Chairing Boards of Examiners and Panels of Examiners BEEC Academic Practice workshop January 2016 Dr...

Chairing Boards of Examiners and Panels of Examiners

BEEC Academic Practice workshopJanuary 2016

Dr Sandra Naylor(Vice-Dean Education, CHLS)

Ruaidhri Donnelly(Head of Q&SA)

Brunel University London 2

Session contents

• Roles of Chairs

• Recent developments

• Assessment processes

• Panels of Examiners

• Boards of Examiners

• Progression and Award rules

• Questions


ROLES OF CHAIRS


Key messages

• Responsibility – awarding degrees on behalf of the University, reporting directly to Senate.

• Understanding – to ensure processes run smoothly

• Regulations – SR4 governs Assessment, Panels, Boards, Mitigating Circumstances and External Examiners. All chairs should be familiar with this.

• Make use of support – from Programme Leads and Administrators; VCRs, Q&S and TAG;

• Further guidance and resources – see

www.brunel.ac.uk/about/quality-assurance/assessment


http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/quality-assurance/assessment


Panels and Boards of Examiners – overall role

Common purpose is to ensure:

• Fairness to all students and each student

• Rigour of assessment

• Robustness of the results and decisions

• Maintenance of academic standards

Different types of decision-making:

• Panels are where collective academic judgement is exercised

• Boards confirm that processes have been appropriately carried out, and make decisions on things like reassessment – but extraordinary academic judgements may also be needed


Brunel University London

• Appointments made by Deans on behalf of Senate (don’t make local changes without informing Deans and Q&S/TAG). Also Deputy Chair as backup

• Board appointments are for the full year – and preferable to have continuity over a term of several years.

• Role induction – Liaise with Programme Teams early on

Introduce yourself to relevant Administrator(s) – they are vital to smooth running, you (and Programme Lead) should be confident in them

New Chairs can ask to shadow a well-established straightforward Board elsewhere

Q&S and TAG can also support Chairs and Administrators

Appointment of Chairs

Chairing Boards of Examiners and Panels of Examiners 6


What is a Panel or Board Chair for?

• Ensuring Panel or Board processes (and post-processes!) are properly executed in accordance with Senate Regulations and other policies

• Also taking Chair’s Action where necessary



Pre-meetings ahead of Panels of Examiners

Chair of PoE, PoE Administrator and Programme Lead are encouraged to meet together ahead of Panels to ensure –

• Meeting deadlines

• Confirming completion of marking and moderation processes (inc. adherence to the agreed marking criteria)

• Confirming completion and accuracy of mark/grade input

• Preparation and checking of Panel paperwork

• Expected attendance (quoracy) at main Panels



Pre-meetings ahead of Boards of Examiners

Chair of BoE, BoE Administrator and VCR (plus Programme Leads where possible) should meet a day or two before the Board to –

• Resolve any issues arising following Panel confirmation

• Review SITS paperwork and any issues arising

This is strongly recommended practice. Sufficient time must be allowed between Panel and Board to allow problems to be resolved.



Chair’s Action

The Chair may need to take decisions on behalf of the Panel or Board when a matter cannot wait until the next meeting. Two types of Chair’s Action:

• Pre-sanctioned – where a meeting of the Panel or Board knows that a Chair will (later) need to make a decision on an issue being discussed now. Normally define bounds (e.g. if X then take action Y, or else action Z).

• Impromptu – where an issue arises that needs to be addressed urgently prior to the next Panel or Board meeting. Chairs must act in good faith on behalf of the Panel or Board following the precedents and general approaches of that body in order to ensure consistency and equity of treatment.

