Academic Regulations Dr Sandra Mienczakowski Head of Academic Processes Student Services - Development

Context The Quality Manual http://nottingham.ac.uk/academicservices/qualitymanual/aboutth equalitymanual.aspx

Undergraduate Taught Course regulations: http://nottingham.ac.uk/academicservices/qualitymanual/assessmentandawards/undergraduate-programme-regulations.aspx Postgraduate Taught Course regulations: http://nottingham.ac.uk/academicservices/qualitymanual/assessmentandawards/index-page-pgt-regulations.aspx

Undergraduate Taught Course regulations: Changes from 15/16 affecting students entering Qualifying or Part I. Students entering Part II or Part III will be considered under old and new and given better of two academic outcomes Postgraduate Taught Course regulations: Changes from 16/17 for students entering from September 2016. Students who entered before September 2016 will be considered under old and new and given better of two academic outcomes

Assessment Regulations http://nottingham.ac.uk/academicservices/qualitymanual/assessmentandawards/assessment-index-page.aspx Includes: External Examiners Assessment Policies Extenuating Circumstances Marking and Classification Academic Misconduct

Moderation Key part of the process in assuring standards http://nottingham.ac.uk/academicservices/qualitymanual/assessmentandawards/marking-and-grading.aspx External examiners should be involved – School’s will vary and will provide information on their process and expectations The University does not use normalisation – i.e. we do not manipulate marks to fit an expected mark distribution

School Examination Boards http://nottingham.ac.uk/academicservices/qualitymanual/assessmentandawards/school-examination-boards.aspx Confirm relevant assessment marks Recommend student progression Recommend degree awards Recommend reassessments as appropriate Recommend outcomes relating to students with extenuating circumstances

School Examination Boards Normally within the regulatory framework which aims to ensure academic rigour, consistency and simplicity Where special circumstances exist that fall outside any current regulation, recommendations can be made notwithstanding the regulations – in this case these must be approved by the Quality and Standards Committee Regulations are regularly updated in the light of experience and requirements

Standardised Regulation The majority of our regulations are standardised unless there is a PSRB or other approved exemption permitted– e.g. whether or not to allow a second reassessment, the weighting of degree classifications, borderline criteria Within a School, decision-making should be consistent and supportable if challenged Overarching consideration should be whether the outcome is reasonable for the individual student

Academic Misconduct Policy at: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/academicservices/qualitymanual/assessmentandawards/academic-misconduct.aspx Two levels: School Central Management depends on initial School consideration and whether or not it is a first offence Range of penalties

Programme Structures Essentially standard structures but may vary - defined in programme specifications These should include information on compulsory modules, non-compensatable modules and other required elements Where a PSRB requires it, regulations may be amended in many ways e.g. non-standard progression

Some Basics UG pass mark – 40% PGT pass mark – 50% Progression/Award – based on weighted average for the stage/programme – 40% for UG, 50% for PG – different requirements may apply where an external body requires it or for Foundation Year progression Some modules may be defined in the programme specification as being non-compensatable Elements of assessment within modules may be non-compensatable

Compensation Regulations – Undergraduate Undergraduate Regulation 10: A student who fails one or more modules will still complete that stage (subject to Regulation 11 below), and so be awarded the total credit for that stage provided that they have:  (a) passed modules worth at least 80* credits and have a weighted average for the stage of at least 40% with no module marks of less than 30% or  (b) passed modules worth at least 100* credits and have a weighted average for the stage of at least 50% (c) passed modules worth at least 90* credits, have marks of 30% or more in modules worth at least 110* credits, and have a weighted average for the stage of at least 45%.

*Ordinary Degrees Additional rules in the regulations cover how compensation applies to ordinary degrees and how weighted averages are calculated for ordinary degrees [Ordinary degrees can only be awarded at exit, students are not able to transfer to an Ordinary degree] Regulation 11 states: Regulation 10 does not apply to the final stage of any degree programme nor to any module which is listed in the relevant programme specification as not compensatable. A student who fails a non-compensatable module will not complete that stage without successfully undertaking re-assessment in that module.

