LG DLHX4072 series Operating instructions

1
CODE OF PRACTICE ON THE ASSESSMENT OF TAUGHT PROGRAMMES
Effective date: March 2016.
The Code of Practice on the Assessment of Taught Programmes applies to all taught
programmes which lead to an award of the University, including validated programmes.
1. General Principles
The University is committed to ensuring that:
-the principles, procedures and processes of assessment are explicit;
-the assessment methods and practices used in programmes are effective in
measuring student attainment of the range of intended learning outcomes,
with due regard to relevant subject benchmark statements, national
qualifications frameworks, and requirements of relevant professional, statutory
and/or regulatory bodies (PSRBs);
-the assessment of programmes is valid, reliable, consistent and fair;
-assessment promotes effective student learning.
2. Dissemination of information and guidance on assessment
Information for students
Information about the University’s assessment regime and appeals procedures is
included in the following publications:
Information provided centrally
Guide to Undergraduate Assessment, Guide to Assessment for Taught
Postgraduate Students and Examination arrangements: what you need to know…
The following information is included in the Guide to Undergraduate/Postgraduate
Assessment or Examination arrangements: what you need to know… or in the case of
Greenlands based programmes the relevant Programme Handbook or the Guide to
sitting exams:
-the periods within which centrally administered examinations are held;
-the University marking and grading conventions;
-procedures in relation to medical and other extenuating circumstances;
-general information on the consequences of assessment (progression/award,
re-examination) and the right of appeal (Senate Standing Committee on
Examination Results and procedures for review of irregularities in relation to
module marks);
-academic misconduct;
-dates and location of publication of results;
-re-examination arrangements.

2
Examinations Office website
The following are available on the Examinations Office website
(http//www.reading.ac.uk/Exams):
-Guide to Undergraduate Assessment/ Guide to Postgraduate Assessment (Taught
Programmes)
-Examination arrangements: what you need to know…
-Code of Practice on the Assessment of Taught Programmes;
-Code of Practice on the External Examining of Taught Programmes;
-University-wide Framework for Classification and Progression for First Degrees, which
inter alia provide descriptors of student attainment in relation to degree
classifications;
-Marking Criteria and Classification Framework for Taught Postgraduate Programmes
-calendar for University examinations (with the exception of Greenlands
programmes);
-information on special arrangements in examinations;
-archive of past examination papers (with the exception of Greenlands
programmes);
-information on appeals procedures.
Student Pages
The Student Pages contain links to key information.
http://www.reading.ac.uk/student/
Module descriptions
Module descriptions provide information on the methods of assessment for
modules, and on the relative contribution of the elements of assessment to the
overall mark or grade for the module.
Programme specifications
Programme specifications provide information on the relative contribution of the
Parts to the overall classification.
Information provided by Schools/Departments
Schools/Departments are required to provide in their Programme Handbooks
information on aspects of assessment, including guidance on good academic
practice and conventions for referencing and citation.
Schools/Departments offering programmes which carry accreditation from a PSRB
are required to provide in Programme Handbooks or elsewhere clear information
about the specific requirements which must be met for progression towards the
professional qualification.
Schools/Departments are required to provide students with advance notice of the
submission dates for coursework for modules for which they are responsible. For
substantial pieces of coursework notice should normally be given at the
beginning of the Part or the Session.

3
A record of the dates for submission of coursework should be held in the relevant
School/Departmental office and be made available to relevant Programme
Directors.
Information for staff
In addition to the codes of practice and the classification frameworks, information
on assessment policy and procedures is available in the University Examination and
Assessment Procedures Handbook, which is available on the Examinations Office
website. Information specific to the programme, School/Department or Faculty is
held in School/Department and/or Faculty Offices. Staff are also advised to refer to
the Examinations Office website.
Information for External Examiners
External Examiners are sent information by the Examinations Office and by the
relevant School/Department(s). The Code of Practice on the External Examining of
Taught Programmes specifies the respective responsibilities of the Examinations
Office and Schools/Departments for providing information.
Information for providers of placements, practice and periods of study abroad
Schools are required to provide sufficient information to providers of placements,
practices and periods of study abroad to enable such providers to fulfil any
responsibilities in respect of assessment.
3. Assessment regimes: approval and enhancement
The University requires that assessment regimes for programmes and modules are
fitted to their purpose, which includes promoting effective student learning and
enabling students to show the extent to which they have met the intended
learning outcomes of the modules or programmes. The University’s procedures
for programme approval include consideration of the assessment regime’s fitness
for purpose, and its effectiveness in measuring student attainment of intended
learning outcomes and in promoting student learning (Approval of a new
programme, Guide to Policy and Procedures for Teaching and Learning, Section 5c).
The University requires that assessment regimes are reviewed in the periodic
review of programmes on a six-year cycle, and are also considered in the annual
programme report process. In these processes, consideration is given to the
requirements of PSRBs, where relevant.
The periodic review of programmes incorporates student evaluation of
programmes, including assessment and feedback.
Module providers, in consultation with Boards of Studies, should give due
consideration to assessment criteria and their communication to students, and to

