks.

                       Postgraduate Diplomas (except Social Research Methods and Comparative
                       and Cross Cultural Research Methods)

                        (a)   an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                              there are no fail marks;

                              or

                       (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                              distinction but has failed one course, the subject examination board
                              may recommend the award of merit.

                       Postgraduate Diploma in Social Research Methods and Postgraduate
                       Diploma in Comparative and Cross Cultural Research Methods

                       (a)    An overall weighted mean mark of 70% (which entails that at least one
                              mark is above that threshold) and there are no fail marks.

                Distinction

                       MA/MPhil/MRes (except MA in Participation, Power and Social Change)

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                              and there are no fail marks;

                              or

                              the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                              zone and the student's major project/dissertation is marked 'Excellent'
                              and there are no fail marks.

                       MA in Participation, Power and Social Change

                       (a)    an overall mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold and there
                              are no fail marks;

                              Or

                              the overall mean mark is in the upper quarter of the 'Good' zone and
                              the synthesis paper is marked 'Excellent' and there are no fail marks.

                       MSc in Social Research Methods and MSc in Comparative and Cross Cultural
                       Research Methods

                       (a)    An overall weighted mean mark of 80% including one mark (i.e. one
                              unit weighting) of at least 85%. Any candidate who fulfils this criteria is
                              automatically entitled to the award of Distinction, provided that he or
                              she has passed all course elements at the first attempt. Where the
                              application of penalty marks for late submission reduce the candidate’s
                              mark from the distinction category to the Merit or Pass categories, the
                              Board may not set aside the effect of the penalty points and a merit or
                              pass MSc (as appropriate) should be awarded in such cases.



Criteria for Awards                                                                                   61
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                       Postgraduate Diplomas (except Social Research Methods and Comparative
                       and Cross Cultural Research Methods)

                       (a)      an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                                and there are no fail marks;

                       Postgraduate Diploma in Social Research Methods and Postgraduate
                       Diploma in Cross Cultural Research Methods

                       (a)      An overall weighted mean mark of 80% including one mark (i.e. one
                                unit weighting) of at least 85%. Any candidate who fulfils this criteria is
                                automatically entitled to the award of Distinction, provided that he or
                                she has passed all course elements at the first attempt.

        SPRU

        15.14 This applies to the following programmes:

                MSC            Industry and Innovation Analysis
                CERT(PG)       International Management (SUSPENDED)
                DIP(PG)        International Management (SUSPENDED)
                MSC            International Management
                MBA            Master of Business Administration SUSPENDED
                MSC            Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation
                MSC            Science and Technology for Sustainability
                MSC            Technology and Innovation Management

                Alignment of marking scales

        15.15 The following is the marking scale used in SPRU:

                Threshold        Marks

                Excellent        ≥ 70%
                Good             60%<70%
                Satisfactory     50%<60%
                Pass             40%<50%
                Fail             <40%

                Criteria for awards

        15.16 The following is the criteria for awards in SPRU:




                Pass

                       MSc in Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation, MSc in
                       Science and Technology for Sustainability

                       (a)      an overall mark in the dissertation at or above the ‘Pass’ threshold with
                                no more than one course failure (excluding the dissertation).

                       MSc in Technology and Innovation Management

                       (a)      An overall weighted mean mark at or above the ‘Pass’ threshold
                                weighted equally between the dissertation and the technology
Criteria for Awards                                                                                     62
                                  Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                               management project. No more than one course failure (excluding the
                               dissertation or technology management project) is permitted.

                        MSc in Industry and Innovation Analysis

                        (a)    An overall weighted mean mark at or above the ‘Pass’ threshold
                               weighted between the spring term courses and the dissertation with no
                               more than one course failure (excluding the dissertation).

                        MSc in International Management

                        (a)    An overall weighted mean mark at or above the ‘Pass’ threshold
                               weighted between the autumn and spring term courses and the
                               dissertation with no more than one course failure (excluding the
                               dissertation).

                Merit

                        MSc in Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation, MSc in
                        Science and Technology for Sustainability

                        (a)    an overall mark in the dissertation at or above the 'Good’ threshold
                               and there are no fail marks.

                        MSc in Technology and Innovation Management

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks. A ‘good’ is required in either the dissertation or
                               technology management project;

                               or
                        (b)    The subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                               recommend the award of merit where:

                               the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory zone and either the dissertation or the technology
                               management project is marked 'Good’ and there are no fail marks;

                        MSc in Industry and Innovation Analysis and the MSc in International
                        Management

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks. A ‘good’ is required in the dissertation;

                               or
                        (b)    The subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                               recommend the award of merit where:

                               the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory zone and the student's major project/dissertation is
                               marked 'Good’ and there are no fail marks;
                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course (excluding the dissertation), the
                               subject examination board may recommend the award of merit.

