Stepped marking refers restricted grade band marking scheme

Assessment and Feedback Policy

2

Purpose

University of Salford and its partner institutions.

Definitions of Assessment and Feedback

to formative assessment.

Summative assessment is used to indicate the extent of a learner's success in

Assessment and Feedback Principles

7. We use assessment for a variety of different purposes:
• Assessment of learning: used for certification: identifying levels of achievement;

• Assessment as learning: where students develop an awareness of how they learn

and use that awareness to adjust and advance their learning, taking an increased

8. The following principles inform the institution’s approach to assessment. Assessment at

the University of Salford will:

• Promote academic and professional ethical practice;

• Include active and collaborative tasks;

• Be conducted equitably and securely in line with University regulations and

processes;

proficiency relative to the specific learning outcomes;

• Support future employment and encourage students to embark on professional

Collaboration Zone Curriculum Design Principles.

Assessment and Feedback Policy

encourage student engagement with each element of assessment.

13. Assessment must be aligned with module and programme learning outcomes, and

14. Each module will contain at least one component of assessment. The Academic

Regulations for Taught Programmes provide further information about the maximum

16. To help support the transition of students into Higher Education there should be no formal written examinations in Trimester 1 for students at levels 3 and 4 within any mode of module delivery (short fat or long thin), this does not preclude the use of other types of assessment carried out under time-limited conditions. Formal written
examinations are permitted where this is a requirement of a PSRB or subject to additional accreditation awarded by external bodies. A note to this effect should be included in relevant programme approval documentation.

17. All assessments (with the exception of examinations) must use the University’s and be provided to students, normally electronically. This is the set of instructions outlining the requirements and criteria for the assessment. As a minimum assessment briefs must include:

• referencing style/requirements;

• allocation of marks and grade descriptors;

19. All assessment shall normally take place within modules during the approved duration of each programme.

5

26. Programme teams should strive to accommodate major religious festivals of all faiths in its planning, though this is not always possible. Programme teams should consider significant dates when setting assessment submission dates. Further information is available through askUS.

27. The University’s assessment process takes place principally electronically, this includes electronic submission, marking and feedback. All written assessments must be submitted through Blackboard, unless an exception has been granted by the Director of Academic Quality. Wherever practical to do so, other assessment artifacts should also be submitted via Blackboard, specific exemption does not need to be sought where Blackboard is not used for such assessments.

30. When submitted online, assessments will be receipted electronically, or confirmation of receipt provided on screen. When an assessment is legitimately submitted offline, students must use the Schools must ensure that there is a robust system for the timed receipting of student work, again using the

31. Whether online or offline, the deadline for submission of assessments is 16:00 UK time on the specified submission date, which should normally be a weekday, except where the relevant module is normally delivered on a weekend. Any submission after 16:00 UK time, even if by only a few seconds, will be considered as late.

35. The University’s late submission period is seven consecutive days following the assessment submission date. The seven consecutive day period includes weekends and Bank Holidays but not extended periods of official closure e.g. Christmas, Good Friday and Easter Monday.

36. The late submission period applies to all assessment attempts (including resit attempts) except In-Year Retrieval Assessment attempts. Late submission arrangements do not apply to examinations or similar scheduled and timed assessment events such as presentations or performances.

penalty shall be applied.

39. Where a student has valid reasons for submitting an assessment late and has a request for Personal Mitigating Circumstances accepted through the the penalty applicable for late submission will be removed.

40. Where students have submitted an assessment later than the published deadline, as permitted by the late submission period or by a Reasonable Adjustment Plan/Carer Support Plan, programme teams should still aim, where possible, to provide feedback within 15 working days of the published deadline, and in any case no later than 15 working days after the date the assessment was submitted. The 15 working day period for provision of feedback does not include days when the University is officially closed, for example weekends, bank holidays or during the Christmas closure period.

43. All summative assessments are either awarded a numerical mark expressed as a percentage or a pass/fail grade.

8

52. Marks and feedback (for summatively assessed work) shall be provided to students within 15 working days of the published assessment submission deadline except where concerns relating to academic misconduct arise. In such instances, the marker may cease marking the assessment and prepare a case for referral to the School’s
Academic Misconduct Officer. Feedback will not normally be given to the student until the case has been considered. Where students have submitted later than published assessment submission deadline due to a Reasonable Adjustment Plan/Carer Support Plan or use of the late submission period, section 40 outlines requirements in relation to the timing for provision of marks and feedback.

53. All marks and, where appropriate, feedback should be returned to students via Blackboard.

• provide an un-ratified mark or grade;
• indicate how marks were arrived at with explicit reference to the descriptors and marking criteria for the assessment task (see sections 45 and 46); • present constructive, developmental comments on the assessment, including reference to successful and less successful aspects of the assessment, and advice on how to improve. This should include the provision of answers to the following questions:

o What you did well in this piece of work (briefly describing the main strengths on this assessment)

57. In addition to meeting the standards set out in this Policy, programme teams must ensure that they meet any standards for feedback required by relevant Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies.