Ensure that all Chair’s Actions are properly recorded on standard Chair’s Action paperwork (for action on SITS), and reported to the following meeting of the Panel or Board.


http://www.brunel.ac.uk/__data/assets/word_doc/0008/385109/Chairs-Action-Proforma.docx



RECENT DEVELOPMENTS


SR4 updates – constitution of Boards

SR4.58 requires that –

• Chairs of Boards must now be independent of the delivery of the programme

• A quorate Board of Examiners must have representation from: Chair of Board [if Deputy Chair steps in at Board, they fulfil this]

Chair or Deputy Chair of all relevant Panels

Representative from MCs Panel (normally MC Panel Chair)

Relevant Programme or Course Directors

One or more External Examiners

A Vice-Chancellor’s Representative (VCR), if awards are to be made



SR4 updates – other small adjustments

• SR4.4 clarifies Panel of Examiners’ responsibilities for approving summative assessment (including to involve External Examiners)

• SR4.6 requires that summative assessment of group work must allow assessment of each individual student’s achievement of learning outcomes (new policy on this)

• SR4.23 clarifies requirements for blind-double marking and internal moderation (and how to record this)

• SR4.53 defines composition of Panels of Examiners

• Other updates cover role of the External Examiner, operation of MCs Panels, etc [See SEN6641, July 2015]


http://www.brunel.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/434915/Summative-Assessment-in-Groupwork-Guidance.pdf


SR3 updates – dissertation submission

• SR3.49 now allows reassessment at Level 5 for any award of a Master’s-level programme, including intermediate awards.

• Students are allowed to submit a dissertation if they wish even if they cannot achieve a Master’s degree by doing so (i.e. if they have definitively failed the taught element).

• However the dissertation cannot be substituted for failed taught elements so as to allow a PGDip award (unless explicitly permitted in the Programme Specification)



Other changes for awareness

• Exemptions policy – students may start being seen at Boards who were admitted with module exemptions; either graded (external grades go on Board paperwork), or ungraded (needs a special calculation).

• Provisional Progression - policy has been clarified and distilled on a single guidance document


http://www.brunel.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/454651/Exemptions-Policy.pdf

http://www.brunel.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/451436/Provisional-Progression-Policy-.pdf


Reminder – final Award Classification mechanisms

• UG and PGT classification mechanism revised with effect from June 2015 – now in its second year of operation

• This replaces the previous complex (GPA / grade-volume) classification mechanism with a simple GPA requirement for each classification

• A deterministic “stepped borderline” mechanism is finer-grained than before; no student can be disadvantaged by this in comparison to the old arrangements



Timescales for Boards in 2015-16

NB tight timescales to complete all processes in summer 2016 (marking, moderation, External Examiner scrutiny, Panels of Examiners) between exams and Boards

Key dates are:

• Exams – weeks 33-35 (03 May to 20 May)

• Panels – weeks 36-38 (24 May to 10 June) approx.

• Award Boards – weeks 37-39 (31 May to 17 June), i.e. from four weeks after the start of exams

• Progression Boards – weeks 40-42 approx. (20 June to 08 July)

• Graduation ceremonies – week 43 (11 to 14 July)


2015-16 Exams and Award Boards

Week 33 (BH) Exams

Week 34 Exams

Week 35 Exams

Week 36

Week 37 (BH) Award Boards

Week 38 Award Boards

Week 39 Award Boards

Week 40 +some late Boards

Week 41

Week 42

Week 43 Graduation

ASSESSMENT PROCESSES


Brunel’s 17-point grade scale

• Grades are the primary performance measure, as used in award calculations (not marks – though mark equivalence is defined)

• University Grade Descriptors are primary reference for academic standards


Indicative Mark Band

Degree class

equivalentGrade Grade

Point

90 and above 1 A* 1780-89 1 A+ 1673-79 1 A 1570-72 1 A- 1468-69 2.1 B+ 1363-67 2.1 B 1260-62 2.1 B- 1158-59 2.2 C+ 1053-57 2.2 C 950-52 2.2 C- 848-49 3 D+ 743-47 3 D 640-42 3 D- 538-39 Fail E+ 433-37 Fail E 330-32 Fail E- 229 and below Fail F 1

Non-submission Fail NS 0


Grading and Marking at point of assessment

• Departments define whether they are using mark or grade ENTRY at element level (by programme)

• All calculations and requirements for award are GRADE-BASED

• SITS (student records database) is set up with details of assessment elements and weightings

• Grade entry – SITS assigns a grade point for each element and calculates weighted average of grade points.