                Distinction


Criteria for Awards                                                                                     63
                                   Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                       MSc in Public Policies for Science, Technology and Innovation, MSc in
                       Science and Technology for Sustainability

                       (a)    an overall mark in the dissertation at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                              and there are no fail marks.

                       MSc in Technology and Innovation Management

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                              and there are no fail marks. An ‘excellent’ is required in either the
                              dissertation or the technology management project;

                              or

                       (b)    The subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                              recommend the award of distinction where:

                              the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                              zone and either the dissertation or the technology management
                              project is marked 'Excellent' and there are no fail marks.

                       MSc in Industry and Innovation Analysis and the MSc in International
                       Management

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                              and there are no fail marks. An ‘excellent’ is required in the
                              dissertation;

                              or
                       (b)    The subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                              recommend the award of distinction where:

                              the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                              zone and the student's major project/dissertation is marked 'Excellent'
                              and there are no fail marks.

                Sussex Institute

                Alignment of marking scales

        15.17 The following are the marking scales used in the departments of the Sussex Institute:




                Category      Centre for        School of       Sussex Law
                              Continuing        Social Work     School
                              Education         and Social
                                                Care and
                                                Sussex
                                                School of
                                                Education

                Excellent     ≥ 80%             A+      95      ≥70%
                                                A       90
                                                A-      85

Criteria for Awards                                                                                  64
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards




                Good             70%<80%            B+       80        60%<70%
                                                    B        75
                                                    B-       70



                Satisfactory     55%<70%            C+       65        50%<59%
                                                    C        60
                                                    C-       55



                Pass             40%<55%            D+       50        40%<49%
                                                    D        45
                                                    D-       40



                Fail             <40%               E+       35        <40%
                                                    E        15
                                                    F        0



                                                    Additional
                                                    criteria for
                                                    SSWSC:

                                                    Pass/Fail in
                                                    Practice
                                                    elements

        Centre for Continuing Education

        15.18 This applies to the following programmes:

                MA             Arts and Cultural Management
                DIP(PG)        Creative Writing and Authorship
                MA             Creative Writing and Authorship
                MA             Creative Writing and Personal Development
                MA             Dramatic Writing
                MA             Field Archaeology
                DIP(PG)        Landscape Heritage Management
                MA             Landscape Heritage Management
                MA             Life History Research: Oral History and Life Story Documents
                CERT(PG)       Lifelong Learning
                DIP(PG)        Lifelong Learning
                MA             Lifelong Learning

                Criteria for awards

        15.19 The following is the criteria for awards in the Centre for Continuing Education:

                Pass

                       MA
Criteria for Awards                                                                                   65
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                        A pass in each course.

                        Postgraduate Diplomas

                        A pass in each course.

                        Postgraduate Certificates

                        A pass in each course.

                Merit

                        The Centre for Continuing Education has agreed that the award of merit shall
                        be available for all programmes.

                        MA

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold, a
                               mark of ‘Good’ in the project/dissertation and there are no fail marks;

                               or

                        (b)    the subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                               recommend the award of merit where the following has been
                               achieved:

                               an overall weighted mean mark in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory’ category, a mark of ‘Good’ in the project/dissertation and
                               there are no fail marks;

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction   but     has    failed  one    course   (excluding the
                               project/dissertation), the subject examination board may recommend
                               the award of merit.

                        Postgraduate Diplomas

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course, the subject examination board
                               may recommend the award of merit.

                        Postgraduate Certificates

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or




Criteria for Awards                                                                                   66
                                      Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                          (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                                 distinction but has failed one course, the subject examination board
                                 may recommend the award of merit.

                Distinction

                          MA

                          (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold, a
                                 mark of ‘Excellent’ in the project/dissertation and there are no fail
                                 marks;

                                 or

                          (b)    the subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                                 recommend the award of distinction where the following has been
                                 achieved:
                                 an overall weighted mean mark in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                                 category, a mark of ‘Excellent’ in the project/dissertation and there are
                                 no fail marks.