Compensation Regulations – Postgraduate Postgraduate Regulation 11: A student who fails one or more modules for the taught stage of the course will still complete that stage and so be awarded the total credit for that stage provided that: - they have passed modules worth at least two-thirds of credits, and - they have a weighted average for the taught stage of at least 50% with no module marks of less than 40% Notwithstanding the above, module marks below 40% for up to 20 credits will be compensated if the student has passed modules worth at least 80 credits and has a weighted average of at least 50%

Extenuating Circumstances 3 categories: Long-term circumstances – dealt with by appropriate adjustment Circumstances affecting assessments Circumstances affecting study Generally considered prior to the main examination board and outcomes confirmed by exam board – not expected that individual cases will be discussed with the External Examiners and vivas are not allowed in making decision

Outcomes from accepted Ecs claims Allow a ‘first sit’ of an assessment Allow repeat registration Take into account at final exam board Grant an extension to a coursework submission date Where the student has completed at least 50% of the required assessment for the module, the marks obtained may be scaled to create a module mark so long as the learning outcomes have been appropriately assessed Manage through the attendance policy

Marks are not altered as the result of an individual EC Where there has been disruption in the assessment process (e.g. a problem with an examination paper), appropriate adjustments may be made to the outcomes for the affected cohort, including potentially to marks, by following the University’s marks adjustment process.

EC review A student who is dissatisfied with an EC outcome should discuss with their School in the first instance and can then ask for a review Managed centrally through the Appeals process At end of internal procedures student is issued with Completion of Procedures Letter and may complain to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator

Reassessments (1) Students other than in the final year of a UG programme who fail at the first attempt have the right to one reassessment – in some circumstances they may be allowed a second reassessment Final year UGs who fail a non-compensatable module but otherwise satisfy requirements for the award of a degree have the right to a reassessment in the failed module in order to gain the credits In other circumstances final year UG students who fail are only allowed to resit for a Pass degree or an Ordinary degree

A student may request reassessments to be taken in attendance Normally taken during summer but School may allow or require a student to take them during the following session A student may request reassessments to be taken in attendance Failure in some modules may require a student to be reassessed in attendance Reassessment marks do not contribute to most UG award calculations but do contribute to PGT calculations of weighted average but not for the purposes of award of Merit or Distinction

Degree Classification http://nottingham.ac.uk/academicservices/qualitymanual/assessmentandawards/degree-classification-options.aspx Based on an arithmetic mean model – i.e. final weighted average calculated using stage averages For Undergraduate degrees, with the exception of Pass degrees and Ordinary degrees, only first sit marks contribute to the final weighted average

Degree Classification Undergraduate Pass degrees, Ordinary degrees, UG Diplomas and UG Certificates are awarded as Pass, Merit or Distinction with borderlines at 58/59 and 68/69 For Postgraduate degrees reassessment marks contribute to the final weighted average in order to qualify for the award but may not be used for the award of Merit or Distinction

Degree Classifications Final weighted averages are used to decide on classification: Honours degree: 70+ I Borderline 68/69 60-69 IIi Borderline 58/59 50-59 IIii Borderline 48/49 40-49 III No Borderline PGT awards: 70+ Distinction Borderline 68/69 60-69 Merit Borderline 58/59 50-59 Pass No Borderline

Exam Board Discretion – Borderlines For undergraduate degrees Regulation 26 (a) application of metrics; [half or more of the final year credits at the higher level or half or more of the final and penultimate year credits at the higher level] (b) student ECs

Exam Board Discretion – Borderlines For postgraduate degrees Regulation 22 Half or more of the total credits at the higher level Borderline criteria must be metrics, not a viva or other subjective measure e.g. a further review of scripts

Hierarchy of Awards Where a student does not qualify for the award on which they were registered they should be awarded the highest level of award available to them based on their achievement (sometimes subject to availability of that award) Undergraduate Hierarchy: Integrated Masters Bachelor’s Honours Pass Degree Ordinary Degree [exit only] Undergraduate Diploma Undergraduate Certificate Postgraduate Hierarchy: Masters Postgraduate Diploma Postgraduate Certificate

Appeals/Complaints/Review Range of actions available to students who are unhappy with their outcomes Mainly managed centrally Review process, through Chair of Academic Appeals and Offences Committee (a member of Teaching and Learning Board), may overturn a School decision where the outcome is deemed to be unreasonable even if all procedures have been followed At end of internal procedures student is issued with Completion of Procedures Letter and may complain to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator

Dr Sandra Mienczakowski Head of Academic Processes Contact Information Dr Sandra Mienczakowski Head of Academic Processes Student Services - Development E Floor, Portland Building University of Nottingham University Park Nottingham NG7 2RD email: sandra.mienczakowski@nottingham.ac.uk Tel: 0115 951 4789