4
deadlines for submission of major pieces of assessed coursework and for dates for
feedback.
Schools are required to ensure that staff-student liaison committees include
consideration of assessment matters in their business at least once in their annual
cycle, and that they have the opportunity to consider relevant External
Examiners’ Reports.
In those cases where an External Examiner meets informally with students to
discuss programmes, External Examiners are encouraged to discuss with them
matters of assessment and feedback.
Such arrangements as may be approved by the Faculty Board for Teaching and
Learning shall apply to the assessment of work placements or periods of study
abroad.
Information about the assessment regime is included in the relevant programme
specification and module description, as appropriate, and in the Programme
Handbook (or supplement) or the relevant website.
The University’s Centre for Quality Support and Development (CQSD) provides
access to expertise and materials which support staff in reflecting on appropriate
methods of assessment and feedback. CQSD offers sessions on assessment and
feedback, and these matters are also addressed in the development programme
for new lecturers.
Participation
Participation in class is an important part of learning, and, under the Statement of
Learner Responsibilities agreed by UBTL at its meeting of 3 May 2011, students are
required to participate appropriately in all classes.
In approving an assessment regime for a module, Boards of Studies may identify
participation as a distinct component of assessment and assign a proportion of the
module mark to this component. Any contribution to the module mark related to
participation should be specified in the module description and students should be
reminded of this at the commencement of the module. Only in exceptional
circumstances may a minimum level of participation required over the Part be
specified separately as a condition for progression.
4. Appointment of External and Internal Examiners
Heads of School are responsible for nominating at the beginning of each Session
External and Internal Examiners for degree, diploma and certificate programmes
within their School. The University requires that an External Examiner is
appointed for every programme which leads to an award of the University
(including franchised or validated programmes). An External Examiner is not
required for those Parts of a degree which do not contribute to a final award. (It
should be noted that, in the post-2002 programme structure, all Parts of the
undergraduate programme contribute to an award.) The University’s Code of
Practice on the External Examining of Taught Programmes specifies the University’s
policies on external examining.

5
Any potential conflict of interest must be declared to the Head of School or Dean.
The University does not permit any member of staff who is in an intimate
relationship with a student to be directly professionally involved in assessing or
examining that student. Provisions relating to such cases are included in the
University Examination and Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 5.
Guidance on procedures for nominating and approving Examiners is contained in
the University Examination and Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 5.
5. Conduct of assessment
Provision of details of University Examinations and registration of students for
examinations
Examination Representatives are responsible for submitting to the Examinations
Officer details of University Examinations which they wish to be held during the
Session. In respect of modularised programmes, Examination Representatives are
responsible for confirming the registration of students for examinations for
modules offered by their School/Department. In respect of non-modularised
programmes, Examination Representatives are responsible for registering all
students on programmes within their School/Department for all their
examinations (including papers set by other Schools/Departments). Detailed
information on these procedures is included in the Examinations and Assessment
Procedures Handbook, Section 8.
Setting University examination papers
Internal Examiners are responsible for scrutinising and approving internally
papers for University Examinations. University Examination papers for an
assessment contributing to an award shall also be scrutinised and approved by the
External Examiner(s). University Examination papers for an assessment not
contributing to an award are not subject to scrutiny by the External Examiner(s).
All University Examination papers must be proof-read by at least two members of
academic staff, including the person who had primary responsibility for drafting
the paper. The format of University Examination papers shall conform with the
Guidelines for the Preparation of University Examination Papers (included in the
Examinations and Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 7), with the exception of
Greenlands based programmes. The Examination Representative is responsible
for submitting by a specified date camera-ready proofs of examination papers to
the University Examinations Officer for printing.
Please see the section below on Examinations and in-class tests held in
Schools/Departments for further details relating to the setting and conduct of in-class
tests.
Conduct of University Examinations
The Chief Invigilator for an examination centre shall be responsible for the
conduct of examinations held in the centre. The Chief Invigilator’s
responsibilities include ensuring that examination rooms are properly prepared in
advance of examinations, that examinations start and finish at the appointed
times, that examinations are properly invigilated, that correct procedures are
followed in cases of suspected misconduct, that scripts are collected at the end of