                          Postgraduate Diplomas

                          (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                                 and there are no fail marks;

                          Postgraduate Certificates

                          (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                                 and there are no fail marks;

                Sussex Law School

        15.20 This applies to the following programmes:

                MA              Criminal Justice SUSPENDED
                MA              European Law and Society SUSPENDED
                LLM             European and International Trade Law
                LLM             Family, Responsibility and the Law
                LLM             International Criminal Law
                LLM             Law
                DIP(PG)         Policing Studies SUSPENDED




                Criteria for awards

        15.21 The following is the criteria for awards in the Sussex Law School:

                Pass

                          MA/LLM

                          An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category including a pass in the
                          dissertation. More than one fail mark entails failure (NB account will be taken
                          of marks with a weight other than one unit).

Criteria for Awards                                                                                     67
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                        Postgraduate Diplomas

                        An overall weighted mean mark in the ‘Pass’ category. More than one fail
                        mark entails failure (NB account will be taken of marks with a weight other
                        than one unit).

                Merit

                        MA/LLM

                        The Sussex Law School has agreed that the award of merit shall be available
                        for all taught programmes.

                        (a)    the overall weighted mean mark is at or above the 'Good’ threshold
                               and there are no fail marks;

                               or

                               the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory zone and the student's major project/dissertation is
                               marked 'Good’ and there are no fail marks;

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course (excluding the dissertation), the
                               subject examination board may recommend the award of merit.

                        Postgraduate Diplomas

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course, the subject examination board
                               may recommend the award of merit.

                Distinction

                        (a)    the overall weighted mean mark is at or above the 'excellent' threshold
                               and there are no fail marks;



                               or

                               the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                               zone and the student's major project/dissertation is marked 'Excellent'
                               and there are no fail marks.

                        Postgraduate Diplomas

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                               and there are no fail marks;



Criteria for Awards                                                                                   68
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                Sussex School of Education

        15.22 This applies to the following programmes:

                MA            Education (School Improvement and Professional Development)
                              (SUSPENDED)
                CERT(PG)      Education Studies
                DIP(PG)       Education Studies
                MA            Education Studies
                MA            International Education
                MA            International Education (Distant) (SUSPENDED)
                MA            International Education (Sandwich)
                CERT(PG)      Learning and Teaching in Higher Education
                DIP(PG)       Management of Change (SUSPENDED)
                MA            Management of Change (SUSPENDED)

                Criteria for awards

        15.23 The following is the criteria for awards in the Sussex School of Education:

                Pass

                        A pass in each assessment.

                Merit

                        MA in Education Studies, MA in International Education

                        (a)    the overall weighted mean mark is at or above the 'Good’ threshold
                               and there are no fail marks;

                               or

                               the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory zone and the student's major project/dissertation is
                               marked 'Good’ and there are no fail marks;

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course (excluding the major project,
                               dissertation, special study), the subject examination board may
                               recommend the award of merit.

                        Postgraduate Diploma in Education Studies

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course, the subject examination board
                               may recommend the award of merit.

                Distinction

                        MA in Education Studies, MA in International Education




Criteria for Awards                                                                                   69
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                       (a)     an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold, a
                               mark of ‘Excellent’ in the project/dissertation and there are no fail
                               marks;

                               or

                       (b)     the subject examination board shall also have discretion to
                               recommend the award of distinction where the following has been
                               achieved:

                               an overall weighted mean mark in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                               category, a mark of ‘Excellent’ in the project/dissertation and there are
                               no fail marks.

                       MA in Management of Change suspended for the 2006 entry cohort

                       Postgraduate Diploma in Education Studies

                       an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold and there
                       are no fail marks;

                       Postgraduate Certificate in Education Studies

                       an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold and there
                       are no fail marks;

                Postgraduate Certificate in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education

                The Sussex School of Education has agreed that the award of the distinction shall
                not be available for this certificate.

                Sussex School of Social Work and Social Care

        15.24 This applies to the following programmes:

                DIP(PG)      Applied Social Care
                MA           Applied Social Care
                CERT(PG)     Evidence Based-Practice in Social Work (Children and Families)
                DIP(PG)      Social Work
                MA           Social Work

                Criteria for awards

        15.25 The following is the criteria for awards in the Sussex School of Social Work and
              Social Care:


                Pass

                       MA in Social Work

                       A pass in each assessment including a pass in the practice elements and a
                       pass in the European Computer Driving Licence (or equivalent). A pass in the
                       MA confers qualified social worker status.

                       All Year 1 courses are mandatory for progression to Year 2, apart from
                       Research Methods, but this course must be passed before students can
                       progress to the Dissertation and complete the award.
Criteria for Awards                                                                                   70
                                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                        Postgraduate Diploma in Social Work

                        This is an exit award only from the MA in Social Work. A pass is required in
                        each course of the masters (excluding Research Methods and the
                        Dissertation), a pass in the practice elements and a pass in the European
                        Computer Driving Licence (or equivalent). A pass in the Postgraduate
                        Diploma confers qualified social worker status.

