Qualification	FHEQ Level	Previous UOB Level	Total credits required	Minimum credits required at the highest level*	Equivalent ECTS credits	Additional credit requirements
Taught Master’s degree (including the four-year Integrated Master’s degree)	7	M	At least 180	150	The minimum requirement is 60, however, a range of 90-120 is more typical.	The total credit requirement for the Integrated Master’s programme is 480 credits, with at least 120 at the level of the qualification (7/M).
Postgraduate Diploma	7	M	At least 120	90		Remaining credits to be at level C/4 or higher
Postgraduate Certificate (including the Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE))	7	M	At least 60	40
Bachelor’s degree with honours	6	H	At least 360	90	180 - 240	Remaining credits to include at least 100 at level I/5 or above
Bachelor’s degree (Ordinary degree)	6	H	At least 300	60
Professional Graduate Certificate in Education (PGCE)	6	H	At least 60	40
Graduate Diploma	6	H	At least 80	80
Graduate Certificate	6	H	At least 40	40
Foundation Degree	5	I	At least 240	90
Diploma of Higher Education in (Faculty name) (Subject)**	5	I	At least 240	90	Approx. 120	Remaining credits at level C/4 or above.
Certificate of Higher Education in (Faculty name) (Subject)**	4	C	At least 120	120
Pathway Certificate in (Faculty name) (Subject name where appropriate)**	3	NQF level 3	At least 120	120

* The highest level is the level of the qualification

** Structured programme in a single discipline or approved combination of disciplines; may be awarded with Distinction.

Notes:

1) This table should be read in conjunction with the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications) and the Higher Education Credit Framework for England (August 2008). The University’s credit framework will apply in cases where the credit requirement is higher than that stated in the national credit framework.

2) The MB,ChB (Medicine), BDS (Dentistry) and BVSc (Veterinary Science) undergraduate programmes are not included in the University's modular structure and therefore do not have credit points attached to them.

3) At the discretion of the faculty joint honours degrees may vary from the minimum of 90 credits at level 6 because of the need for more flexible structures in joint programmes.

4) Individual students can take units at a higher level than normally specified during their programme, e.g. a level 7 unit might be substituted for a level 6 unit, or a level 6 unit might replace one at level 5.

5) The QAA has published a statement on the PGCE qualification title.

6) The University’s qualifications relate to the Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area (FQ-EHEA) as follows:

• Doctoral degrees : Third Cycle Qualifications (Not typically credit rated)

• Master’s degrees: Second Cycle Qualifications (Min. 60 ECTS credits, however a range of 90-120 ECTS credits is typical)

• Integrated Master’s degrees : Second Cycle Qualifications (As above)

• Bachelor’s degrees with Honours: First Cycle Qualifications (180-240 ECTS credits)

• Foundation degrees : Short Cycle Qualifications (120 ECTS credits)

• Diplomas of Higher Education (As above)

Credit points

Shared teaching between undergraduates and postgraduates

3.22 Undergraduate and taught postgraduate students may be taught together. If undergraduate and taught postgraduate students undertake the same unit, with the same learning outcomes and assessment, the credit awarded will be at the pre-defined level of the unit. If the learning outcomes and assessment differ for the undergraduate and postgraduate students then they are deemed to be undertaking different units; such units must have been previously approved at the different levels.

(Back to top)

4. Undergraduate Modular Programmes

4.1 Undergraduate programmes may be a single honours unitary degree or a joint honours degree devoting approximately equal time to two subjects or a major/minor combination where the minor subject accounts for at least a quarter of the programme.

4.2 For each joint honours programme, one of the contributing schools must own the programme and apply the relevant regulations as set out in this document. For programmes that span faculties the programme committee must decide the ‘home’ school, and therefore faculty ownership, guided by the balance of the programme content and emphasis.

4.3 The degrees of BA, BSc, BEng, LLB, may be awarded with honours or as ordinary degrees. Names of successful candidates for honours shall be arranged as follows: first class honours; second class honours in two divisions and third class honours. The names of successful candidates for the ordinary degrees shall be listed separately.

4.4 The degrees of MSci and MEng may be awarded with honours, as follows: first class honours and second class honours in two divisions.

4.5 The Foundation Degree is not awarded with honours.

Student choice

4.6 Full time students on undergraduate degree programmes will normally have the opportunity to broaden their education by taking units outside of their subject discipline (i.e. ‘open units’) worth at least 20 credit points, except where this is not practicable, for example, due to professional accreditation reasons.

4.7 Faculties and schools will determine the point during a student's career at which open units may be taken. Faculties and schools may specify to its students which open units are most appropriate for them to take.

4.8 Students do not have a right to take any particular unit as an open unit. The availability of any particular unit is subject to practical constraints such as space in teaching rooms or laboratories and timetabling. Subject to these constraints, students may also seek to take a unit (or units), which has not been flagged as being an ‘open unit’.

4.9 Students are not required to take open units. If they wish, and subject to the programme structure and practical constraints described in 4.8, they can take the 20 credit points set aside for open units in their honours subject(s).

5. Undergraduate Modular Programmes with Study Abroad

The following policy is being introduced from the start of the 2013-14 academic year, although the principles within should be in place for any study abroad period from the start of 2014-15.

5.1 The common University policy on the study abroad period applies to those undergraduate modular programmes where either:

a. An identified requisite of the programme is for a student to study abroad for an academic year for the award of credit, hereafter known as the ‘Year Abroad’. The accomplishment of the study abroad element is reflected in the title of the programme (e.g. MSci Chemistry with Study Abroad or MSci Chemistry with Study in Continental Europe).

b. A student is permitted to study at another institution for credit in lieu of the units that the student would normally have taken at Bristol (i.e. a ‘Teaching Block Abroad’). Such arrangements are not an integral part of a programme but are recognised in the student’s transcript.

All other arrangements, where students study abroad for experiential reasons (i.e. not for credit), are not covered by this policy.

Principles for the studying abroad process

5.2 All formal arrangements for studying abroad

1. Where the learning from any period of formal study undertaken outside of the UK is a required part of the programme, how the intended learning outcomes of the programme are met must be identified.

2. Any formal period of study abroad must be credit-bearing and contribute to the award of the programme and consequently the degree classification (i.e. and therefore not pass/fail).

3. Any mark(s) from a period of study abroad may be reached, solely or in combination, by assessment set by the University of Bristol (i.e. by assessing what a student has learnt during their experience) or by the translation of marks that have been gained at the partner institution. Where the mark is obtained by a combination of assessments set by Bristol and the partner institution, the weighting of the constituent marks and the expected input of the student to each component must be agreed and clear to all parties.

4. Schools should ensure that students are fully aware of the academic arrangements for any period of study abroad prior to the student committing him or herself to it.

5. A tutor within each School must maintain regular contact with a student undertaking a study abroad arrangement, whilst they are away from the University (see 8.12)

5.3 ‘Year Abroad’ only

1. The Year Abroad should only be undertaken in the third year of a four-year (Bachelors or Integrated Masters) programme. It is not expected that students will undertake an entire year of study away from the University as part of a three-year Bachelors programme.

2. The Year Abroad must be set at the level of study appropriate to the programme and in alignment with the University’s credit framework.

3. The Year Abroad equates to 60 ECTS and 120 credit points at the University of Bristol.

4. Students must undertake at least the equivalent of 100, and no more than 120, credit points of units during the Year Abroad. All the marks gained in these units will count towards the mark for the Year Abroad, unless there is a specific rationale for an alternative approach, which must be applied to the entire cohort of students. Any further study may be in units unrelated to the subject and, in such cases, will not count towards the mark for the Year Abroad.

5. A student’s performance will be reflected by a single overall mark for the learning undertaken across the year, unless the programme is structured so that students are assessed at differing levels of study during their Year Abroad. Only the overall unit mark should be considered when determining progression from year to year at the University of Bristol.

6. The Study Abroad year will be weighted as 10% of the overall programme mark for the purposes of degree classification (see annex 21).

5.4 ‘Teaching Block Abroad’ only

1. Studying abroad for a teaching block must not be undertaken in the student’s first or final year of their programme of study.

2. Normally a teaching block undertaken at a partner institution outside of the UK will equate to 30 ECTS and 60 credit points at the University of Bristol.