6
the examination and dispatched to the nominated recipient. The Chief Invigilator
is responsible for providing with the script relevant information if the
examination was held under abnormal conditions or was subject to special
provisions.
University examinations shall normally be invigilated either by members of
academic staff or by external invigilators, approved by the Examinations Officer.
All invigilators shall be issued with guidelines/instructions.
Schools/Departments are required to ensure that a nominated member of
academic staff with responsibility for the paper can be contacted by phone for the
first hour of an examination. Contact details should be provided to the
Examinations Officer in cases where the member of staff cannot be readily
contacted through the School/Departmental office.
No candidate shall be permitted to enter the examination room more than half an
hour after the beginning of the examination, and no candidate shall be permitted
to leave the examination room until after the expiration of half an hour from the
beginning or in the last half hour of an examination.
Candidates are required to place their campus card or University access card on
the desk in written examinations for inspection by the Invigilator.
The Chief Operating Officer (or his representative) and the Chief Invigilator shall
have the power to exclude from the examination room any candidate using unfair
means in an examination and any candidate failing to conduct himself or herself
with propriety in the examination room.
Language of assessment
In respect of taught programmes, the language of assessment will be English
(except in the case of programmes involving modern languages or British Sign
Language, where teaching and assessment may be conducted in either English or
the relevant modern language/British Sign Language at the discretion of the
School). Any proposed variation from this convention requires the explicit
approval of the University Board for Teaching and Learning.
Use of dictionaries and calculators in University examinations
Dictionaries
Candidates may only take a dictionary into a University examination where
written permission has been given by the School/Department responsible for the
paper. Information on procedures to be followed in such cases is included in the
Examinations and Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 11, and in Examination
arrangements: what you need to know.
Calculators
As a general university policy and subject to such exceptions as
Schools/Departments may specify, non-programmable scientific calculators are
normally permitted in examinations, but programmable permanent-memory
calculators are not normally permitted in examinations. Detailed information on

7
these provisions is included in the Examinations and Assessment Procedures Handbook,
Section 11, and in Examination arrangements: what you need to know.
Special arrangements in University examinations
Provision for students with specific learning difficulties
Students who have been assessed as having specific learning difficulties may
apply for special arrangements in examinations. Such arrangements include
extra time in examinations and special consideration in marking (for example, no
penalties given for poor spelling, grammar or punctuation in written
examinations; or sympathetic consideration given to poor organisation and
structure in written examinations). Students who believe that they may have
specific learning difficulties should consult their Personal Tutor or the Disability
Advisory Service in the first instance. Details of procedures in respect of
examinations for students with specific learning difficulties are provided in the
Examinations and Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 12 and on the
Examinations Office website.
Special arrangements for examinations in respect of illness, disability and other circumstances
Special arrangements may be made for students who are ill at the time of their
examinations, who have a disability, or who, for good reason, are unable to sit an
examination at the specified time. Details of such arrangements are included in
the Examinations and Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 12 and on the
Examinations Office website.
Examinations and in-class tests held in Schools/Departments
Where examinations or in-class tests (for summative assessment) are held in a
School/Department, the School/Department is required to ensure that the
examinations or in-class tests are held under conditions which are closely
comparable to those of University examinations. Guidance on examinations and
in-class tests held in Schools/Departments is included in the Examinations and
Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 13.
External Examiners are required to monitor the questions and tasks set in respect
of in-class tests in order to ensure the reliability and validity of the assessment.
Responsibility for support and administration associated with in-class tests lies
with the School/Department and not with the Examinations Office.
Examinations held overseas
Examinations may not be sat overseas except in the most exceptional
circumstances (for example, in cases of serious illness or bereavement in respect
of an immediate family member). Permission for an examination to be held
overseas may be requested only by the School Director of Teaching and Learning
responsible for the programme, in consultation with the University’s
Examinations Officer, and may only be granted by the relevant Teaching and
Learning Dean. Students wishing to sit a University Examination overseas are
required to apply to the School Director of Teaching and Learning or the
University Examinations Officer. The University’s distance-learning programmes
and certain part-time Masters programmes are excluded from this proscription.
See Examinations and Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 14.

8
Procedures for submission of coursework
Students, when submitting a major piece of coursework, are required to append to
their work a signed statement confirming that the work is their own. The
minimum information to be included in the statement of original authorship is
specified in the Examinations and Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 15.
Schools/Departments are required to include the definition of plagiarism in
Programme Handbooks and it is particularly recommended that they remind
students of the definition of plagiarism and its consequences at those times when
students are preparing major pieces of coursework.
It is recommended that Schools/Departments normally issue the form for the
statement of original authorship, at the latest, when the piece of work is set
(rather than when it is submitted) in order that students might be reminded of
good academic practice and the meaning and consequences of plagiarism before
they embark on a piece of work.
Schools/Departments are normally required to issue to students, through
School/Departmental offices, a signed, dated, and (where appropriate) timed
receipt slip in acknowledgement of the submission of dissertations and major
pieces of coursework. Schools/Departments are strongly encouraged to issue
similar receipts for other pieces of coursework.
Editorial and proof-reading services
The University’s policy in relation to students’ use of editorial and proof-reading
services is available in the Guide to Undergraduate Assessment, the Guide to Assessment
for Taught Postgraduate Students, and the Examinations and Assessment Procedures
Handbook, Section 15.
6. Extensions to deadlines for submission of assessed coursework and the
penalties for late submission of assessed coursework
Work for formative assessment (i.e. work which does not contribute to a result)
Work for formative assessment is submitted so that the student can benefit from
feedback. Submitting such work late is discourteous and disrupts the plans staff
will have made in allocating time to provide the feedback. The penalty for late
submission, therefore, is forfeiting any right to feedback. Students may approach
the member of staff who would normally read and comment on the work in
order to apologise, present excuses and request feedback. It is entirely up to the
member of staff to agree or not, and, if agreeable, to determine the time when
such feedback will be given.
Work for summative assessment
(a) Extensions and remission
Students may request extensions in advance in accordance with the University’s
extenuating circumstances procedures (see Examinations and Assessment Handbook,
section 18). If a student wishes to request an extension, he or she must do so in
advance of the deadline for submission of the relevant work. If an extension is