                        MA in Applied Social Care

                        A pass in each course.

                        Postgraduate Diploma in Applied Social Care

                        This is an exit award only from the MA in Applied Social Care. A pass is
                        required in each course (excluding Research Methods and the Dissertation).

                        Postgraduate Certificate in Evidence Based Practice in Social Work (Children
                        and Families)

                        A pass in each course.

                Merit

                        The Sussex School of Social Work and Social Care has agreed that the
                        award of merit shall be available for all taught programmes except for the
                        Postgraduate Certificate in Evidence-Based Practice in Social Work (Children
                        and Families).

                        MAs

                        (a)    the overall weighted mean mark is at or above the 'Good’ threshold
                               and there are no fail marks;

                               or


                               the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the
                               'Satisfactory zone and the student's major project/dissertation is
                               marked 'Good’ and there are no fail marks;

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course (excluding the dissertation), the
                               subject examination board may recommend the award of merit.

                        Postgraduate Diplomas

                        (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Good’ threshold and
                               there are no fail marks;

                               or

                        (b)    where a student has otherwise met the criteria for the award of
                               distinction but has failed one course, the subject examination board
                               may recommend the award of merit.

Criteria for Awards                                                                                   71
                                   Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                Distinction

                       MAs

                       (a)    the overall weighted mean mark is at or above the 'excellent' threshold
                              and there are no fail marks;

                              or

                              the overall weighted mean mark is in the upper quarter of the 'Good'
                              zone and the student's major project/dissertation is marked 'Excellent'
                              and there are no fail marks.

                       Postgraduate Diplomas

                       (a)    an overall weighted mean mark at or above the 'Excellent' threshold
                              and there are no fail marks;

        Unacceptable outcomes of the rules for classification

        15.26 The strict application of the rules may produce a result unacceptable to a subject
              examination board, in which case the board may alter the classification indicated by
              the rules, on the merits of the case, provided that at least half of the external
              examiner members of the board present support the setting aside of the rules, and
              provided that the rationale for setting-aside the indicated classification is minuted with
              clarity and detail.




Criteria for Awards                                                                                   72
                                 Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

16.      CREDIT

         16.1   Taught Programmes Committee has approved the introduction of a credit framework
                for introduction by no later than the Academic Year 2008/09.

         16.2   With effect from the Academic Year 2006/07, subject examination boards may award
                general credits for diploma supplement (transcript) purposes in compensation for
                failed courses.

                General credit

         16.3   The criteria for award of general credit shall be where a student has achieved a mean
                minimum overall performance of 50% or above for the programme as a whole and
                has met fully the programme learning outcomes. General credit cannot be awarded in
                compensation for a course designated mandatory-for-progression or mandatory-for-
                programme.




Credit                                                                                             73
                                             Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

                                                                                                          APPENDIX A

                                                   EXAMPLE PASS LIST

                                           THE UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX

                                                     MASTER OF ARTS

                HUMANITIES SCHOOL POSTGRADUATE SUBJECT EXAMINATION BOARD

                                                      PASS LIST 2007

Programme Name
                                                    SURNAME Forename Forename
                                                    SURNAME Forename Forename
Programme Name
                                                   SURNAME Forename Forename
                                                 * SURNAME Forename Forename
Programmes Name
                                                    SURNAME Forename Forename
                                                    SURNAME Forename Forename


* = distinction
                                                                               +      ...............................
                                                                                      ...............................

+ These lines to be added if you need to continue onto another page
Subject to ratification by the Senate, I approve, on behalf of the Humanities School Postgraduate
Subject Examination Board, the award of the degree of Master of Arts to the students listed above.


Date............................ Chairperson of the Examination Board ……………………………….

I approve, on behalf of the Senate, the award of the degree of Master of Arts to the students listed
above.

Date ....................…...... Chairperson of the Taught Programmes Committee ……...…………….

Pass List Published on
........................................

