Foreword
1 This document is a code of practice for the assessment of students in UK higher education institutions. It is one of a suite of inter-related documents which, taken together, will form an overall Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education for the guidance of higher education institutions subscribing to the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (the QAA).
2 The overall Code and its constituent sections are being prepared by the QAA in response both to the Reports of the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education and its Scottish Committee (the 'Dearing' and 'Garrick' Reports) and the consequent remodelling of the national arrangements for quality assurance in higher education. The completed Code will identify a comprehensive series of system-wide expectations covering matters relating to the management of academic quality and standards in higher education. In so doing, it will provide an authoritative reference point for institutions as they consciously, actively and systematically assure the academic quality and standards of their programmes, awards and qualifications. The Code assumes that, taking into account nationally agreed principles and practices, each institution has its own systems for independent verification both of its quality and standards and of the effectiveness of its quality assurance systems. In developing the Code, extensive advice is being sought from a range of knowledgeable practitioners.
3 Each section of the Code is structured into a series of precepts and accompanying outline guidance. The precepts identify those key matters that the QAA expects an institution to be able to demonstrate it is addressing effectively through its own quality assurance mechanisms. The accompanying outline guidance is provided to assist institutions in maintaining and enhancing the quality of provision for students and other stakeholders. The guidance is not intended to be either prescriptive or exhaustive: its purpose is to offer a framework for quality assurance and control which institutions may wish to use and adapt according to their own needs, traditions, cultures and decision-making processes. Nonetheless, in many institutions the guidance will constitute appropriate good practice.
4 To assist users, the precepts are listed, without the associated guidance, in Appendix 1 to code.
5 During the course of its quality assurance reviews, the QAA will consider the extent to which individual institutions are meeting the expectations of the precepts in the available sections of the Code of practice. The QAA will report on how effectively higher education institutions individually are meeting these expectations and are discharging their responsibilities for the academic standards and quality of their programmes and awards. In doing so it will focus on the precepts themselves, and not on the associated guidance: the latter may, however, provide a helpful starting point for discussion. The QAA expects that by autumn 2001 all institutions will be able to demonstrate that they are adhering to the precepts.
Introduction
6 Assessment is a generic term for a set of processes that measure the outcomes of students' learning, in terms of knowledge acquired, understanding developed, and skills gained. It serves many purposes. Assessment provides the means by which students are graded, passed or fail. It provides the basis for decisions on whether a student is ready to proceed, to qualify for an award or to demonstrate competence to practise. It enables students to obtain feedback on their learning and helps them improve their performance. It enables staff to evaluate the effectiveness of their teaching.
7 Assessment plays a significant role in the learning experience of students. It determines their progression through their programmes and enables them to demonstrate that they have achieved the intended learning outcomes. It is assessment that provides the main basis for public recognition of achievement, through the awarding of qualifications and/or credit.
8 Assessment is usually construed as being either diagnostic, formative or summative.
9 Commonly held understandings of these terms are that:
- diagnostic assessment provides an indicator of a learner's aptitude and preparedness for a programme of study and identifies possible learning problems;
- formative assessment is designed to provide learners with feedback on progress and inform development, but does not contribute to the overall assessment;
- summative assessment provides a measure of achievement or failure made in respect of a learner's performance in relation to the intended learning outcomes of the programme of study.
10 Any assessment instrument can, and often does, involve more than one of these elements. So, for example, much coursework is formative in that it provides an opportunity for students to be given feedback on their level of attainment, but also often counts towards the credit being accumulated for a summative statement of achievement. An end-of-module or end-of-programme examination is designed primarily to result in a summative judgement on the level of attainment the student has reached. Both formative and summative assessment can have a diagnostic function. Assessment primarily aimed at diagnosis is intrinsically formative, though it might, rarely, contribute towards a summative judgement.
11 This section of the Code of practice assumes that these understandings of the nature and purpose of assessment are broadly accepted and implemented by higher education institutions. It is not the QAA's intention to prescribe specific ways of implementing the precepts set out below. It is equivalence of effect that will be looked for. The guidelines that accompany the precepts suggest possible ways of meeting the precepts but these are neither prescriptive nor exhaustive. The QAA wishes to encourage innovation and diversity in assessment practices.
12 In implementing this code institutions will also need to refer to other sections of the Code of practice, in particular:
- student complaints and appeals;
- students with disabilities;
- postgraduate research programmes;
- external examining;
- programme approval, monitoring and review;
and also
- The guidelines on the quality assurance of distance learning
- The guidelines for programme specification.