3. A student’s performance should be reflected by individual marks, equivalent to the units a student would have undertaken in their registered programme of study at the University of Bristol. These unit marks will contribute to the calculation of the year mark, final programme mark and degree classification, as normal.

4. If a student fails a ‘must-pass’ unit (i.e. deemed by the faculty to be a core part of the programme) during a Teaching Block Abroad, a re-sit should be arranged at the University of Bristol.

Process for the translation of marks gained from study abroad

5.5 Given the variation in structures and standards in the marking process in institutions and across countries outside of the UK, some translation or mapping of the marks to the equivalent standards of the University, as a UK higher education institution, may be required.

The University has adopted an evidence-based approach for converting marks gained from studying abroad, in the form of a common reference tables for ‘Converting Marks from Study Abroad’ (which will be available from the International Office website later in the academic year when finalised), based upon the following principles:

• A single translation for each country, unless evidence indicates this is not appropriate, using the ECTS translation tables.

• Where there is evidence a country-based approach is not appropriate, an institution wide approach should be adopted, i.e. presume that the institution is internally consistent, unless there is actual evidence this is not the case.

• Only where there is actual evidence of inconsistency in marking should we have different disciplinary rules within a single institution.

• Variation from that table should only occur where there are extenuating circumstances in particular cases, although extenuating circumstances may be contextualised differently when students are studying in another country.

This Reference Table is owned by the ‘Study Abroad Advisory Group’ and managed by the International Office.

5.6 For the Year Abroad - the overall mark will be calculated by averaging all the contributing weighted marks from the host institution and, if necessary, any weighted marks awarded by the University of Bristol. If the partner institution uses a linear marking scale, the translation provided in the Reference Table is then applied to the overall mark. If the partner institution does not use a linear marking scale, each of the individual marks should be translated before being averaged.

5.7 The translation of the overall mark must be mapped onto the 0-100 scale, so to conform to the University’s procedures for determining student progression and degree classification, unless it is necessary to use a different marking scale, whereby the processing of marks from the study abroad period will be conducted using the 0-100 scale and then translated to the nearest point on the alternative marking scale.

5.8 The mark(s) awarded, following translation, for the study abroad period should be reviewed to ensure that it is robust.

5.9 The translation and subsequent review of the marks are the responsibility of the School Year Abroad Co-ordinator, or equivalent.

5.10 The relevant Examination Board that considers the marks retains discretion to adjust the marks from those shown in the Reference Table where there is evidence that the marks gained from the host institution is not an accurate reflection of the student’s performance.

5.11 The translation algorithm of marks for any new partnership arrangement for study abroad should be checked against those provided in the Reference Table and confirmed before the agreement is signed.

5.12 The University’s official transcript will show the University of Bristol translated mark from the study abroad period.

Exceptions

5.13 Where there is a good academic reason to request an exception from one or more of the principles, the programme director should make a case to the relevant Faculty Education Director well in advance of the commencement of any arrangements for a student to study abroad. If the Faculty Education Director approves the case, it will be presented to the Study Abroad Advisory Group for incorporation into the Reference Table.

(Back to top)

C. ADMISSION AND STUDY

The ‘Student Agreement’ sets out the terms and conditions that form the basis of the relationship between the student and the University.

6. Undergraduate Programmes

(Back to top)

7. Taught Postgraduate Programmes

(Back to top)

8. Student Support - in undergraduate programmes

The following policy is introduced from the start of the 2013-14 academic year, although where a School decides to make significant adjustments to the existing student support structure, it need not be fully implemented until the start of the 2014-15 academic year. It is anticipated, however, that all Schools will implement the spirit of the policy as soon as is possible.

The policy will apply to the support of undergraduate students on modular programmes. The spirit of this policy should also apply for students on the undergraduate non-modular programmes (BVSc, BDS, MBChB) wherever possible, although it is noted that the support requirements for students on these programmes may differ and that these programmes must comply with accrediting body requirements.

8.1 The aim of the University’s model for undergraduate student support is to provide students with a productive, predictable and meaningful support experience, which also allows for the distinctive disciplinary traditions in the University to provide this support in a manner appropriate to their discipline. The key principles of the model are:

• That support is provided by those colleagues and in those forms which are best suited for their purpose;

• That the adopted support structure is efficient in terms of impact and delivery;

• That it enables staff and students to meet regularly and in conducive circumstances;

• That it is visible to all;

• That it forms a coherent and comprehensive whole.

8.2 The University, through its schools, specialist central services and Students’ Union, will provide undergraduate students with an overall framework of support throughout their University lives, within which there are three elements:

• academic subject tutoring;

• academic personal tutoring;

• welfare support.

All three elements of the student support process should be viewed holistically and is principally the responsibility of academic members of staff in Schools. Heads of Schools are responsible for the process and the quality of the support provided.

8.3 Schools will ensure that the identified elements of support are fulfilled as a coherent whole. The support structure will be based upon the following defined functions:

• Academic Subject Tutor (i.e. the provision of subject-specific support within disciplinary teaching);

• Academic Personal Tutor* (see 8.4);

• Senior Tutor* (see 8.5).

* In the professional non-modular programmes, an alternative title may be appropriate.

These roles do not necessarily have to be provided by different people and need not map directly onto the different elements of support, for example a Subject Tutor may also be a student’s Personal Tutor.

8.4 The Academic Personal Tutor role will ensure there is someone who: knows the individual student by name; has a holistic view of his or her academic development; monitors their progress; and, provides access to appropriate individual advice at critical points in the student’s University life to enable them to benefit from a liberal education. In order to fulfil these functions, there will be a regular programme of face-to-face contact between Academic Personal Tutors and their tutees.

8.5 The Senior Tutor role in each School will act as a focal point for School expertise in the process of supporting students and a person from whom the Academic Personal Tutor can consult and seek advice in particularly difficult cases. The role will provide an academic link with the central Student Support services, the International Office, the Students’ Union and other agencies, such that students are appropriately referred onto expert services, where necessary. A ‘Senior Tutor Network’ will enable good practice across Schools and act as a conduit to the central Support Services.

The Senior Tutor role will also lead upon the provision and quality assurance of student support in his or her School, including the operation of academic personal tutoring and will report annually on the operation of student support in their School.

8.6 As far as is possible, a student should have one Academic Personal Tutor providing the overview of his or her academic progress, throughout his or her studies. Where this is not possible, Schools should ensure that a change in Tutor is managed carefully and any disruption is kept to a minimum.

8.7 The role of Academic Personal Tutor can only be undertaken by a member of University staff and is considered a core responsibility for an academic member of University of Bristol staff on pathways 1 and 3.

8.8 In the case of students who may find it inappropriate or uncomfortable sharing problems with individuals they feel may be assessing their work or forming academic judgements of them, Schools will ensure that students are aware of alternative pathways for advice that offer students a choice of how to raise and discuss personal issues, such as: a designated member or members of support staff within the School, the Students’ Union Advice Centre and/or one of the University’s central Student Support services.

For this purpose, Schools will identify a member or members of support staff in each School as an alternate point of contact.

8.9 Schools must have a procedure to facilitate any request from a student to change their Personal Tutor, which is sensitive to the problems that this can create.

8.10 Schools will ensure that its model of student support is visible and that students are fully aware of the support opportunities that are available to them, particularly on first arrival at the University, at the start of each academic year and at key points during their programme of study. A system of recording the attendance of both Tutors and tutees should be established.

8.11 Whilst the University will ensure that students are aware of and have access to the support opportunities that are available, the onus is upon the student to engage with these opportunities, as necessary.

Support arrangements in ‘non-standard’ programmes

8.12 The School, in liaison with central Professional Services (i.e. the International Office), must have arrangements in place to support students who are registered but studying outside of the University, such as those students who undertake a formal study abroad period, placements in industry or if they have been granted a suspension of studies.

A tutor within each School must maintain regular contact with students that study abroad or undertake a placement, whilst they are away from the University.

8.13 Students undertaking a joint honours programme must have an Academic Personal Tutor from the School that ‘hosts’ the programme to provide personal tutoring specifically relevant to the joint honours programme, who will liaise with the other School involved.