Please print on WHITE paper




Appendix A - example pass list                                                                                          74
                               Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

SECTION B:


The rest of this handbook applies to the following programmes ONLY:


              MA          Aesthetics
              MA          American History
              MA          American Literature: Critical reading
              MA          Anthropology
              MA          Anthropology (Africa)
              MA          Anthropology (Europe)
              MA          Anthropology (South Asia)
              MA          Anthropology of Conflict, Violence and Conciliation
              MA          Anthropology of Development and Social Transformation
              MA          Applied Linguistics
              MA          Art History
              DIP(PG)     Byzantine Art and Text
              MA          Byzantine Art and Text
              MA          Cognitive Linguistics
              MA          Colonial and Post-Colonial Cultures
              MA          Contemporary European Studies
              DIP(PG)     Contemporary European Studies (European Public Policy)
              MA          Contemporary European Studies (European Public Policy)
              MA          Contemporary History
              MA          Creative and Critical Writing
              MA          Criminal Justice
              MA          Critical Theory
              MA          Development Economics
              MPHIL       Development Studies (SUSPENDED)
              MA          Digital Media
              MA          Early Modern History 1500-1800
              MA          Early Modern Literature and Culture
              DIP(GRAD)   Economics
              DIP(PG)     English Language Teaching
              MA          English Language Teaching
              MA          English Local and Regional History
              DIP(PG)     Environment, Development and Policy
              MA          Environment, Development and Policy
              LLM         European and International Trade Law
              MA          European Economic Integration
              MA          European Law and Society
              MA          European Politics
              MA          Family, Responsibility and the Law
              MA          Film Studies
              MA          Gender and Development
              MA          Gender and Media
              MA          Gender Studies
              MA          Global Political Economy
              MA          Globalisation, Ethnicity and Culture
              MA          Governance and Development
              MA          History
              MA          Human Rights
              MA          Intellectual History and the History of Political Thought
              LLM         International Criminal Law
              MA          International Economics
              DIP(PG)     International English Language Teaching
              MA          International English Language Teaching
              MA          International Relations
              MA          Landscape History and Culture
              DIP(GRAD)   Law
              LLM         Law

Specified programmes                                                                             75
                            Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

              MRES      Linguistic Methods
              MA        Literature, Film and Visual Culture
              MA        Literature, Religion and Philosophy
              DIP(PG)   Media and Cultural Studies
              MA        Media and Cultural Studies
              MA        Medical Anthropology
              MA        Medicine and Health Studies
              MA        Migration Studies
              MA        Modern and Contemporary Literature, Culture and Thought
              MA        Modern European Jewish History, Culture and Thought
              MA        Music
              MA        Nineteenth Century Literature and Culture
              MA        Opera and Music Theatre
              DIP(PG)   Philosophy
              MA        Philosophy
              DIP(PG)   Philosophy of Cognitive Science
              MA        Philosophy of Cognitive Science
              DIP(PG)   Policing Studies
              MA        Rural Development
              MA        Sexual Dissidence in Literature and Culture
              MA        Social and Political Thought
              MRES      Social and Political Thought
              MA        Social Development
              MA        War, Violence and Society




Specified programmes                                                                          76
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

SECTION B

       MARKING PROCEDURES (SPECIFIED PROGRAMMES ONLY)

       Unseen examinations

              Despatch of answer books

       B.1    The first internal examiner will receive from the Postgraduate Office a set of answer
              books along with a statement of the number of answer books to be marked, a set of
              mark sheets for both Internal Examiners and copies of the question paper.

       B.2    Each answer book has a cover with a section containing the student's number, the
              examination number and the title of the course being examined.

              Marking procedure

       B.3    The procedure for the internal examiners is:

              (a)     each examination paper must be marked in accordance with the marking
                      scale determined by Taught Programmes Committee.

              (b)     internal examiners must not write anything on the examination answer books
                      because each examiner must mark independently.

              (c)     the first internal examiner enters on the mark sheet (not the answer book) for
                      each student, the mark awarded for each question, and for the examination
                      paper as a whole (in the column headed "Examiner's mark for the paper").
                      Ensure that the marks are legible on all copies of the marks sheet. The first
                      internal examiner should leave the final ("Agreed Mark") column blank at this
                      stage (this column does not appear on the marks sheet for the second internal
                      examiner). The first internal examiner should send the answer books together
                      with the second internal examiner’s mark sheet to the second internal
                      examiner for marking.

              (d)     when both internal examiners have completed the independent marking of the
                      examination answer books, both internal examiners liaise to agree upon a
                      mark for each examination paper.

              (e)     the first internal examiner should enter the agreed mark on the right-hand
                      column of the first internal examiner’s mark sheet. Each internal examiner
                      must sign the marks sheet to confirm their agreement.

       B.4    On completion of marking, each internal examiner must return the white copy of their
              completed mark sheet to the Postgraduate Office by the deadline given; exchange
              the pink copy with the other internal examiner, send the blue copy to the Programme
              Convenor. The yellow copy should be retained for the examiner’s records.

       B.5    The second internal examiner should return the answer books to the first internal
              examiner who will return them to the Programme Convenor.