9
granted and the work submitted by the revised deadline no penalty will be
applied. Extensions will only be granted for good reason.
Through the extenuating circumstances procedures, students may request
removal of a penalty imposed for late submission of work. Such a penalty will
only be removed for very good reason.
Requests for extension or removal of a penalty for late submission should be
made on the University’s Extenuating Circumstances Form, which should be
submitted to the School Office of the School which ‘owns’ the student’s
programme. The Extenuating Circumstances Form is available on the web at
http://www.reading.ac.uk/internal/exams/student/exa-circumstances.aspx.
While it is stressed that an extension will only be granted (or a penalty for late
submission removed) for good reason, it is also recognised that where a proper
reason exists an extension or request for removal of a penalty will not be refused
unreasonably.
Decisions on extensions and removal of penalties for late submission, as with
decisions on other extenuating circumstances procedures, will be made by the
Senior Tutor of the School which ‘owns’ the student’s programme, or a person
nominated by the Senior Tutor. In the case of requests for extensions in respect
of modules which are ‘owned’ by another School, the Senior Tutor of the School
‘owning’ the student’s programme remains responsible for the decision, but
should consult the Senior Tutor of the School ‘owning’ the module prior to a
decision.
Extensions and removal of penalties for late submission should be recorded by
the School responsible for the student’s programme, which must inform the
School owning the module in respect of which the extension has been granted.
Any student requiring more than two extensions and/or remissions in one year
should be seen by the Senior Tutor and appropriate advice given or suitable
action taken.
(b) Penalties for late submission
The Module Convener will apply the following penalties for work submitted late:
•where the piece of work is submitted after the original deadline (or any
formally agreed extension to the deadline): 10% of the total marks available
for that piece of work will be deducted from the mark for each working day
(or part thereof) following the deadline up to a total of five working days;
•where the piece of work is submitted more than five working days after the
original deadline (or any formally agreed extension to the deadline): a mark of
zero will be recorded.
Details of variants from the standard penalty, special provisions relating to
submission of coursework for exhibitions in the Department of Fine Art and the
Department of Typography and Graphic Communication, and additional guidance
for staff and students are available in the Guide to Policies and Procedures for
Teaching and Learning (section 6l).

10
LJF/EO291111
http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/FILES/qualitysupport/penaltiesforlatesubmission.pdf
Students are informed in the Guide to Undergraduate Assessment/Guide to Postgraduate
Assessment (Taught Programmes) that it is advisable to submit work in an unfinished
state rather than to fail to submit any work.
7. Academic Misconduct
The Senate has agreed the following statement in respect of academic
misconduct:
‘Cheating, which is the attempt to gain an advantage for oneself or another by
deceit, and other misconduct are breaches of discipline under the University’s
Regulations for Conduct 16, and are punishable by a range of sanctions.
(a) Cheating in assessed coursework (for example, dissertations, long essays or
projects) and open book examinations includes, but is not restricted to:
(i) Plagiarism
For the purposes of these regulations, plagiarism is defined as the
fraudulent representation of another’s work as one’s own. This applies
whatever the source of the material (for example, a published source,
the web, or the work of another student), whether the material is
copied word for word or paraphrased, and whatever the extent of the
material used. Wilful and deliberate disregard for good academic
practice in respect of attribution of material will be construed as
plagiarism.
[Please note that programme handbooks normally provide discipline-
specific advice on the appropriate use and attribution of source
material]
(ii) Taking a copy of another student’s work without his or her permission
(whether or not this work is subsequently plagiarised).
(iii) Reproduction of work assessed elsewhere
Unless otherwise stated, it is not permissible for a piece of work
submitted for assessment to include substantial sections which are
drawn from another piece of work submitted for a qualification,
whether of this University or another awarding body. In the case of
assessments where the incorporation of work from another assessment
is permitted, the relevant School will inform students accordingly. Any
material in an assignment which has been drawn from another piece of
work submitted for a qualification should be clearly indicated with a
reference to the assessment and qualification for which the material
was previously submitted.
(iv) Falsifying data, evidence, or experimental results.