• Mark entry – SITS finds weighted average of marks – assigns corresponding grade point for assessment block



Assessment waypoints

• Specify assessment tasks and criteria

• Approve assessment tasks and criteria Students take assessment Students submit any mitigating circumstances• Marking/grading

• Moderation (internal and external)

• Panels of Examiners

• Mitigating Circumstances Panels

• Boards of Examiners



Scrutiny of summative assessment tasks (SR4.4)

• All summative assessments must be scrutinised by a group designated by the appropriate Panel of Examiners.

• External Examiners' views should be sought on all examination papers and other assessments (e.g. proposed coursework titles) at Level 2, 3 and Masters Level, before the papers are printed or other assessments notified to students. Assessment criteria, marking schemes, and/or indicative answers should be

provided to Externals. If staff disagree with changes proposed by the External, this must be discussed

with the External and a clear rationale put to the Panel when approving.• Panels must give final approval of summative assessments, having been reassured

that these have been properly scrutinised (including by Externals) and that these: are expressed clearly; adequately assess the intended learning outcomes; are in accordance with the overall assessment strategy for the programme; are of an appropriate standard; are associated with appropriate assessment criteria.



External moderation – information to provide

• Samples of student work should either be sent prior to the Panel of Examiners or (by agreement) made available on the morning of the Panel. This should: Represent at least 10% sample size (20% for Master’s

dissertations, or all if fewer than 10 students)

Indicate where adjustments have already been made following internal moderation

Represent full range of achievement

• Full set of provisional grades should also be seen by Externals

• All student work should be available to External Examiners on day of Panel



External moderation – output expected

• External Examiners should comment on - Is the work of appropriate standard and comparable with other

UK HEIs?

Do grades/marks assigned reflect the marking criteria and published grade descriptors?

• Not required to study each piece of work in detail

• Findings feed into Panel consideration and confirmation



Full process flow

Mark/Grade EntryTo SITS

Panel Paperwork

Panel Grade Confirmation In SITS

Marking &Moderation

Panel ofExaminersMeeting

Re-marking Moderation

ExternalModeration

X

Board Paperwork Produced

Recommendation of MCs panel to

BoE

Decisions of BoE entered on SITS

Students notified of decision

through e-Vision

BoE MeetingMCs Panel meeting

Resolution of problems

identified in Board Paperwork

XAssessment Task & CriteriaDesign and Approval

ExternalScrutiny

PANELS OF EXAMINERS


Constitution of Panels

Established (by Dean of College) for each subject grouping or cognate group of modular/assessment blocks contributing to awards.

As per SR4.53 (revised 2014-15), Panels shall comprise:

• A Chair and Deputy Chair (appointed by the Dean of College)

• Internal examiners (normally the relevant modular or assessment block leaders – Chairs appoint)

• Internal moderators (Chairs appoint)

• External Examiner(s), as appointed by Senate

To be quorate to transact its business, a Panel needs representation as above.

• Also (crucially!) in attendance: Departmental Administrators



Role of Panels of Examiners (PoE)

• Approving summative assessments (this is done early in the year – through a meeting or correspondence?)

• Key role: to agree all assessment results (verifying element marks/grades and confirming grades for each module/block)

• Not to look at individual students (unless error or additional info presented) – i.e. all students treated equally

• May make specific recommendations to Boards concerning particular assessments

• Implement Senate Regulations 4.52-4.56

• Panels of Examiners are where collective academic judgement is exercised



Documentation for Panels

NB that only SITS-generated paperwork can be used for presentation of formal results at Panels of Examiners (and note there several tabs in each workbook – all need to be printed/shown).

The following should also be available/accessible at meetings:

At Element level

• Assessment Specifications

• Marking/Grading Criteria

• Other supporting assessment paperwork, such as raw assessment forms, moderation records, etc.

At Module level

• Module Syllabus

At University level

• Grade Descriptors

• Senate Regulations SR2/3, SR4



Role of External Examiners at Panels

• Full membership of the Panel of Examiners

• Contribute to the collective academic decision-making

• Have a distinct influence on the PoE (through their independence and their overview)

• EEs are not empowered to change marks or grades – all decisions are made collectively

• May ask to inspect any documents involved in the assessment process

• See SR4.93 – 4.99



Issues for Panels of Examiners

• Potential assessment design errors

• Academic judgment

• Moderation effectiveness and issues

• Extraordinary factors/events

• Re-marking/adjustment of results (see below)

• Justification of actions

• Recording of decisions at all stages!