       B.6    The Programme Convenor will send to the external examiner, all scripts specified
              section 3, together with a mark sheet appropriately filled in showing the internal marks
              (and the rationale for the marks if required). A sample of examination scripts will also
              be sent to the external examiner for moderation only.


Appendix B- Marking Process                                                                        77
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

       B.7    The Programme Convenor, after receiving the answer books and mark sheets from
              the external examiner, will ensure that the final agreed marks are recorded on the
              mark sheet and returned, together with all the answer books, to the Postgraduate
              Office.

       B.8    Recorded Delivery must be used for all items of assessment which have to be sent by
              Post Office Mail.

              Inability of the internal examiners to agree a mark

       B.9    If the internal examiners of an examination answer book are unable to decide upon
              an agreed mark, the second internal examiner must send the relevant answer book(s)
              together with the signed and dated white copies of the mark sheets of both internal
              examiners with the "Agreed Mark" box left blank to the Programme Convenor. The
              Programme Convenor will then send the answer book(s) and a note stating the basis
              for the divergence of opinion asking the external examiner to mark the answer book
              independently and then to consult with the internal examiners in order to produce an
              agreed mark. Only a single grade is acceptable; a split grade, e.g. B/C, must not be
              used to record disagreements between Examiners.

       Term-Papers

              Despatch of Term Papers

       B.10   The first and second internal examiners will each be sent by the Postgraduate Office
              a set of Term Papers to be marked and a marks sheet containing the names of the
              Examiners.

       B.11   Each Term Paper will have a cover sheet completed by the student containing the
              following information:

              (a)     the student’ candidate number;
              (b)     the Academic Year;
              (c)     the title of the programme;
              (d)     the title of the course;
              (e)     the approximate length (number of words) of the Term Paper.

       B.12   Examiners must not accept Term Papers or parts of Term Papers which have not
              been sent to them by the Postgraduate Office.

              Marking procedure

       B.13   Each Term Paper must be marked in accordance with the marking scale determined
              by the relevant Examination Board. The procedure for the internal examiners is:

              (a)     the first internal examiner should enter on the mark sheet the mark awarded
                      for each student, (in the column headed "Examiner's mark for the paper").
                      Ensure that the marks are legible on all copies of the marks sheet. The first
                      examiner should leave the final ("Agreed Mark") column blank at this stage
                      (this column does not appear on the marks sheet for the second internal
                      examiner);

              (b)     when both internal examiners have completed the independent marking of the
                      Term Papers, they should liaise to agree upon a mark for each Term Paper;




Appendix B- Marking Process                                                                       78
                                 Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

              (c)      the first internal examiner should enter the agreed mark on the right-hand
                       column of the mark sheet. Each examiner must sign the mark sheet to confirm
                       their agreement;

              (d)      on completion of marking, each internal examiner must return the white copy
                       of their completed mark sheet to the Postgraduate Office by the deadline
                       given; exchange the pink copy with the other internal examiner, send the blue
                       copy to the Programme Convenor. The yellow copy should be retained for
                       your own records. The first internal examiner must return the set of Term
                       Papers (green covers) to the Postgraduate Office by the stated deadline. The
                       second internal examiner must return the set of Term Papers (blue covers) to
                       the Programme Convenor;

              (e)      the Programme Convenor will send to the external examiner all relevant
                       scripts together with a marks sheet appropriately filled in showing the internal
                       examiners marks (and a rationale for the marks if required). A sample of Term
                       Papers will also be sent to the external examiner for moderation only;

              (f)      the Programme Convenor, after receiving the Term Papers and mark sheet
                       from the external examiner, will ensure that the final agreed marks are
                       recorded on the mark sheet and will return the mark sheets to the
                       Postgraduate Office. The Programme Convenor should retain the Term
                       Papers (blue covers);

              (g)      recorded delivery must be used for all items of assessment which have to be
                       sent by Post Office Mail.

       B.14   If the internal examiners of a Term Paper are unable to decide upon an agreed mark,
              the second internal examiner must send the Term Paper with the blue cover and the
              signed and dated white copies of the mark sheet of both internal examiners, with the
              "Agreed Mark" box left blank to the Programme Convenor. The Programme Convenor
              will then send the Term Paper and a note stating the basis for the divergence of
              opinion and asking the external examiner to mark the script independently and then to
              consult with the internal examiners in order to produce an agreed mark. Only a single
              grade is acceptable; a split grade, e.g. B/C, must not be used to record
              disagreements between examiners. Should disagreement persist, the decision of the
              external examiner will be final. The Programme Convenor must insert the agreed
              mark on the mark sheet and sign to indicate that the decision has been made by the
              external examiner.