8.14 In the case of students who are ‘intercalating’, the ‘host school’ will provide subject tutoring for the intercalating period, whilst the home school will continue to offer support via the student’s existing Academic Personal Tutor.

(Back to top)

9. Student Absence due to Illness or Other Cause – in all taught programmes

During the Teaching Period

9.1 If a student is absent due to illness or other cause for up to and including 7 consecutive days in the teaching period, he or she should inform their home school as soon as possible and complete a self-certificate for absence form (available from www.bristol.ac.uk/academicregistry/studentforms/).

9.2 If a student is absent due to illness or other cause for more than 7 consecutive days in the teaching period, he or she should inform their home school as soon as possible and complete a self-certificate for absence form. Additional evidence for the absence may be required, e.g. if the absence is due to illness the student should also attend an appointment with a Medical Practitioner (e.g. a GP) (with the completed self-certificate form) to obtain a medical certificate (‘sick-note’). Both documents must then be submitted to a school or faculty representative.

9.3 If an absence from the teaching period means a student is unable to submit a summative coursework assignment by the agreed deadline, the student should contact the relevant school and request an extension before the assignment deadline. Schools may ask for evidence of the reason for the absence in agreeing an extension to a deadline if the absence is 7 consecutive days or less.

Students who are ill for a period of time during the teaching period, whether close to the deadline or not, must submit work on time unless an extension has been agreed by the School. Schools will not accept late submission without penalty where no extension has been granted.

During the Examination Period

9.4 Students who are unable to attend a summative examination/s must inform the school of their non-attendance as soon as possible and, if the absence is due to illness, attend an appointment with a GP prior to, or on the day of, the summative examination. In such cases the student should complete the University’s extenuating circumstances form (available from www.bristol.ac.uk/academicregistry/studentforms/) and submit it along with appropriate certification, for example a ‘sick-note’ from a GP, to the relevant faculty or school representative.

9.5 For further information on the process for notifying the University of any Extenuating Circumstances during the examination period, see section 23.

9.6 Students should also ensure they meet any school or programme requirements concerning notification of absence.

9.7 The information provided in the forms will be held by the University and processed by staff in schools and Faculty Offices in order to keep a record of student absence.  Schools will monitor the frequency of self-certified absences and will inform students of their procedures to follow up multiple instances. A Head of School may request that the student provides medical certification in multiple and sustained instances of self-certified illness. Information will be recorded and processed in accordance with the Data Protection Act.

9.8 The Faculty will decide if it is necessary to notify a student’s absence to their LEA, sponsor or other agency, as appropriate.

9.9 In all cases of absence, the completed forms should be submitted by the student to the student’s school within TWO working days of the end of the period of absence.

(Back to top)

10. Suspension of Study – for all taught programmes

(Back to top)

11. Extension of Study – for taught postgraduate programmes

(Back to top)

D. FORMS AND CONDUCT OF ASSESSMENT

Assessment is defined as “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”. 

Assessment may serve several purposes:

• It is the means whereby student achievement is measured and compared, thereby providing the basis for decisions on whether a student is ready to progress or qualify for an award or to receive a licence to practise;

• enabling students to obtain feedback on the quality of their learning, thereby helping them improve their performance;

• giving staff an opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of teaching and consistency of practice.

12. Forms of Assessment

12.1 The assessment methods that might be expected in taught programmes are provided at www.bristol.ac.uk/esu/assessment/annex/annex-formsofassessment.html. Programmes should be designed such that students are given an opportunity to develop aptitudes for, and be assessed on, learning outcomes that have been defined for the programme they are undertaking. Assessment should reflect a balance of formative and summative requirements such that students are guided in their learning as well as being given information on ways in which they can improve their attainment. There must also be clear development of, and information about, progression through the programme of study, in terms of both attainment and demonstration of skills and attributes.

12.2 A programme need not employ all of the forms of assessment but the range should be sufficient to enable the full spectrum of knowledge and skills (both subject specific and generic) embodied in the programme and unit or element intended learning outcomes, to be appropriately assessed individually or cumulatively.

12.3 When assessing student work, the following principles should be applied wherever possible:

a) Different forms of assessment should be used to test different types of skills.

b) A variety of forms of summative assessment should be utilised, as appropriate, within a programme preceded by the provision of a formative experience of the summative assessment.

c) The volume of summative assessment in a programme must be the least necessary to measure the extent to which students have achieved the intended learning outcomes.

d) The overall assessment load associated with any unit must be appropriate to the level of study, the credit point weighting, and the need for formative feedback. This must be specified and agreed when the unit is first approved and should be reviewed as part of annual programme review.

e) Programme Directors should agree appropriate assessment methods to assist unit directors in choosing a set of formative and summative assessment tasks which are proportionate and consistent within the subject.

f) In assessing a unit composed of more than one element, it is the unit as a whole, not each element that needs to be satisfactorily completed. Elements need not be capable of being separately assessed, although programmes may require an element to be satisfactorily completed in order for a unit to be passed and enable the credit points to be awarded.

g) Students should be given outline information about the assessment tasks they will encounter at the outset of the programme and the implications of any failure. Detailed information should be given at the beginning of each subsequent academic year on the timing and weighting of each assessment. Such information should be made available in programme/unit handbooks, and online via Blackboard, and should be reinforced, both at the beginning of a unit and before each assessment task.

h) Decisions about the utilisation of the different types of assessment tasks should take into account competency standards, developing graduate attributes, professional frameworks, subject benchmarks and the degree to which the task can provide formative feedback and encourage student self-reflection.

12.4 All assessment should be undertaken in the language in which the material from the unit is taught, unless there is a clear academic rationale for doing otherwise. Where this is the case, the rationale must be approved as part of the normal programme and unit approval process and students informed prior to or on the commencement of their studies. Students may not request assessment to be conducted in an alternative language other than as allowed by this clause.

Assuring assessment criteria and intended learning outcomes at unit level

12.5 Faculties are responsible for ensuring that students are given clear guidance on the assessment requirements of their programmes and receive equitable treatment university-wide, whilst Schools are responsible for this at the unit level. 

12.6 Unit specifications must provide sufficient information about the assessment in relation to the intended learning outcomes. This should be accomplished by reference to the university common generic marking criteria and marking scales (see section 16) as well as the subject-specific marking criteria.

12.7 Any significant changes to a unit, at whatever level it is approved, should automatically trigger a review of whether the assessment methods and criteria remain congruent with the unit’s intended learning outcomes.

12.8 Annual review mechanisms for units (annual unit or programme reviews) must provide appropriate opportunities for evaluating whether the assessments test the stated unit objectives/learning outcomes.

Academic scrutiny of assessment

12.9 The Head of School  is responsible for ensuring that procedures are in place to assure the quality and standards of assessment. This responsibility is normally delegated to one or more School Examinations Officer (see section 21).

12.10 All assessment tasks and marking schemes should normally be subject to review by a second person, except in cases where the assessment accounts for the equivalent of 25 percent or less of the overall mark in a 20 credit point unit (e.g. 50 percent in a 10 credit point unit).

12.11 External examiners should be asked to scrutinise all examination papers and any summative assessment tasks that accounts to the equivalent of more than 25 percent of the overall mark in a 20 credit point unit and contributes to the final degree result. To facilitate this, external examiners should have access to the relevant information relating to aims and objectives, contents, intended learning outcomes, assessment methods, marking criteria and any model answers.

(Back to top)

13. Conduct of Assessments

Formal unseen written examinations

13.1 The procedures under which the University requires unseen written examinations to be conducted are set out in the University’s Examination Regulations (annex 7). Should any divergence from these procedures be requested, the chair of the relevant School Board of Examiners must be consulted. She or he may act on behalf of the board, but must first consult the undergraduate or graduate Education Director.

13.2 The University's Examination Regulations contain detailed provisions concerning the handling of allegations of plagiarism, cheating and other examinations offences (sections 2.9 -11.18). Anyone with responsibility for handling such allegations must be fully familiar with these regulations.

The examination periods

13.3 Summative examinations must be set within the January and May/June assessment periods.  Re-sit examinations may only be set in the August/September period. Exceptions must be agreed as in 13.5.

13.4 The summative assessment of units must take place during or at the end of the teaching block in which the unit is run, except for agreed exceptions.