Precepts and guidance
General Principles
1
As bodies responsible for academic standards, institutions should have effective
procedures for:
i) designing, approving, supervising and
reviewing the assessment strategies for programmes and awards;
ii) the consistent implementation of rigorous
assessment practices which ensure that the academic/professional standard
for each award and award element is set and maintained at the appropriate
level and that student performance is properly judged against this.
In considering how their own policies and practices reflect this precept, institutions will need to consider, in addition to their own policies, the implications of the introduction in UK higher education of subject benchmark statements and the national qualifications frameworks.
In particular, institutions will wish to ensure that:
- assessment tasks and associated criteria are effective in measuring student attainment of the intended learning outcomes;
- assessment policies and practices are responsive and provide for the effective monitoring of the validity, equity and reliability of assessment.
2
The principles, procedures and processes of all assessment should be explicit,
valid, and reliable.
- how to make information and guidance on assessment clear, accurate, consistent and accessible to all staff, students, placement or practice assessors and external examiners*;
- the range and types of assessments used and how these measure appropriately the achievement by students of those skills, areas of knowledge and attributes identified as intended learning outcomes for the module or programme, and allow the strengths and weaknesses of the students to be demonstrated;
- how to ensure that assessment is operated fairly within programmes, and that the principles for assessment are applied consistently across the institution;
- how the reliability of assessment is demonstrated (for example, the consistent use of agreed marking and grading schemes, and moderation arrangements);
- the robustness of arrangements to monitor, evaluate and demonstrate the fairness of assessments.
*A note on information that institutions might consider publishing appears in Appendix 2
3
Institutions should have effective mechanisms to deal with breaches of assessment
regulations, and the resolution of appeals against assessment decisions.
While appeals cannot normally be made against academic judgements, institutions will wish to consider:
- how concerns about unfair operation of assessment procedures are dealt with and the types of evidence normally required to investigate such matters.
Additionally, institutions will wish to consider how students are provided with information and guidance on their responsibilities within the assessment process including, for example:
- definitions of academic misconduct in respect of assessment, such as plagiarism, collusion, cheating, impersonation and the use of inadmissible material (including material downloaded from electronic sources such as the internet);
- accepted and acceptable forms of academic referencing and citation;
- the consequences and penalties incurred by late or non submission of material for assessment.
Assessment panels and boards
4
Institutions should implement effective, clear, and consistent policies in
respect of the membership, procedures, powers and accountability of assessment
panels and boards of examiners. Where there is more than one such body the
relative powers of each should be defined.
In constituting such bodies institutions should consider:
- under what exceptional circumstances internal assessors and/or examiners would not be expected to attend the assessment panels or examiners' meetings that consider their assessments;
- whether to include on final assessment panels and boards of examiners at least one internal member from the institution who is independent of the academic unit operating the assessment;
- a requirement for members of assessment panels and boards of examiners to declare personal interest, involvement or relationship with a student being assessed;
- the minimum number of internal and external members who must be present for valid decisions to be taken;
- what student work should be available to meetings of the assessment panels and boards of examiners;
- the extent of any discretion that may be exercised in relation to students whose assessment performance might have been adversely affected by extenuating circumstances;
- the keeping of appropriate records of the procedures and decisions of each assessment panel and board of examiners.
(See also the QAA's code of practice on external examining.)
The conduct of assessment
5
Institutions should ensure that assessment is conducted with rigour and fairness
and with due regard for security.
In addressing this precept institutions will need to consider:
- the publication of clear rules and regulations governing the conduct of assessment including deadlines for submission of assessed work;
- measures to prevent fraudulent activities including impersonation and the submission of work that is not that of the student in work submitted for assessment;
- proper and rigorous invigilation of assessments, including rules and guidelines for invigilators;
- any special measures that may be necessary for the assessment of materials based on work placements or periods of study abroad;
- procedures for retention by the institution of assessed work for a defined period of time.
(See also the QAA's code of practice on collaborative provision and guidelines on distance learning.)
Scheduling and amount of assessment
6
Institutions should ensure that the scheduling and amount of assessment
are consistent with an effective and appropriate measurement of the achievement
by students of the intended learning outcomes and that they effectively support
learning.
In observing this precept institutions will need to consider:
- the proper and sensible links between the organisation of the curriculum, its staged delivery through teaching and learning sessions, the specified learning outcomes identified and the appropriate scheduling of assessment;
- how assessment supports student learning;
- the exercise of due economy in the number of assessment tasks, and the possible advantages of combining the assessment of a number of cognate modules so as to avoid assessment overload;
- ensuring students have adequate time to reflect on learning before being assessed.