              Failed Term papers

       B.15   If the internal examiners agree a fail mark for a Term Paper, the Term Paper must be
              sent to the Programme Convenor for onward transmission to the external examiner in
              order to confirm that the mark is appropriate. In cases of disagreement the external
              examiner's decision is final.

       Dissertations

              Marking procedures

       B.16   The dissertation must be marked by two internal examiners;

       B.17   Internal examiners must not write anything on the dissertation because each
              examiner must mark independently.



Appendix B- Marking Process                                                                         79
                                Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

       B.18   Directors of Graduate Studies may use their discretion to impose within their School a
              restriction for any programme that the supervisor should not act as an Internal
              Examiner;

       B.19    Ensure that the marks are legible on all copies of the mark sheet.

              Despatch of dissertations

       B.20   Each internal examiner will be sent a copy of the dissertation (including a cover sheet)
              and a marks sheet containing the following information:

              (a)     the student's candidate number;
              (b)     the programme;
              (c)     the convenor;
              (d)     the names of the Examiners.

       B.21   Examiners must not accept dissertations or parts of dissertations which have not
              been sent to them by the Postgraduate Office.

       B.22   The first internal examiner should, on completion of the marking and after a mark has
              been agreed with the second internal examiner:

              (a)     complete and sign the mark sheet and send the white copy to the
                      Postgraduate Office, the blue copy to the Programme Convenor, the pink copy
                      to the second internal examiner and retain the yellow copy;
              (b)     return the dissertation (green cover) to the Postgraduate Office by the stated
                      deadline

       B.23   The second internal examiner should, on completion of the marking, and after a mark
              has been agreed with the first Internal Examiner:

              (a)     complete and sign the mark sheet and send the white copy to the
                      Postgraduate Office, the blue copy to the Programme Convenor, the pink copy
                      to the first Internal Examiner and retain the yellow copy;
              (b)     return the dissertation (blue cover) to the Programme Convenor

              Failure of internal examiners to agree on a mark

       B.24   In cases where the internal examiners are unable to decide upon an agreed mark the
              dissertation should be sent to the relevant external examiner. The Programme
              Convenor will provide a note stating the basis for the divergence of opinion and
              asking the external examiner to mark the script independently and then to consult
              with the internal examiners in order to produce an agreed mark. Only a single grade
              is acceptable; a split grade, e.g. B/C, must not be used to record disagreements
              between examiners. Should disagreement persist, the decision of the external
              examiner will be final. The Programme Convenor must insert the agreed mark on the
              mark sheet and sign to indicate that the decision has been made by the external
              examiner.

       B.25   The Programme Convenor should send to the external examiner all dissertations
              specified under section 3, together with mark sheets appropriately filled in showing
              the internal examiners marks (and the rationale for the marks if required).

       B.26   The Programme Convenor should also send a sample of dissertations obtaining
              marks across the marking scale to the external examiner for moderation in
              accordance with existing policy.


Appendix B- Marking Process                                                                        80
                               Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

              Procedure after consideration by the external examiner

       B.27   The Programme Convenor will liaise with the external examiner to produce finally
              agreed marks in respect of each category of dissertation they have been asked to
              consider.

       B.28   The external examiner will record all decisions in writing and so notify the Programme
              Convenor who will send a copy of the notification to the Postgraduate Office.

       Library copy of the dissertation

       B.29   A subject examination board may decide, on the recommendation of the Programme
              Convenor or the external examiner, that dissertations with a mark in the Excellent
              category should be lodged in the University Library.




Appendix B- Marking Process                                                                      81
                                                                                     SECTION C

   TIMETABLE FOR EXAMINERS OF COURSEWORK AND DISSERTATIONS 2006/2007

            MA, LLM, MPhil (Development Studies) and Postgraduate Diplomas


Term Dates

Autumn Term:       Monday, 2 October, 2006 - Friday, 8 December, 2006

Spring Term:       Monday, 8 January, 2007 - Friday, 16 March, 2007

Summer Term:       Monday 18 April, 2007 - Friday, 22 June 2007


Autumn Term, 2006

By 17 November                 Programme Convenor:
(Week 7)
                               provides list of internal examiners for Autumn Term Papers to
                               Postgraduate Office

By 24 November                 Programme Convenor:
(Week 8)
                               sends question papers for Spring Term unseen examinations to
                               Postgraduate Office