11
(v) Collusion: acting with another student with the intention to deceive.
(b) Cheating and other academic misconduct in written examinations
(including in-class tests and examinations administered by a
School/Department) include, but are not restricted to:
(i) Taking into the examination hall, or possessing while in the
examination hall, any books, memoranda, notes or other similar
material (including material held electronically) except that students are
permitted to deposit such material in an area designated by the
invigilator prior to the start of the examination. Material which has
been supplied by the invigilator or authorised by the Examiners is
exempt from this proscription.*
(ii) Taking into the examination hall or possessing while in the
examination hall any device which permits communication with others
or receipt of communication from others or receipt of information;*
(iii) Copying from, consulting or otherwise making use of another
candidate’s script; or attempting to copy from, consult or otherwise
make use of another candidate’s script;
(iv) Improperly aiding or attempting to aid another candidate, or
improperly obtaining or attempting to obtain aid from any person;
(v) Consulting or attempting to consult, any books, memoranda, notes or
any other similar material (including material held electronically) while
present in the examination hall during the period of the examination;*
(vi) Impersonating or attempting to impersonate another candidate or being
knowingly impersonated.
* Please note: For the purposes of these regulations, ‘examination hall’
includes the examination room, the toilets and any other areas to which
candidates have access during the examination.
(c) Other misconduct in written examinations
Candidates are not allowed under any circumstances to talk to each other
or to behave in a manner likely to disturb or distract other candidates
during an examination.
Candidates are not permitted to smoke in the exam room. Candidates
are not permitted to eat in the exam room and are permitted to drink
still water only, except where a specific alternative arrangement has
been agreed in respect of eating and/or drinking in the exam room,
which would normally be on the grounds of health or wellbeing.
Candidates are not permitted to have a pencil case or other container in
the vicinity of their examination desk, unless the pencil case or container
is transparent.
It is forbidden to remove an examination script or a part of an
examination script from the examination room.

12
Candidates are not allowed to leave the examination before it has finished
without the permission of the invigilator or to leave the examination room
temporarily for any purpose without the permission of the invigilator.
Invigilators are authorised to instruct candidates who are talking or
behaving in a disruptive manner to leave the room. Invigilators will report
candidates whose conduct appears to constitute cheating.
It is an offence to disregard a legitimate instruction given by an invigilator.
Candidates failing to comply with such instructions will be liable to
disciplinary action.
The statement also explains the range of penalties available in cases of academic
misconduct. The University’s full definition of academic misconduct is available
on the Examinations Office website and the procedures for considering cases of
academic misconduct are contained in the Examinations and Assessment Procedures
Handbook, section 19.
Programme Handbooks include guidance on good academic practice, including
advice on referencing and on avoiding practices which may render a student
liable to suspicion of plagiarism.
8. Marking and moderation of assessments
Marking
Marking shall be carried out by appropriately qualified and properly appointed
persons. It should be noted that peer assessment may be used for formative
purposes and a marker’s determination of a formal mark may be informed by
peer marking.
Anonymous marking
It is a requirement, in respect of all written examinations whether administered
centrally or by a Department, that scripts remain anonymous until marking has
been completed.
Wherever practicable and appropriate, coursework and in-class tests should
remain anonymous to the marker until marking has been completed.
Schools/Departments are responsible for determining whether anonymous
marking is practicable and appropriate in relation to coursework and in-class tests
in their modules. Where a School has agreed that anonymisation of
coursework/in-class tests is not practicable and appropriate, the School should
consider enhancing the moderation process for coursework/in-class tests and must
ensure that the extent of the moderation carried out is clearly documented.
Unless it is impossible, candidates should be anonymous during the moderation
process.
Criteria for marking and grading
Generic assessment criteria relating to mark ranges and classifications for first
degrees across the University are provided in the University-wide Framework for

13
Classification and Progression for First Degrees for the appropriate cohort.
Generic assessment criteria relating to mark ranges and classifications for taught
postgraduate programmes are provided in the Marking Criteria and Classification
Framework for Taught Postgraduate Programmes for the appropriate cohort.
Students should be informed, and periodically reminded, of the generic
assessment criteria relevant to their degree. It is often appropriate that students
are advised, at the time when the work is set, of more detailed assessment criteria
which are relevant to the specific piece of work. In some cases, detailed criteria
which are made known beforehand help students direct their learning and
therefore are an aid to the teaching and learning process. In other cases, detailed,
highly determined criteria may discourage diversity and innovation, and may
therefore be inappropriate. It is important that students are informed of the
assessment criteria which are relevant to the work which they are undertaking;
and, where distinct criteria apply to different pieces of work, the relevant criteria
should be clearly stated.
Schools should seek to enhance students’ awareness of, and engagement with,
the generic assessment criteria which underpin their degree, and to promote
their understanding of those qualities which are valued. Schools should consider
how this might best be achieved in respect of their students. Experience suggests
that an activity or exercise which requires students to engage critically with
assessment criteria is more effective than providing a written explanation or
discussing the criteria in a lecture.
The University provides guidance on the use of the criteria in the Guide to Policy
and Procedures for Teaching and Learning (Section 6c).
The use of assessment criteria and their effective communication to students are
considered in periodic review of teaching.
Moderation
The following procedures for internal and external moderation apply:
Internal Moderation
All marking which counts towards a formal mark for awarding or progression
should be moderated appropriately internally. Such moderation should be
sufficient to give reasonable assurance that the marking is accurate to common
standards applied to shared understandings of the criteria. In terms of the
investment of staff effort, the moderation process should be commensurate with
the weight of the assessment task and the size of the cohort.
Double marking of the whole cohort is a suitable method of moderation for
cohorts of eight or fewer, for work which is automatically marked by a panel of
two or more assessors or for assessed work of sufficient weight and significance to
warrant the workload (some major final part dissertations, for example).
Otherwise, where possible, moderation of a sample should be arranged. The
sample should contain a meaningful proportion of the total candidates, but it is
suggested that a minimum of eight candidates might in most cases be appropriate
with