13.5 Where there is good academic reason to request an exemption from 13.3 or 13.4, the programme director must make a case to the relevant Faculty Education Director. If the Faculty Education Director approves the case, it must then be presented to the relevant Academic Director of Studies for final approval.

13.6 Examinations within the MBChB, BDS, BVSc and other specified non-modular programmes should be arranged as outlined in 13.3 and 13.4 as far as is possible.

Students requesting to take summative examinations outside of the United Kingdom

13.7 All students taking first-sit or re-sit examinations are expected to take their scheduled examinations in venues arranged by the central University of Bristol Examinations Office or by their School. In exceptional cases, however, approval may be sought for permission to take an examination at an approved institution outside the United Kingdom (UK).

13.8 The sitting of an examination outside the UK is not an automatic entitlement and permission will only be given where it is determined that a student has good cause/reason why they should not sit the examination in the UK, subject to programme requirements and providing an arrangement can be made which conforms to University policy as set out in this Code. This judgement is at the discretion of the Faculty.

A student being on holiday or working overseas at the time of the examination will not be considered a good reason for taking the examination outside the UK. Authorisation to sit an examination outside the UK will not be given where the request is made on medical grounds as students should only be taking examinations when fit to do so. Students who have medical issues should speak to their School about their options.

13.9 Students on the MBChB, BDS and BVSc programmes, and some other professional programmes, will not be permitted to take examinations outside the UK, due to professional body requirements. Other areas of the University have a policy of never allowing students to sit examinations outside of the UK. If a student is unsure whether or not to seek approval, they should contact administrative staff in the School.

13.10 A student will only be permitted to sit an examination outside the UK in institutions that are approved by the University of Bristol.

13.11 The examination will either be taken at the same time as the examination is taken in Bristol, or there must be some overlap between one ending and the other beginning.

13.12 The School / Faculty that owns the programme of study on which the student is registered is responsible for deciding whether to permit a student to sit an examination outside of the UK. The School that owns the relevant unit is responsible for organising the examination once permission has been given.

13.13 The same procedures apply where the requirements of a distance learning programme necessitate students taking their written summative examinations outside the UK. Consideration should be given during the design stage of distance learning programmes as to whether alternative forms of assessment are more appropriate. 

Coursework and similar forms of written summative assessment

Coursework is defined as any summative assessment based on essays, assignments, creative writing or other tasks that is completed outside timetabled classes in the students' own time.

13.14 Students should be provided with timetables at the start of each unit indicating when coursework will be set, when it is to be submitted and when it will be returned. Deadlines for coursework should be provided in sufficient time for completion.

13.15 Clear statements about how a student should apply for an extension to the original deadline and the penalties for late submission must also be provided (see section 20).

13.16 Academic misconduct associated with continuously assessed assignments should be dealt with as a disciplinary offence.

13.17 Formative feedback on summative coursework should be provided to students. The work and the feedback should be returned promptly, in sufficient time to help the student’s work on subsequent assignments. Student-led forms of feedback should also be undertaken prior to any subsequent assignments (see section 15).

13.18 External examiner(s) should be supplied with the summative assessment structure for a programme in which the examination and coursework requirements are defined. External examiner(s) must be able to scrutinise examination papers and examples of summative coursework.

13.19 The director of a unit that utilises coursework as an assessment method is responsible for ensuring that all those involved in the assessment process are aware of the guidelines for the assessment of the unit, and for uniformity of marking where the marking of coursework is undertaken by more than one person., procedures must be in place to ensure the uniformity of marking.

Online assessment

13.20 Arrangements should be made for responding to unexpected technical problems in a way that is fair and efficient and within a reasonable timeframe. This includes technical support in case of server failure. In cases of serious technical failure, students should be offered the examination in paper format.

13.21 Suitable arrangements should be made in conjunction with the University’s central Information Services for the invigilation of online assessment. 

13.22 The summative examination should only be accessible by secure password and the performance recorded by university-approved secure management tools suited for the purpose.

13.23 Computers used for summative examinations should wherever possible have both internet and communication tools disabled, except as needed for the purpose of the assessment.

13.24 The use of a large pool or sub-pools of examination questions from which a randomised sub-set of questions is generated to produce individualised student exams is strongly encouraged as long as the pool/s cover/s all aspects of the examinable material and the sub-sample generated is representative. Pools of questions should be carefully constructed to test the unit’s intended learning outcomes.

13.25 Information Services is responsible for the technical infrastructure which enables the assessment to occur.

13.26 Schools must ensure that the scheduling of online assessment does not conflict with the central examinations timetable.

13.27 Online assessment must be conducted under the same processes specified by the Code as for other forms of assessment. 

Oral examinations of individual students

13.28 Two examiners should be present during all oral examinations. If this is not possible then a procedure for recording the event must be in place e.g. video, Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE).

13.29 Oral examinations should only be used when it matches the intended learning outcome being tested e.g. practical or performance skills. Normally this would not include assessment of simple factual knowledge recall.

13.30 It is the responsibility of the Programme Director in conjunction with the Unit Directors involved to demonstrate that the oral examination is reliable, fair and appropriate and adds value to the assessment portfolio.

13.31 The external examiner must have adequate access to all intended learning outcomes, including those attached to the oral examination, to be able to form a judgement as to the fairness and appropriateness of the assessment and student performance.

13.32 In all cases where oral examinations contribute to the summative assessment of taught programmes, students and examiners must always be aware of the purposes of the assessment and all the possible implications of the outcome.

13.33 If an oral examination is part of the assessment of a unit, it must apply to every student taking that unit.

13.34 An oral examination is not permitted as a means of moderating a student’s examination result or degree classification.

(Back to top)

14. Assessment and Student Circumstances

Disability

Guidance for schools working with disabled students, including implementing a Disability Support Summary (DSS), is available at: www.bris.ac.uk/disability-services/documents/dssguide.pdf.

14.1 Disability is a characteristic that is protected under the Equality Act 2010. Schools should have procedures in place that anticipate the support needs of students with a disability (e.g. a school disability coordinator who will liaise as required if a disability is disclosed). However, it is recognised that in some programmes (e.g. professional) some assessments cannot be adjusted as they test mandatory learning outcomes and/or a competence standard.

14.2 Schools should ensure that students are given the opportunity to disclose a disability throughout their programme of study and that they are aware that failure to do so may adversely impact on the school’s ability to make any necessary reasonable adjustments.

14.3 Any student, who discloses a disability, such that additional support may be required, should be referred to the Disability Services. In most cases Disability Services will develop a personalised learning support plan (known from August 2013 as a ‘Disability Support Summary’). These documents will be devised in collaboration with staff in the school/faculty and the student concerned. The Summary will state the support the student requires, including adjustments to assessment practice where appropriate.

14.4 Where a student requires adjustments to assessment, they should complete and submit an alternative examination arrangements form at the earliest opportunity and by the stipulated deadline. For students with a Disability Support Summary the ‘Examinations, timed assessment and in class tests’ section can act in lieu of an application for an alternative examination arrangement. Students should be made aware that if the evidence is not made available by the deadline specified, this will affect the school’s decision in terms of what it considers reasonable and practicable to arrange within the time available.

14.5 Examiners are not obliged to retrospectively consider the effect of a disability on a student’s performance that was not declared and evaluated prior to the assessment, taking place. The School may permit such a student an opportunity to undergo a supplementary assessment, with necessary reasonable adjustments, should this be deemed appropriate following a subsequent professional evaluation of the disability.

14.6 Programme and unit directors are encouraged to consider the accessibility of assessments and, during annual programme review, to consider whether assessment of the learning outcomes could be undertaken in different ways without compromising any competence standards. They should also establish which learning outcomes justifiably constitute competence standards, in which case the duty to make reasonable adjustments may not apply.

14.7 Faculties should keep records of alternative assessment arrangements made by schools.

14.8 Such arrangements must be approved by the Faculty Undergraduate or Graduate Education Director (or nominee).

Discrimination by association

The protected characteristics for higher education are: age; disability; gender reassignment; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; and sexual orientation.

14.9 It is direct discrimination if an education provider treats a student less favourably because of the student’s association with another person, who has a protected characteristic . However, this does not apply to pregnancy or maternity.  Discrimination by association may occur in various ways, e.g. where the student has the relationship of parent, child, partner, carer or friend of someone with a protected characteristic.