Spring Term, 2007

By 2 February                  First Internal Examiner:
(Week 4)
                                returns Term Papers (green covers) to the Postgraduate Office
                                returns unseen examination answer books to the Programme
                                 Convenor
                                returns white copy of mark sheets to Postgraduate Office

                               Second Internal Examiner:

                                returns Term Papers (blue covers) to the Programme
                                 Convenor
                                returns white copy of mark sheets to Postgraduate Office

                               Programme Convenor:

                               sends relevant scripts to the External Examiner (see section 3)

By 16 February                 External Examiner:
(Week 7)
                                returns agreed marks for Term Papers to the Programme
                                 Convenor
                                return agreed marks for unseen examinations and answer
                                 books to the Programme Convenor

                               Programme Convenor:

Appendix C - Timetable for examiners of coursework and dissertations
                    Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards


                       ensures that the final agreed marks are recorded on the mark
                        sheets, sends the mark sheets for both the unseen
                        examinations and the Term Papers to the Postgraduate Office
                       retains Term Papers (blue covers).

By 16 March           Programme Convenor:
(Week 10)
                       sends question papers for Summer Term unseen examinations
                        to the Postgraduate Office.
                       provides names of internal examiners for Spring Term Papers
                        to Postgraduate Office

Summer Term, 2007

By 4 May              First Internal Examiner:
(Week 3)
                       returns Term Papers (green covers) to the Postgraduate Office
                       returns unseen examination answer books to the Programme
                        Convenor
                       returns white copy of mark sheet to Postgraduate Office

                      Second Internal Examiner:

                       returns Term Papers (blue covers) to the Programme
                        Convenor
                       returns white copy of mark sheet to Postgraduate Office

                      Programme Convenor:

                      sends relevant scripts to the External Examiner (see section 3)


By 18 May             External Examiners:
(Week 5)
                       return agreed marks for Term Papers to the Programme
                        Convenor
                       return agreed marks for unseen examinations and answer
                        books to the Programme Convenor

                      Programme Convenor:

                       ensures that the final agreed marks are recorded on the mark
                        sheets, sends the mark sheets for both the unseen
                        examinations and the Term Papers to the Postgraduate Office
                       retains Term Papers (blue covers).




                                                                                        83
                        Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

By 25 May                 Programme Convenor:
(Week 6)
                          sends approved dissertation titles and outlines to Postgraduate
                          Office for the following candidates:

                          Full-time and second year part-time Masters candidates

                          With the exception of LLM candidates for which the dissertation
                          titles are sent to SLS

                          Programme Convenor:

                                sends Summer Term Study Plans to the Postgraduate
                                 Office
                                provides names of internal examiners for Summer Term
                                 Papers to Postgraduate Office

By 22 June                Programme Convenor:
(Week 10)
                          provides names of internal examiners for dissertations to
                          Postgraduate Office for:

                           full-time Masters candidates
                           second year Part-Time Masters candidates
                           second year MPhil (Development Studies) candidates



Summer Vacation, 2007

By 13 July                First Internal Examiner:

                           returns Term Papers (green covers) to the Postgraduate Office
                           returns white copy of mark sheet to Postgraduate Office

                          Second Internal Examiner:

                           returns Term Papers (blue covers) to the Programme
                            Convenor
                           returns white copy of mark sheet to Postgraduate Office

                          Programme Convenor:

                          sends relevant scripts to the External Examiner (see section 3)

By 27 July                External Examiners:

                          return agreed marks for Summer Term Papers to the Programme
                          Convenor




                                                                                            84
                         Assessment handbook for postgraduate examiners and examination boards

By 17 September            First Internal Examiner:

                            returns dissertations (green covers) to the Postgraduate Office
                            returns Term Papers (green covers) to the Postgraduate Office
                            returns white copy of mark sheets to the Postgraduate Office

                           Second Internal Examiner:

                            returns dissertations (blue covers) to the Programme Convenor
                            returns Term Papers (blue covers) to the Programme
                             Convenor
                            returns white copy of mark sheets to the Postgraduate Office

                           Programme Convenor:
By 21 September
                           sends the dissertations specified in section 3 to the External
                           Examiner


Autumn Term, 2007

By 5 October               External Examiners:

                            return agreed marks for Term Papers submitted on 1
                             September to the Programme Convenor
                            return agreed marks for dissertations to the Programme
                             Convenor


November 2007              Masters Examination Board meetings
Dates to be confirmed
                           Pass Lists will be published on the Postgraduate Office Notice
                           Board and the appropriate School Notice Board within 7 days of
                           the date of the Exam Board meeting

Friday 25 January 2008     Graduation Ceremony




                                                                                            85

				
DOCUMENT INFO