14
•at least one exemplar of each class for which marks are given (nearest to the
midpoint of the mark range for the class)
•all borderline candidates (see section 7.5.1 of the Framework for Classification and
Progression)
•all failed candidates
•sufficient first class or distinction candidates to illustrate the range from
lowest First Class/Distinction mark given to highest
•any individual candidates the first marker finds significant difficulty in
marking.
Unless it is impossible, the marking, selection of the sample and moderating
should be made while the candidates remain anonymous.
Where double-marking of a sample is not possible, some other form of
moderation should take place, subject to the two conditions of being sufficient for
and commensurate with the assessment task. See the Framework for Classification
and Progression for First Degrees, section 5.1 for examples of alternative forms of
moderation.
All marks which are arrived at through addition of subsidiary marks (a total from
a mark scheme, a (possibly weighted) average of minor assessments, etc) should
have the arithmetic checked by a designated person, who could be a suitable
member of the administrative or support staff.
If more than two markers are involved in marking an assessment, appropriate
arrangements for moderation across the cadre of markers should be agreed in
advance and a report on the outcomes and process provided to the relevant
School Director of Teaching and Learning and made available to the External
Examiner responsible for the module.
For each assessment, the Module Convenor (in collaboration with the relevant
Programme Director, where appropriate) shall propose a suitable method of
moderation to be approved by the School Director of Teaching and Learning who
will report on moderation processes to the External Examiners. The External
Examiners have the right to comment on and suggest changes to moderation
processes.
The outcome of moderation should normally be that a single, internally agreed
mark for each module is recommended to the External Examiners. The
moderation process must be adequately documented: a record must be kept in
respect of each module indicating:
•the pieces of work which have been moderated internally and those which
have been moderated externally
•how moderation was undertaken
•any action taken as a result of moderation
•the rationale for those actions
•(in the case of internal moderation only) confirmation that the full range
of first class/distinction marks has been used, where appropriate

15
Where a piece of work has been referred to a third marker, following an
irreconcilable difference between the first and second markers, the third marker
should prepare a brief report on the resolution of the mark.
Records of internal moderation must be made available to the External Examiner.
External Moderation
The University requires that the standard and consistency of the marking of
assessments which contribute directly to an award be confirmed by the
appropriate External Examiners.
External Examiners have the right of access to all assessed work which
contributes to an award. In practice, in most cases they will necessarily
concentrate on a sample of assessed work. The School Director of Teaching and
Learning or a member of staff designated by the Head of School/Department (for
example, a Programme Director) should seek the agreement of the External
Examiners as to how the sample is selected, bearing in mind that, in the first
instance, the same principles as for internal moderation should determine the
selection of the sample, but that, in the case of external moderation,
consideration should be given to candidates’ profile of marks and indicative
overall classification as well as to marks for individual modules.
In considering candidates’ profile of marks and indicative overall classification,
External Examiners may wish to give consideration to: (a) those candidates who
fall within the borderline and who fail marginally to fulfil one or other of the
criteria for promotion; (b) those who fall marginally short of the threshold overall
average which qualifies for inclusion in the borderline and who have fulfilled one
or other of the criteria for promotion; and (c) candidates whose profile is marginal
and sufficiently unusual to give rise to concerns about the security of the implied
classification. Statistics from previous Sessions indicate that the numbers of
students who fall within these categories for any programme will be small.
For the Part 1 Examination, External Examiners would be expected to consider a
sample which allows them to moderate the full range of marks, and to attend
particularly to the pass/fail borderline and the borderline at the 30% threshold. It
is expected that the sample may be smaller than the samples for the Part 2 and
Part 3/4/Final Examination.
The School Director of Teaching and Learning (or other designated member of
staff) should seek to establish whether External Examiners wish for access to
assessed work which might not be readily available (e.g. coursework), and should
make appropriate arrangements to accommodate such requests.
External Examiners are asked to comment on the monitoring of assessment, and
explicitly to report that moderation procedures are satisfactory.
Further information on the requirements for moderation by External Examiners
is contained in the Code of Practice on the External Examining of Taught Programmes.
Verification and submission of marks
Markers, or, where appropriate, the module convenors, are responsible for
checking that the marks submitted to the School/Departmental Examination