Marking and Grading
7
Institutions should publish, and implement consistently, clear criteria for
the marking and grading of assessments.
8
Institutions should ensure that there are robust mechanisms for marking and
for the moderation of marks.
Precepts and guidance relating to external scrutiny and moderation of marking are to be found in the QAA's Code of practice: External examining. In so far as mechanisms for marking and internal moderation are concerned, in developing its policies and procedures institutions will wish to consider, for example:
- the range of guides for marking and grading that are used throughout and within the institution;
- the benefits and limitations of marking systems that mask the identity of the candidate from markers and/or examiners;
- the use, where appropriate, of second marking, including the reliability of methods used for the sampling of assessments from larger groups;
- the rules governing any internal moderation of marks;
- undertaking an analysis of marking and marking trends to facilitate comparisons and provide evidence on standards.
9
Institutions should evaluate periodically the maintenance and development
of their academic standards.
Institutions should consider:
- maintaining and using an archive of sample marked scripts in all subject areas;
- analysing trends in results to identify, for example, the relation between student entry qualifications and assessment outcomes; and the evaluation and comparison of the distribution of marks, grades or honours classes.
10
Institutions should publish clear criteria for the aggregation of marks and
grades and the rules and regulations for progression, final awards and classifications.
11
Institutions should ensure that where they practise compensation and/or condonation
(condonement) the regulations are clear and consistent and their application
does not jeopardise the integrity of awards and standard.
Institutions should give consideration to:
- the basis on which component marks, or other assessment outcomes are to be aggregated for the purposes of progression, award and classification;
- the need to ensure that the outcomes of aggregation procedures are statistically valid;
- whether compensation for, and condonation of, failure, should be allowed, particularly within credit-based systems;
- the number and timing of retakes that are permissible;
- how award and classification borderlines are defined and dealt with;
- policies on re-submission of assessed work and the resitting of examinations;
- rules on deferring assessment, together with any special assessment conditions or penalties that may apply, including any restriction on the marks, grades or levels of awards that can be obtained on the basis of retaken or deferred assessments.
Feedback to students on performance
12
Institutions should ensure that appropriate feedback is provided to students
on assessed work in a way that promotes learning and facilitates improvement.
In meeting the needs of students for feedback on their progress and attainment, institutions will need to consider:
- the timeliness of feedback;
- specifying the nature and extent of feedback that students can expect in relation to particular types and units of assessment, and whether this is to be accompanied by the return of assessed work;
- the effective use of comments on returned work, including relating feedback to assessment criteria, in order to help students identify areas for improvement as well as commending them for evident achievement;
- the role of oral feedback, either on a group or individual basis as a means of supplementing written feedback;
- when feedback may not be appropriate.
Staff development and training
13
Institutions should ensure that all staff involved in the assessment of students
are competent to undertake their roles and responsibilities.
Institutions should consider how staff development can:
- promote understanding of the theory and practice of assessment and its implementation in the institution;
- enable staff to learn about new approaches to assessment as well as the best ways to operate existing or traditional methods;
- provide induction on assessment practices for new staff and those with new responsibilities;
- meet the training needs of administrative staff involved in assessment procedures and processes.
The language of assessment
14
The languages of assessment and teaching will normally be the same. If, for
any reason, this cannot be achieved, institutions must ensure that their academic
standards are not consequently put at risk.
Institutions subject to the requirements of the Welsh Language Act (1993), and those involved with overseas provision in which assessments might be conducted in a language(s) other than that not used for teaching and study, should publish:
- procedures for the consideration of students' requests for assessment to be undertaken in a language not used for teaching, including the time at which such requests should be made;
- the criteria to be used when considering how to respond to such requests.
In determining their criteria institutions will need to consider:
- how persons with the necessary expertise in the appropriate language(s), subject knowledge and assessment methods will be identified and employed;
- how suitable external examiners fluent in the relevant language(s) will be identified, appointed and involved with the assessment process;
- if translation can not be avoided, how the reliability and validity of the assessment judgement arising from the marking of translated assessments will be assured.
(See also the QAA's codes of practice on students with disabilities and collaborative provision).
Professional and accreditation body requirements
15
Institutions should ensure that where a programme forms part of the qualifications
regime of a professional or statutory body, clear information is available
to staff and students about specific assessment requirements that must be
met for progression towards the professional qualification.