14.10 Schools should consider making adjustments for students because of their association with someone who has the protected characteristic of disability.  In relation to assessment, this could mean that a student will request an alternative assessment date due to their role as a carer of a disabled dependent.  Consideration to adjustment of an assessment (e.g. timing) would have to be given if the request is due to the student’s association with a disabled person.

14.11 Further information and guidance on competence standards and the practical aspect of making reasonable adjustments to assessment because of disability is provided in annex 12. The University’s policy on Fitness to Study is available at: www.bristol.ac.uk/equalityanddiversity/act/protected/disability/fitnesstostudy/. 

Religious observances

14.12 Where it is practicable, reasonable and fair to all students, assessment tasks should be designed to accommodate the religious observances of the students and staff involved. The Examinations Office and schools should work together, with advice from the Multi-faith Chaplaincy when necessary, to try to ensure, as far as it is practicable so to do, that the examination timetable does not conflict with the observance of religious festivals and other holy days.

14.13 Schools should make clear to prospective applicants and current students, at the outset of their studies, that it is their personal responsibility to inform the faculty office about their religious beliefs where there is potential for conflict with the setting of assessment. Students should be reminded of their obligations through an appropriate entry in school / programme handbooks.

14.14 Some programmes include mandatory requirements, often but not exclusively, related to the need to demonstrate certain knowledge, skills and competencies required by professional, statutory or regulatory bodies. These may require students to undertake study and assessments on days associated with religious observance.

Pregnancy/maternity or paternity

14.15 If it is likely that a student’s pregnancy might affect her ability to meet coursework deadlines or sit examinations, consideration must be given to implementing measures to support her in meeting the requirements of the programme.

14.16 If a student is due to give birth near to, or during assessment deadlines, or the examination period, but she wishes to complete her assessed work or sit her examinations, she should not be prevented from so doing.

14.17 Schools should ensure that the needs of pregnant students are addressed during assessments, including offering the opportunity to sit the examination in a location separate from other students.

14.18 If a pregnant student is concerned about sitting examinations or meeting assessed work deadlines, or if she has a pregnancy-related health condition that is exacerbated by stress, she should be advised to seek medical advice. If her midwife or doctor advises against her sitting an examination or trying to meet the assessed work deadline, an alternative method of assessment should be explored.

14.19 If a pregnant student is unable to undertake an alternative method of assessment, or if she experiences significant pregnancy-related problems in the course of an examination or while undertaking assessed work, the school should make arrangements for her to sit the examination, as a first attempt, at the earliest possible opportunity or agree to an extension to the deadline for the submission of coursework.

14.20 If student is likely to be absent due to their partner giving birth, and where the due date conflicts with any scheduled assessments, staff should endeavour to offer flexibility wherever practicable so to do. However, it must be made clear that in such circumstances automatic dispensation from examinations will not always be possible. This provision also extends to cover same sex couples.

14.21 Further guidance for staff on student pregnancy, maternity and paternity is available from: https://www.bris.ac.uk/equalityanddiversity/act/protected/pregandmat/.

(Back to top)

15. Feedback to Students

15.1 Each school must develop and publicise to its students a clear policy on the delivery of feedback on formative and summative work, covering the following points:

• the different ways in which students will receive guidance on their work;

• which assessment tasks students will receive feedback on, and in what form;

• the delivery of feedback on different forms of assessment and how students will be informed if it proves impossible to meet the agreed deadline (formative feedback on work should normally be delivered within three working weeks of the deadline for submission);

• the opportunities students will have to discuss their work and their progress with staff, as well as guidance on how they should make use of feedback.

15.2 The principles for the provision of formative feedback to students are available at: www.bristol.ac.uk/esu/assessment/annex/annex-deliveringformativefeedback.html.

(Back to top)

E. MARKING OF ASSESSMENTS AND THE PROCESSING OF MARKS

16. Marking Criteria and Scales

16.1 Marking criteria are designed to help students know what is expected of them. Marking criteria differ from model answers and more prescriptive marking schemes which assign a fixed proportion of the assessment mark to particular knowledge, understanding and/or skills. Annex 1 provides definitions for: marking criteria, marking scheme and model answer.

16.2 Where there is more than one marker for a particular assessment task, schools should take steps to ensure consistency of marking. Programme specific assessment criteria must be precise enough to ensure consistency of marking across candidates and markers, compatible with a proper exercise of academic judgement on the part of individual markers. 

16.3 The relevant marking criteria should be made available to staff and students before the assessment.

16.4 Markers are encouraged to use pro forma in order to show how they have arrived at their decision. Comments provided on pro forma should help candidates, internal markers and moderators and external examiners to understand why a particular mark has been awarded.  Schools should agree, in advance of the assessment, whether internal moderators have access to the pro forma / mark sheets completed by the first marker before or after they mark a candidate’s work.

University generic marking criteria

16.5 The common University generic marking criteria, set out in table 1, represent levels of attainment on a graded scale, of levels 4-7 of study. Establishing and applying criteria for assessment at level 8 should be managed by the school that owns the associated programme, in liaison with the faculty and the Academic Director of Graduate Studies.

16.6 The common marking criteria are designed to be used for an individual piece of assessed student work. The descriptors give broad comparability of standards by level of study across all programmes as well as level of performance across the University. They reflect the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications but need to be benchmarked against subject specific criteria at the programme level.

16.7 Faculties, with their constituent schools, must establish appropriately specific and detailed marking criteria which are congruent with the University-level criteria and, if appropriate, the level of study. All forms of programme-specific marking criteria must be approved by the Faculty.

Marking scales

16.8 Assessment must be marked using one of the sanctioned marking scales, as follows:

• 0-100 marking scale

• 0-20 marking scale

A five point A-E marking scale is available for those programmes which already utilise this scale where distinct grades of competence are being measured. Given the complexities in translating a grade in this type of scale to a percentage for the purposes of progression or classification, any new proposals to use the A-E scale requires a pedagogic rationale for doing so and the approval of the relevant Faculty Education Director and Academic Director of Studies.

16.9 Schools should determine the marking scale that is best suited to the form of assessment that is being employed and ensure that the scale that is being utilised to mark the assessment is available and signposted to students in advance.

Exceptions to the sanctioned marking scales

16.10 Neither the 0-20 nor 0-100 point scale is applicable to assessments where marks are not awarded; the student either passes or not. Such assessment may be employed, subject to approval by the faculty, when a student is required to demonstrate a minimum standard of competence for reasons related to professional accreditation requirements.

16.11 Highly structured assessments that are scored out of a total number less than 100 may be utilised where each mark can be justified in relation to those marks neighbouring it. In these cases the mark must be translated onto the 0-100 point scale, mapped against the relevant marking criteria, and students informed of the use of this method in advance of the assessment.

Reaching the ‘Unit Mark’

(see also section 18)

16.12 Marks gauged on the 0-20 scale should be translated to a point on the 0-100 scale so to calculate the overall unit mark for the purposes of progression and classification (see table 2).

16.13 The 0-20 point scale is a non-linear ordinal scale; for example, a mark on the 0-20 point scale IS NOT equivalent to a percentage arrived at by multiplying the mark by 5. Table 2 provides an equivalence relationship between the scales to enable the aggregation of marks from different assessment events to provide the overall unit mark which will be a percentage. This is illustrated below for a notional unit the assessment of which consists of:

• Dissertation (25%),

• Unseen written exam (35%),

• MCQ (25%)

• Oral presentation (15%).

In this example the MCQ uses all points on the 0-100 scale whereas all the other assessments use the 0-20 point scale.

To achieve the final unit mark each element mark needs to be adjusted as shown below:

16.14 The overall unit mark must be expressed as a percentage as the University’s degree classification methodology is based on the percentage scale.

16.15 The final programme mark for a taught programme will be calculated by applying the agreed algorithm for the programme to the unit marks (see section 29 and section 30).

 

TABLE 2: Relationship between the three marking scales

(Back to top)

17. Treatment of Marks

17.1 The University assures the quality of its marking through moderation. Definitions of the terms used in this section can be found in the glossary of terms at annex 1.