16
Representative are an accurate record of the recommended marks. The
Examination Representative is responsible for ensuring that marks for each
module are reported accurately to Programme Examiners’ Meetings and, in
accordance with a published schedule of dates, to the Examinations Officer, as
appropriate. Those responsible for producing papers for an Examiners’ Meeting,
whether a School/Department or the Examinations Office, are required to check
the accuracy of aggregate marks and the averages.
Retention of examination scripts and coursework
Examination scripts are normally retained for a period of two years after the
examination has been sat.
Schools are responsible for making reasonable provision to enable Examiners or
the Senate Standing Committee on Examination Results to have access to
coursework which contributes to classification. Schools may wish to retain copies
of coursework. Alternatively, Schools may wish to inform students that each
student is responsible for retaining the marked copies of his/her coursework
contributing to classification and for ensuring that such coursework is available
for return to the School on request, and that failure to return coursework on
request may be detrimental to their classification or review of result.
9. Feedback to students
The University Board for Teaching and Learning has approved (January 2013,
revised February 2016) a policy statement related to student feedback.
The policy is that across all undergraduate and taught postgraduate programmes,
the standard turnaround time for individual feedback and marks on coursework
(formative and summative) and in-class tests (for summative assessment) is a
maximum of fifteen working days from the deadline for submission/date of the
in-class test. The policy applies equally to work from full-time and part-time
students, and to full-time, part-time and sessional staff.
Characteristics of high quality feedback include being well considered, varied in
nature, consistent in standard, integrated into the wider module, constructive,
personal and user-friendly.
Some assessments may be exempt from the fifteen working day turnaround time
feedback policy. The following assessments are exempt, subject to the proviso
that work submitted in the Summer Term of the Final Part should be returned
prior to graduation:
•Dissertations
•Final year projects (normally 40 credits in weight)
Schools must ensure that, if sought, feedback on performance in written
examinations is available to students. The School is responsible for determining
the nature and extent of feedback which is appropriate to the circumstances,
subject to the proviso that students who are resitting a module are entitled to

17
guidance on their performance in the written examination for the relevant
module which identifies the strengths and weaknesses of their performance and
indicates how they might improve their performance. In the case of students
who are not resitting, more generic feedback, which does not address the
individual case, may be appropriate.
A student does not have an entitlement to have access to his or her examination
scripts. A module convenor or appropriate member of academic staff may permit
a student sight of his or her script in order to discuss examination performance.
It is not expected that students would routinely be permitted access to their
scripts. The student is not permitted to remove the script from the School.
The full policy is available in the University’s Guide to Policy and Procedures for
Teaching and Learning (Section 6c).
http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/FILES/qualitysupport/Policy_on_providing_feedback
_to_students_on_their_performance.pdf
Students are informed of the marks for each module at the end of each Part and
receive a diploma supplement or transcript at the end of their programme.
10. Results
Undergraduate and Integrated Masters (M) programmes
Results for first degrees
Marking criteria for results for first degrees are contained in the University-wide
Framework for Classification and Progression for First Degrees applicable to the relevant
cohort.
The relevant Awarding Method for First Degrees is specified in the University-wide
Framework for Classification and Progression for First Degrees applicable to the relevant
cohort.
Degrees with Honours may be awarded with the following classifications:
First Class
Second Class Division 1
Second Class Division 2
Third Class
A Pass degree may be awarded.
Candidates who have failed to fulfil the requirements for a Pass degree shall be
stated to have Failed.
In the case of Ordinary degrees, the results available are Passed and Failed.
Results for Parts 1 and 2

18
The standard rules for progression from Part 1 to Part 2, and from Part 2 to Part 3,
in the post-2002 programme structure are specified in the University-wide
Framework for Classification and Progression for First Degrees. The available results are:
Failed A candidate who has failed to achieve a threshold performance shall be
stated to have failed.
Not qualified A candidate who (i) has achieved a threshold performance at Part 1
or Part 2 but who has not fulfilled a programme-specific requirement, or (ii) in the
case of a candidate registered for Part 2 of an M programme, has achieved a
threshold performance at Part 2 and has either not achieved an overall average of
50% at Part 2 or not fulfilled a programme specific rule, shall be stated to have not
qualified to proceed; such a candidate may be eligible for the award of a
Certificate or Diploma of Higher Education.
Passed A candidate who has achieved a threshold performance at Part 1 or Part 2
and all relevant programme-specific requirements for progression and, if
following Part 2 of an M programme, has achieved an overall average of 50% shall
be stated to have passed; such a candidate may be eligible for the award of a
Certificate or Diploma of Higher Education.
Results for Diploma and Certificate of Higher Education
Candidates are stated to have Passed or Failed. The result Passed with Distinction
is available in a limited number of Diploma and Certificate of Higher Education
programmes, where explicit provision is made in the relevant Ordinance.
Results for Foundation degrees
Candidates are stated to have Passed or Failed. The results Passed with Distinction
or Passed with Merit are available to a limited number of Foundation degree
programmes, where explicit provision is made in the relevant Ordinance.
Results for taught postgraduate and post-experience awards
Generic marking criteria and the classification framework for taught postgraduate
programmes are provided in Marking Criteria and Classification Framework for Taught
Postgraduate Programmes applicable to the relevant cohort.
Masters programmes: Candidates are stated to have Passed with Distinction,
Passed with Merit, Passed, or Failed (with or without eligibility for a lesser award).
Postgraduate Diplomas and Certificates, Post-experience Diplomas and
Certificates: Candidates are stated to have Passed with Distinction, Passed, Passed
with Merit, or Failed, as provided for in the relevant Ordinance and awards
framework.
It should be noted that Examiners for taught postgraduate programmes are
required to assess a dissertation as submitted. It is not permitted to refer a
dissertation for amendment or agree a result subject to the amendment of the
dissertation.