Institutions should ensure that there is clear information available about:
- which options or modules must be passed to meet the requirements of the body;
- the level at which the programme, or any part of it, must be passed to meet the requirements of the body.
Review of regulations
16
Institutions should have effective mechanisms for the review and development
of assessment regulations.
Institutions should consider:
- how proposed changes are discussed with staff, students and external examiners.
- the frequency and processes for review of their assessment regulations;
- procedures that involve any appropriate staff, students, external examiners and participating individuals or bodies in the review and discussion of proposed developments and changes;
- the procedures and time scale for enacting any changes to assessment regulations.
Recording, documentation and publication of assessment decisions
17
Institutions should ensure that assessment decisions are recorded and documented
accurately and systematically.
18
Institutions should ensure that the decisions of relevant examination boards
are published as quickly as possible, consistent with rigour of assessment
and accuracy.
Institutions will wish to consider providing:
- clear statements of the responsibilities of all those involved in computation, checking and recording of assessment decisions;
- systems for back-up when using electronic storage or transmission of assessment data;
- clear policies on access to information on assessment judgements about individuals.
Appendix 1
The precepts
(Note: the precepts are printed here without the guidance notes for ease of reference.)
General principles
1
As bodies responsible for academic standards, institutions should have effective
procedures for:
i) designing, approving, supervising and reviewing
the assessment strategies for programmes and awards;
ii) the consistent implementation of rigorous
assessment practices which ensure that the academic/professional standard
for each award and award element is set and maintained at the appropriate
level and that student performance is properly judged against this.
2
The principles, procedures and processes of all assessment should be explicit,
valid, and reliable.
3
Institutions should have effective mechanisms to deal with breaches of assessment
regulations, and the resolution of appeals against assessment decisions.
Assessment panels and boards
4
Institutions should implement effective, clear, and consistent policies in
respect of the membership, procedures, powers and accountability of assessment
panels and boards of examiners. Where there is more than one such body the
relative powers of each should be defined.
Conduct of assessment
5
Institutions should ensure that assessment is conducted with rigour and fairness
and with due regard for security.
Scheduling and amount of assessment
6
Institutions should ensure that the scheduling and amount of assessment are
consistent with an effective and appropriate measurement of the achievement
by students of the intended learning outcomes and that they effectively support
learning.
Marking and grading
7
Institutions should publish, and implement consistently, clear criteria for
the marking and grading of assessments.
8
Institutions should ensure that there are robust mechanisms for marking and
for the moderation of marks.
9
Institutions should evaluate periodically the maintenance and development
of their academic standards.
10
Institutions should publish clear criteria for the aggregation of marks and
grades and the rules and regulations for progression, final awards and classifications.
11
Institutions should ensure that where they practise compensation and/or condonation
(condonement) the regulations are clear and consistent and their application
does not jeopardise the integrity of awards and standards.
Feedback to students on performance
12
Institutions should ensure that appropriate feedback is provided to students
on assessed work in a way that promotes learning and facilitates improvement.
Staff development and training
13
Institutions should ensure that all staff involved in the assessment of students
are competent to undertake their roles and responsibilities.
Language of assessment
14
The languages of assessment and teaching will normally be the same. If, for
any reason, this cannot be achieved, institutions must ensure that their academic
standards are not consequently put at risk.
Professional and accreditation body requirements
15
Institutions should ensure that where a programme forms part of the qualifications
regime of a professional or statutory body, clear information is available
to staff and students about specific assessment requirements that must be
met for progression towards the professional qualification.
Review of regulations
16
Institutions should have effective mechanisms for the review and development
of assessment regulations.
Recording, documentation and publication of assessment decisions
17
Institutions should ensure that assessment decisions are recorded and documented
accurately and systematically.
18
Institutions should ensure that the decisions of relevant examination boards
are published as quickly as possible, consistent with rigour of assessment
and accuracy.
Appendix 2
A guidance note on published assessment information
The following list is illustrative of the type of information that institutions should consider including in their published documentation:
- the purpose, methods and schedule of assessment tasks during, and at the end of, a module or programme of study;
- any role played by Accreditation of Prior (Experiential) Learning and the processes involved;
- the criteria for assessment including, where appropriate, descriptors of expected standards of student attainment: what is expected in order to pass or to gain a particular grade or classification;
- what elements will, and which will not, count towards interim or final assessment and with what weighting or exemption procedures;
- the marking and grading conventions that will be used;
- the consequences of assessment, such as decisions about progression to the next level, final awards and the right of appeal;
- how and when assessment judgements are published;
- any opportunities for re-assessment.
Top