17.2 All work assessed for summative purposes should be capable of being independently moderated and made available in case it needs to be moderated by the external examiner(s).

17.3 Where coursework is assessed summatively, schools should have a system in place to ensure students’ work is available for moderation at a later date, by a means that ensures that the marked work is identical to that originally submitted.

17.4 Students should be informed at the outset of their programme of studies and at the beginning of each academic year of any obligation to make available assessed work which might be required for the purpose of moderation.

17.5 Each faculty, through its Faculty Quality Enhancement Team, should ensure that its schools have clear marking and verification procedures, as well as information on the operation of moderation, so that students are treated fairly and consistently across the University. Such information, along with details on the University’s procedure for handling the final programme mark within the borderline of classifications (see section 29), should be available to students (e.g. in the student handbook).

17.7 The less prescriptive the assessment (i.e. the lower the expectation of conformity to a model answer), the more necessary it is to ensure an effective moderation strategy. The types of moderation and how they may or may not be applied for assessments within the University of Bristol are outlined in 17.8-17.16.

17.13 Schools may choose to adopt double-marking as academically desirable in the case of summative assessment (see annex 1 for a definition of double marking).

17.14 Detailed marking criteria for assessed group work, the assessment of class presentations, and self/peer (student) assessment must be established and made available to students and examiners.

17.15 In respect of group work, it is often desirable to award both a group and individual mark, to ensure individuals’ contributions to the task are acknowledged. The weighting of the group and individual mark and how the marks are combined should be made clear to the students.

17.16 It is recognised that there are particular difficulties in providing the second marking/moderation in some forms of assessment such as a class presentation which contribute to the overall unit mark. In these cases evidence of how the assessment mark was reached should be preserved for moderation.

(Back to top)

18. Processing and recording marks

(Back to top)

19. Anonymity

(Back to top)

20. Penalties

For academic misconduct

The University’s Examination Regulations (annex 7) contain full details of the regulations and procedures to be followed in respect of academic misconduct, including plagiarism.

20.1 Information on what constitutes academic misconduct in respect of assessment (including clear definitions of plagiarism, collusion, cheating, impersonation and the use of inadmissible material) should be provided, or referenced by a web link, in school handbooks together with specific information about the consequences of such misconduct. It may be necessary for individual schools to develop additional guidance on what constitutes academic misconduct, to reflect the relevant academic discipline.

20.2 When recommending a penalty to a Board of Examiners, an appropriately constituted committee/panel will consider the offence and penalty independently of its potential impact on the student’s degree classification. Whether the penalty for offence in question should be reflected in the degree class to be awarded is the judgement of the board. In such cases, Boards of Examiners should take into account any effect on the degree classification that the penalty already has had.

For the late submission of summative coursework

20.3 Students must be made aware of the existence of penalties for not meeting submission deadlines. These should be clearly specified in writing to students and staff at the beginning of the programme / unit, preferably in the programme / unit handbook.

20.4 Faculties’ policies on the penalties for the late submission of undergraduate summative coursework, should be in accordance with the following:

a) Faculties should adopt an approach to the late submission of coursework within the framework provided and their schools should ensure that the policy is communicated to students at the outset of their studies, stated in student handbooks and re-iterated at the start of teaching of each unit;

b) Schools should ensure that students from other schools or faculties who register for their units are made explicitly aware of the faculty policy on the late submission of coursework;

c) Coursework that is submitted after a deadline should be subject to some penalty, unless an extension has been agreed by the School, prior to the deadline, or late submission is justified by reason of illness or other validated extenuating circumstance (see sections 7 and 20);

d) For work submitted up to 24 hours after the agreed submission deadline, a penalty of 10 marks out of 100 (or 3 marks out of 20) from the mark the student would have received applies (e.g. coursework that is marked at 60/100 would become 50/100 or a mark of 10/20 would become 7/20) once the penalty is applied);

e) For work submitted seven calendar days after the submission deadline the student will receive a mark of 0, although schools may still require work of a satisfactory standard to be submitted in order for credit to be awarded;

f) Faculties should decide on the rate of reduction, by day or at specific thresholds, for late submissions made after the 24 hour period but within 7 days. In setting the rate by which the mark is reduced the weighting of the assessment may be taken into account;

g) Any penalty applied should be in the form of a mark reduction from the mark the student would have achieved.

For exceeding the size limit in summative coursework

20.5 Faculties’ policies for defining the size limit of summative coursework, by assessment type, and the penalty for exceeding the defined limit, for its taught programmes, should be in accordance with the following:

a) That it includes:

• Whether specific forms of coursework are subject to a size limit, and if so:

• Whether the size limit is defined by reference to the number of pages (with font size, line spacing, margin size, and page orientation requirements), by a word / character limit or other defined limit.

• The penalty where the defined limit is exceeded.

b) Students must be informed in writing, at or before the date of issue of the coursework, the size limit and the penalty for exceeding the limit, if any, which shall accord with the approved unit specification. This information should also be provided on the cover sheet for the submission of the coursework.

c) The policy of the faculty that owns the unit will apply. It is important for students whose home programme is based in a different faculty are made fully aware that the policy applied in the submission of coursework for a unit may be different than the policy of their home faculty.

d) It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that the work complies with the defined size limit prior to submission and to certify the size (word or page length or other defined limit) on the front cover sheet when submitting the work.

e) The student in question must be informed of the decision to apply the penalty for exceeding the defined size limit.

(Back to top)

F. ARRANGEMENTS AND PROCESSES FOR DETERMINING PROGRESS AND AWARDS

21. Bodies and roles responsible for determining progression and awards

Faculty Education Directors

21.1 It is the responsibility of the Faculty Education Directors to ensure that university and faculty regulations, policies and procedures with respect to these Regulations and Code are implemented in their faculties. In doing this they will work closely with schools, Faculty Education Managers and each Faculty Quality Enhancement Team (FQET).  

Programme Directors

21.2 Annex 11 sets out the University’s guidelines for Programme Directors. Programme Directors must be familiar with these guidelines and all regulations that relate to their programme including this Code.

21.3 The Programme Director is responsible for the quality assurance of the programme for which he or she is responsible, including Annual Programme Review arrangements and feedback on the programme.

Internal examiners

All internal and external examiners must ensure that they are fully informed about these Regulations and Code.

21.4 Heads of School should nominate an individual to be responsible for liasing with the External Examiner. This would normally be the Programme Director or the Examinations Officer. It must be clear to all concerned who will undertake this contact role.

21.5 Internal examiners are normally the individuals responsible for assessment in the relevant unit. The curriculum vitae of all internal examiners who are not on academic pathways one and three, including anyone not holding academic status at the University, should be submitted annually by the school for approval by the relevant faculty board/s. Internal examiners are expected to attend the meeting(s) of the relevant board of examiners. Each faculty should have a policy on the quoracy of its boards of examiners.

21.6 An internal examiner nominated by the Head of School should take academic responsibility for the unit’s summative assessment. This person should ensure that the following tasks are completed satisfactorily: the setting of papers, liasing with external examiners, preparing any relevant assessment and marking criteria, leading teams of markers (where appropriate), ensuring a proper process of internal verification and agreeing sets of marks. The nominated internal examiner is responsible to the school board of examiners.

21.7 The nominated internal examiner is responsible for establishing procedures at school level to enter and check the marks for each individual piece of assessed work which forms the basis for examiners’ meetings.

21.8 He or she is also responsible for ensuring back-up systems are in place for electronic storage and transmission systems.

School examinations officer(s)

21.9 School examinations officer(s) will be appointed by the Head of School. Their role is to organise and co-ordinate the school’s assessment processes, from the preparation of examination papers provided by internal examiners to the accurate recording of assessment marks and their presentation to the School and Faculty Boards of Examiners.

21.10 School examinations officer(s) are the principal line of communication of the School with the Faculty and to the University Examinations Office (Academic Registry).

External examiners

21.11 The purpose of the external examiner system is to ensure that:

a) the academic standards of University awards and their component parts are set and maintained at the appropriate level, and that the standards of student performance are properly judged against this;

b) the assessment process measures student achievement against the intended learning outcomes, and is rigorous, fairly operated, and in line with University policies and regulations;

c) the assessment process is fair and is fairly operated in the marking, grading and classification of student performance, and that decisions are made in accordance with University regulations;

d) the University is able to compare the standard of its awards with those in other higher education institutions.