60. Feedback should be easily accessible and clear, ensuring that comments can be accessed confidentially by individual students and can be retained by students and the University.

61. A record of marking, which evidences the breakdown of marks for each assessed component, will be retained within the Student Information System. Only whole component marks are recorded.

64. Summative assessment outcomes shall be subject to internal and external moderation and confirmed by the Assessment Board in line with the The purpose of moderation is to provide assurance that
assessment criteria have been applied appropriately and to verify academic standards.

11

67. Our standard moderation processes provide the necessary assurance of consistency and fairness across the majority of modes of assessment and there is no case to introduce second marking as a requirement where moderation can be adequately complete. Second marking should only be used when it is not possible to use sample moderation or where it is specifically prescribed by a PSRB. Guidance about second marking is available

Reassessment

Academic Misconduct

71. Any improper activity or behaviour by a student which may give that student, or another student, an unfair academic advantage in a summative assessment is considered to be an act of academic misconduct. This is unacceptable in an academic community. All cases of suspected academic misconduct will be considered in line with the or the

consideration by the University in respect of:

Reasonable Adjustment Plans/Carer Support Plans

73. The assessment of need process seeks to put measures in place to mitigate the effects of a student’s individual needs. Reasonable adjustments are made while the student is progressing through their programme and may affect the conduct of their assessments. Adjustments Plans which are developed by the or through Carer Support Plans developed by the Student Diversity team.

failure in assessments, or to submit assessments that were not submitted at initial

attempt, at a much earlier point in the academic year, closer to the point of module

13

77. Advice is available to Sconfidential disposal of assessed work from the

1. Purpose
1.1 The overall purpose of internal and external verification of summative assessment

briefs and marking schemes is to ensure that the assessment of students is

component within that diet. Verification should take account of intended learning

outcomes, consideration of marking schemes/model answers, the characteristics of

2.1 Verification involves both internal and external review to ensure that assessments meet both institutional and sector standards and offer an appropriate level of challenge to students as well as forming an authentic and accessible way to gauge student achievement.

2.2 Internal verification is required annually for all components of summative

• for summative assessments at other levels where required by Professional,

Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRB) or by collaborative provision

2.5 First-sit assessments and, where a different task is used, reassessments should be verified at the same time.

3. Verification Process

3.1.2 The impact of changes at other tiers of the verification process should be checked annually to ensure that the coherence of the overall diet of assessment is not affected. At this tier, review of overall timely progression and, where relevant, degree outcomes should be reviewed to help inform the consideration of the overall programme assessment strategy, including performance by specific sub-sets of the student body. This process is an integral part of the ongoing programme monitoring and review cycle feeding in as appropriate to the PMEP and Student Staff Liaison processes.

3.2 Tier 2 Level of Study verification – coherence of assessment within each academic level
3.2.1 The pattern of assessment within a single level should be reviewed to verify the appropriateness of the volume (student load), timing and variety of assessment presented to students. Specific consideration should be given to the relative distribution of assessment to ensure there is no bunching and that there are opportunities for feed-forward from one piece of assessment to another and between modules. Where appropriate the timing of In-year retrieval and / or reassessment should also be considered.

3.3.2 At this tier, review of module pass rates and distribution of marks should be considered to help inform the consideration of the module assessment strategy, including performance by specific sub-sets of the student body.

3.3.3 The clarity and coherence of each assessment brief should be reviewed to ensure that students are able to identify and follow the requirements of the specific assessment item. Mapping of the assessment brief and assessment criteria to the module intended learning outcomes is essential. Component verification should

3.4.1 Internal verifiers should record the outcome of the process on the

Internal verifiers either confirm that the assessment and

produce an amended or new assessment and/or marking scheme/rubric and the

process of internal verification is repeated.

• University verification template detailing internal verification;

• the previous year’s assessment briefs and outcomes for comparison.

new assessment and the process of external verification is repeated until

satisfactorily completed.

17

overall flow of assessments in the level and so result in the need for Tier 2 coherence to be reconfirmed.

Where possible, it is advised that stepped marking is considered. Stepped marking refers to a restricted grade band marking scheme, where markers may only choose marks representing the upper. middle and lower range of each band, as illustrated in the table below (for levels 3 to 6). For example, in the adequate band must choose between 42%, 45% or 48%.

Stepped marking should make conversations between markers, students and moderators more straightforward. For holistic marking rubrics, the marker will select one mark from the list in the table, and for analytic rubrics (where multiple criteria are assessed separately) each criterion is marked separately, and the overall mark calculated based on the weighting of the different criteria.

19

1.3 Regardless of how the length is specified, it is essential that the nature of this limit and margin of acceptability is detailed in the assessment brief. A clear distinction is required to identify the upper limit of length beyond which work will not be accepted for consideration to derived mark.

1.4 Under no circumstances should there be an arbitrary deduction of marks for excessive length. Rather, the assessor should cease consideration of content at the specified length and award marks only on the basis of work within the stated acceptable upper limit of length.