19
Other results (available at undergraduate and postgraduate level)
An Aegrotat degree may be awarded to a candidate who is prevented by reason of
illness from completing the assessment for a degree, subject to the provisions of
Ordinance X.
A candidate may at the discretion of the Faculty Examiners be deemed not to have
sat the examination if the candidate has been prevented from sitting the
examination by illness or other good cause or if the candidate’s performance in
the examination has been significantly affected by illness or other serious
personal circumstance.
No recommendation shall be submitted to the Senate in respect of a candidate
who has an outstanding tuition debt to the University.
Where a result is not yet available for a candidate, this shall be stated on the
results list.
11. Programme and Faculty Examiners’ Meetings
Programme Examiners’ Meeting
Powers
In respect of undergraduate Final Examinations and postgraduate Examinations
-to recommend for submission to the Faculty Examiners’ Meeting results in
respect of the programmes within their purview
-to consider, through its Special Cases Sub-Committee, mitigating
circumstances and, on the basis of evidence of mitigating circumstances, to
exercise discretion in determining a result or mark or to recommend to the
Faculty Examiners that a candidate be deemed not to have sat.
In respect of undergraduate Part 1 and Part 2 examinations
-to consider, through its Special Cases Sub-Committee, in accordance with the
University’s procedures, extenuating circumstances which have been referred
to it, and, on the basis of evidence of extenuating circumstances, to determine
whether a module mark be calculated on a variant of the normal method. (It
should be noted that the Faculty Examiners are responsible for deeming a
student not to have sat.)
Membership
The membership of the Programme Examiners’ Meeting comprises the Internal
Examiners (from among whom the Heads of the relevant Schools/Departments
should appoint a Chair), the Programme Director, the School Director of Teaching
and Learning and, where appropriate, the External Examiners for the programme.
External Examiners are members of those Examiners’ Meetings responsible for
making recommendations in respect of awards.

20
Markers and personal tutors have the right to attend and to participate fully in
the consideration of marks and results, and should be encouraged to do so.
Quorum
A Programme Examiners’ Meeting shall normally be deemed inquorate if fewer
than half the nominated Internal Examiners are present. Exceptionally, with the
agreement of the Chair, an alternate may attend in place of an Internal Examiner.
In the event that a Meeting is inquorate, the Meeting should be postponed and
reconvened at the earliest opportunity. In the event of postponement due to
inquoracy, the Dean of the relevant Faculty and the University Examinations
Officer should be informed immediately.
External Examiners are normally required to attend the Programme Examiners’
Meeting which considers results of students. In the case of Masters programmes
with small numbers of students, the Chair of the relevant Examiners’ Meeting
may exceptionally agree that External Examiners convey their views to the
Examiners’ Meeting by correspondence, provided they are available for
consultation by telephone or email. In the case of the unavoidable absence of an
External Examiner, the Chair of the relevant Examiners’ Meeting may
exceptionally agree that External Examiners convey their views to the
Examiners’ Meeting by correspondence, or email.
Procedures
Advance notice of a Programme Examiners’ Meeting should be given to those
with a right to attend.
Information presented to the meeting and all discussion of candidates and results
is strictly confidential to the meeting and to those officers of the University who
have good reason to be provided with such information.
Examiners and those attending the Meeting are required to disclose to the
Meeting any conflict of interest. It should be noted that the University does not
permit any member of staff who is in an intimate relationship with a student to
be directly professionally involved in assessing or examining that student.
Provisions relating to such cases are included in the University Examination and
Assessment Procedures Handbook, Section 5.
The meeting is required to appoint a Special Cases Sub-Committee to consider
evidence submitted in respect of candidates’ special circumstances. The Special
Cases Sub-Committee shall act in accordance with the ‘Policy on and procedures
relating to extenuating circumstances’, which can be found on the Exams Office
website.
The following documentation should be available to the meeting: the University-
wide Framework for Classification and Progression for First Degrees, and/or the Marking
Criteria and Classification Framework for Taught Postgraduate Programmes, the relevant
programme-specific classification conventions, marks lists, a report from the
Special Cases Sub-Committee on candidates considered in relation to medical and
other special circumstances, and a record of candidates, who, on account of
specific learning difficulties (e.g. dyslexia), have been recommended to receive