21.12 The duties and responsibilities of individual external examiners will be based on their role to act as independent and impartial advisors providing informed comment on academic standards set (including those associated with Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs) where appropriate) and student achievement in relation to those standards.

21.13 The University has its own internal quality assurance procedures for the processing and consideration of assessment marks, and attaches great importance to peer review from colleagues in other academic institutions, professional bodies, industry or commerce. When arriving at the degree classifications given to final year undergraduates and the final award for taught postgraduates, appropriate weight should be given to the view of the external examiner(s) as full and equal members of the Examination Board.

21.14 In addition to attendance at examination boards, external examiners also have the right to attend any other examiners’ meetings relating to the programme with which they are concerned and at which decisions on individual students are to be taken. In some circumstances, it may be necessary to consult the external examiners of units taken by students in subjects outside their main programme subject area.

21.15 The role of the external examiner is not confined to consideration of examination results and attendance at examination boards. External examiners are encouraged, to comment and advise on the content, balance and structure of programmes and units, the development and review of programmes and/or units, and on assessment processes.

21.16 External examiners have the right to see all examination scripts and any other work that contributes to the award result, though normally the external examiner would only receive a selection of scripts, as agreed in advance with the relevant school(s). The selection should normally include all examination scripts and other assessed work that contributes to the award results of candidates assessed internally as borderline first class, third class, or failures. Where internal double marking takes place, a third internal marker might be asked to adjudicate in circumstances where the first two internal examiners are unable to agree a mark. If this does not resolve the disagreement, the external examiner may be invited to provide a view.

21.17 Chairs of School Boards of Examiners are responsible for conveying the contents of external examiners’ reports to their schools and programme directors as part of the on-going process of assessment review. The matter should appear as an item on the agenda for a subsequent school or examiners meeting and a record of any agreed alterations in assessment practices must be kept. External examiners should be given formal written feedback on the discussion of their reports and consequent changes in assessment practices by the head of school or nominee. The school’s responses should also be forwarded to the Education Support Unit.

21.18 Annex 13 – the University’s Code of Practice for the External Examining of Taught Programmes provides full details of the University’s external examining processes.

Programme (or school) examination boards

21.19 This section should be viewed alongside Ordinance 17, Assessment for Academic Awards, which includes details of the constitution and requirements for Boards of Examiners.

21.20 A School Examination Board may be convened at a School or a programme level. The board must consist of at least three people and are convened to approve each undergraduate and taught postgraduate academic award of the University.  Membership of initial examination boards normally includes the internal and external examiners for each subject or group of subjects in the programme of study for the award. Such boards make recommendations to the Faculty Examination Board to the faculty in which the degree is awarded. External examiners are normally required to be present at the meetings of the School Board of Examiners for all programmes which lead to a University award, and to which they have been appointed as external examiner.

21.21 The Faculties of Medicine and Dentistry and Medical and Veterinary Sciences may choose to convene separate ‘unit’ examination boards as well as programme boards to reflect the nature of their professional programmes. A unit examination board must also consist of at least three people.

21.22 Discussions held at the programme or school examination board are confidential. The procedure for disclosing marks and results to students is outlined in section 24.

21.23 A designated member of the board of examiners must take responsibility for overseeing the processing of marks at all stages of the assessment procedure.

21.24 The written records of all meetings of boards of examiners should be kept and communicated to the Faculty Examination Board. This should contain adequate details of the discussion of borderline cases and where individual medical or other extenuating circumstances are presented. A record should be kept of how and why decisions were taken (i.e. the reasons for each decision).

21.25 Schools should ensure they give as much notice as possible to all board members of the dates of examination board meetings and other occasions on which they may be required to be present so that the quoracy of the board of examiners is met.

21.26 School Boards of Examiners should determine the range of assessed material and, where appropriate, the evidence relating to the award of marks for that assessed work that will be subject to moderation.

21.27 In some circumstances, in addition to marks, student work may be made available at the meeting of School Boards of Examiners (e.g. where low marks achieved in one part of a programme are being considered against additional work done by the student).

21.28 School Boards of Examiners should assure themselves that elements of formative work that is also used for summative purposes should be subject to moderation and should establish a mechanism to verify the authenticity of that work (i.e. that it is the student’s own work and it is as it was originally submitted). See section 17 for details on internal verification / moderation.

21.29 School Boards of Examiners should assure themselves that the guidelines which determine the selection of scripts that the external examiner receives are adhered.

21.30 It is the responsibility of the School Board of Examiners to draw the Faculty Board’s attention to issues it wishes to raise. It should also refer complex cases, including those of unusual profile students (e.g. where a student is awarded a zero mark as a result of plagiarism) to the Faculty Examination Board.

21.31 A Faculty Education Director, or nominee, may attend school examination boards in order to aid interpretation of the new policy for progression and classification and provide insight on particularly complex cases.

Faculty examination boards

21.32 The role of the Faculty Examination Board includes: assuring fair and consistent treatment of candidates and their results across all schools in the faculty; monitoring assessment trends and any major deviations from norms faculty-wide; and receiving and assuring the appropriateness of subject specific marking criteria in the light of the agreed university wide generic marking criteria.

21.33 The decision to approve the award result and confer a student is only final when approved by the Faculty Examination Board. Until this occurs student’s results are deemed to be provisional and subject to confirmation.

21.34 The remit of the Faculty Examination Board is outlined in Ordinance 17 as:

21.35 The responsibility of the Faculty Examination Board in alleged cases of cheating or plagiarism is outlined in the Examination Regulations:

21.36 Discussions held at the Faculty Examination Board are confidential. The procedure for disclosing marks and results to students is outlined in section 27.

21.37 A record of each meeting of the Faculty Examination Board must be kept, including the reasons for decisions and how they are taken. This record must contain adequate details of the discussion of borderline cases and where individual medical, or other extenuating circumstances, are taken into account.

21.38 A meeting of the Faculty Examination Board should be held shortly after the January examination period to check and verify the marks achieved in order for the confirmed marks to be released to students. Formal decisions on progression may be made by the Board at this meeting in cases where it is not possible for the student to progress to the next year of study or component on the basis of the marks achieved in the first teaching block.

21.39 Faculty Boards may decide that examination boards that make decisions about the progression of students should be named and constituted differently (e.g. Faculty Progress Committee). In such cases, the responsibilities and powers of these boards as set out in the Code are exactly the same as for Faculty Examination Boards. 

(Back to top)

22. Pass Mark

(Back to top)

23. Extenuating circumstances

23.1 Information must be provided to students on the procedure for the treatment of medical and other extenuating circumstances. As a minimum, schools should include information in student handbooks about the procedure that should be followed and the importance of informing the school about medical or other extenuating circumstances prior to the meeting of the relevant special circumstances committee and provide the date of the committee meeting. Staff and students in the school should be made aware of the correct person in the school to be provided with documentation of evidence and how it will be stored. Schools should ensure that their procedures are arranged so the number of copies is kept to a minimum.

23.2 The following extracts from the University’s Examination Regulations are relevant to this section:

23.3 Students must complete the University’s form for extenuating circumstances (available at: www.bristol.ac.uk/academicregistry/studentforms/) and submit the form to the relevant School or Faculty Office within 2 days (excluding weekends and bank holidays) following the final assessment or examination in the assessment / examination period to which it relates, so as to inform the Faculty Board of Examiners for his/her programme of any extenuating circumstances that may have affected his/her ability to fulfil the criteria for the award of credit points or to perform to the best of his/her ability in assessment events. Relevant evidence must be provided. 

23.4 Schools should ensure that students are informed about the nature of the evidence that they will need to provide to supplement the information supplied in the University’s form for extenuating circumstances.

23.6 Such a committee should be set up and run in accordance with the following principles:

a) The Faculty or School should establish a procedure for ensuring that judgements are as consistent and robust as possible, in-year and year-on-year. The special circumstances committee should use its discretion in deciding on the severity and impact in any particular case. Judgements should be guided by University advice (set out in annex 14) as to what is considered “acute” or “chronic” and “mild, moderate or severe”.

b) The special circumstances committee should consider cases where students have brought evidence or made a claim that they may have been disadvantaged on the grounds of medical or extenuating circumstances.

c) The special circumstances committee may be chaired by the chair of the Board of Examiners to which it reports. For Faculty or School Examination Boards where the chair would also be involved in any appeal process, an alternative chair for the special circumstances committee must be appointed.

d) The special circumstances committee should meet as soon as is convenient before the Board of Examiners.

e) The special circumstances committee should determine:

• which (if any) assessments may have been affected by the circumstances drawn to its attention;

• whether the impact on the student’s capacity to perform is likely to have been mild, moderate or severe, and whether the extenuating circumstance was acute (of short duration and only likely to have had a negative impact upon the student’s performance in the assessment) or chronic (over a significant period of time and therefore likely to have had an impact upon their learning as well as their performance in the assessment);

• whether sufficient allowance for the circumstances has already been made, for example, by making special arrangements for examinations or by granting extensions to deadlines.

f) The committee should note the reasons underlying its decisions and these notes, along with information on the period of time in which the circumstances affected the student and the assessments / forms of learning that were affected, should form its report to the Board of Examiners.

g) The role of the special circumstances committee is to evaluate whether or not extenuating circumstances may have affected the candidate’s capacity to perform. It is not the role of the special circumstances committee to determine the effect, if any, on the candidate’s results.

h) Information about the precise medical or other extenuating circumstances of the candidate must remain confidential to the special circumstances committee.

i) The candidate should  be informed where a Board of Examiners has considered extenuating circumstances and made a discretionary decision (including not to take any action), as outlined in 23.8. A written response giving reasons for the decision should be available on request.

23.7 Faculty Board of Examiners are required to note the advice given by the special circumstances committee on whether the circumstances are likely to have had a mild, moderate, or severe effect on the student’s capacity to perform either during the assessment (following an acute circumstance) or whether their learning may also have been affected (following a chronic circumstance). The Board should then determine the effect, if any, on the candidate’s results.

23.8 If there is evidence that a mark, which is likely to have been affected by the extenuating circumstance, would have been better in the absence of the circumstance, the Faculty Board of Examiners shall take such decision, in respect of the student, as is fair and reasonable in the circumstances. The Faculty Board of Examiners shall take into account whether the student’s performance during the assessment was not a fair reflection of his/her level of attainment due primarily to acute circumstances or whether the student’s learning was negatively affected by chronic circumstances. The Board of Examiners’ decisions may include:

• to take no action;

• allowing the student to re-attempt the assessment without penalty (a supplementary assessment –“as for the first time”- see annex 1 for definition)

• allowing the student to re-attempt the year or for undergraduate students only to undertake a supplementary year “as for the first time”;

• disregarding the affected mark for the purposes of progression and classification (not relevant for non-modular undergraduate programmes including MB ChB, BDS and BVSc);

• awarding a classified degree where the student is prevented by illness or other substantial cause from completing a minor part of the assessment and the Board is unable to make an academic award under any other of the University’s regulations (see annex 15 on the application of Ordinance 18 at the undergraduate level);

• allowing the re-submission of the dissertation in taught postgraduate programmes where the student has achieved a mark less than 45 out of 100 (see 27.16);

• the award of credit notwithstanding a fail mark; (not relevant for non-modular undergraduate programmes including MB ChB, BDS and BVSc).

The manipulation of the mark itself should be considered only as a last resort and applied in exceptional acute circumstances by a higher mark being awarded on the basis of performance in other contexts.

Annex 16 outlines the options available to Boards of Examiners by level and year of study where extenuating circumstances are present.

23.9 Faculty Boards of Examiners may wish to seek professional advice e.g. medical opinion prior to making a decision, particularly if chronic circumstances are involved.

23.10 Faculty Boards of Examiners should ensure that their decisions in respect of students whose performance is impaired by extenuating circumstances are consistent over time.

23.11 Faculties should ensure that all Boards of Examiners record their decision-making in ways that facilitate consistent decision making year on year.

23.12 A record must be kept of the consideration of medical or other evidence, at any stage of a student’s progress; the reasons for any decisions made and the outcomes agreed.

23.13 Guidance on student absence during the teaching period due to illness or other cause is provided at section 9.

(Back to top)

24. Treatment and publication of results

Disclosure of marks and results

24.1 There is no general requirement to return examination scripts to candidates but schools should share examination results with students wherever this would make a useful contribution to formative feedback. Faculties should adopt a consistent policy on this matter. Staff should be aware that any comments made by examiners, in relation to a specific candidate, with respect to any assessment, including coursework, must be disclosed to the candidate, if she or he makes a formal request under the Data Protection Act 1998. However, this should not inhibit markers from making appropriate comments to indicate why, in their judgement, a script or piece of work merits the mark awarded.

Transcripts

24.8 The transcript is intended to provide useful information to potential employers or to other universities (in the case of credit transfer) and to facilitate better understanding of the student's level of attainment overall and in individual units.

24.9 For the purpose of transcripts and credit transfer, the University will make it clear how the student has performed in assessments relating both to the achievement of credit points and to overall performance.

24.10 The transcript in the approved format will show a single mark for each unit, which represents the mark agreed by the Board of Examiners. This might be a combined mark to take into account different elements of assessment such as written work, practicals, coursework etc.

24.11 A copy of the transcript, in the approved format, will be provided automatically to students on completion of their studies. Subsequently, a charge will be levied for the provision of transcripts to graduated students.

Retention of Student Work

24.12 Schools should judge what summatively-assessed work needs to be retained so to ensure that such work is available in the case of appeal. For this reason, the work of a student would not normally be retained for longer than a year following graduation.

24.13 Schools should also take into account the requirements of professional, statutory and regulatory bodies, where relevant.

(Back to top)

25. Appeals against decisions of the board of examiners

25.1 All information concerning the University’s regulations for appeals against the decisions of Boards of examiners is contained in annex 7, the University’s Examination Regulations.

25.2 It is essential to address a student’s representation against a decision of a board of examiners as early as possible, and initially within the respective school and faculty. Students must be made aware of section 11 of the Examination Regulations (annex 7) governing appeals, with particular attention drawn to the 15 working day deadline from the date of notification of the decision for submitting a formal appeal. Students should also be reminded that a degree cannot be conferred whilst an appeal is ongoing.

25.3 The student’s eligibility to graduate at a degree congregation will depend on the degree being confirmed by a specific date, normally two weeks prior to the start of the degree congregation (the precise deadline date is set by the examinations and degree congregation offices annually). Appeals that have not been resolved by this date will result in the student being offered the opportunity to graduate at the next available ceremony.

25.4 Information on the University’s student complaints procedure can be found at www.bristol.ac.uk/secretary/studentrulesregs/complaints.html.

(Back to top)

G. REGULATION AND POLICIES FOR DETERMINING PROGRESS AND AWARDS

26. Student progression and completion in undergraduate modular programmes

This section refers to the regulations and policies for student progression and completion of students on undergraduate modular programmes newly registered from the 2011-12 academic year. Students newly registered before the 2011-12 academic year are covered by the previous regulations, which are available at annex 17.

A flow diagram of the options available for the progression of students on taught programmes is available at annex 18.

(Back to top)

27. Student progression and completion in taught postgraduate modular programmes

A flow diagram of the options available for the progression of students on taught programmes is available at annex 18.

(Back to top)

28. Student progression and completion in non-modular programmes (MB,ChB, BDS and BVSc)

(Back to top)

29. Awards: for undergraduate modular programmes

(Back to top)

30. Awards: for taught postgraduate programmes

(Back to top)

31: Awards: for non-modular programmes (MB,ChB, BDS, BVSc)

(Back to top)

---

Approved by Senate, May 2008

Amendments for 2009-10: approved by Senate, 15 June 2009 and under vacation powers, August 2009.

Amendments for 2010-11: approved by Senate, May and June 2010

Amendments for 2011-12: approved by Senate, December 2010, May and June 2011 and under vacation powers, August 2011.

Amendments for 2012-13, approved by Senate, February, May and June 2012 and under vacation powers, August 2011.

Amendments for 2013-14, approved by Senate, May and June 2013.

(Back to top)