Panels of Examiners – calculated grades

• NB that Grades and especially Grade Bands for each student, for each module/block, must be “right” – because award calculations use Grades (not percentage marks).

• Where there are multiple elements of assessment in a module/block, rounding may be required just below grade borderlines (whether mark or grade entry). SITS does no rounding – it is up to the Panel to make decisions

based on academic judgement for its modules/blocks.

Note that rounding merely moves borderlines – it does not magically remove them!



Panels of Examiners – rounding decisions

• Should a calculated mark average of 69.8% for a particular module be confirmed as a B+ or should it be an A-, and very significantly is it in the B band or the A band?

• Should a calculated GPA of 13.93 for a particular module be confirmed as a B+ or should it be an A-, and very significantly is it in the B band or the A band?

Answer: the Panel needs to exercise academic judgement about the assessment of the module/block, for this year.



Assessment design errors

Issues may potentially arise (for correction by the Panel) in:

• Learning outcomes coverage

• Element weightings

• Assessment specification

• Sub-element combination method

• Assessment criteria specification

• Marking/grading scheme or strategy

• Moderation process



Adjusting grading at Panels

SR4.55 covers this –

• Take action if the Panel has “insufficient confidence in the integrity and fairness of the outcomes of an assessment”

• Usually, require the assessors to reconsider grades/marks for the complete cohort of students who took this assessment

• Only in exceptional circumstances may the Panel scale grades/marks for a particular assessment – if so, must record justification and rationale

• Grades/marks for an individual student may not be adjusted, unless they have been wrongly recorded or additional information is presented.



Post-Panel actions

• Confirmation of marks/grades on SITS for each module/block MUST be done as soon as possible AFTER THE PANEL. Unless all marks/grades are confirmed for every module/block,

SITS/Business Objects will not generate the correct Board paperwork and the Board cannot take place!

The Chair of the Panel of Examiners is responsible (in association with the Administrator) for ensuring Panel-confirmed grades are input to SITS. Please ensure checks are in place to avoid errors.

• The Chair of the Panel of Examiners is also responsible (in association with the administrator) for providing Minutes of the PoE meeting(s) to the relevant Board(s) of Examiners. This also requires prompt attention as BoEs occur shortly after

the PoE.


BOARDS OF EXAMINERS


Role of Boards of Examiners (BoE)

• To receive confirmed marks/grades from Panels of Examiners

• To consider individual student profile of achievement

• To take into account mitigating circumstances and determine appropriate actions

• To decide on progression and re-assessment

• To recommend to Senate appropriate awards for each completed/withdrawn student

• Implement Senate Regulations 4.45-4.51 and 4.57-4.66

• NB Boards now have few powers of discretion within the regulations – but all decisions must still be justified



Documentation for Boards

NB that only SITS-generated paperwork can be used for presentation of formal results at Boards of Examiners (ensure that sheets are seen for all relevant Programmes).

The following should also be available/accessible at meetings:

At Programme level

• Programme Specifications (NB may be more than one relevant version per programme)

At University level

• Grade Descriptors (UG/PG)

• Senate Regulations SR2/3 (both old and new!), SR4



Role of External Examiners at Boards

• Full membership of the BoE

• Contribute to the collective academic decision-making

• Have a distinct influence on the BoE (through their independence and their overview)

• EEs are not empowered to change marks or grades/progression/classification unilaterally – all decisions are made collectively

• Assure themselves that due process has been followed and appropriate consideration and decisions have been made by the BoE

• See Senate Regulations SR4.93 – 4.99



Role of Vice-Chancellor’s Representative (VCR)

Experienced member of University Professional Services. Most BoEs are attended by both a Lead VCR and an Assistant VCR.

• Helps ensure BoE proceedings and decisions are in line with Senate Regulations and approved programme specification(s) – ask them for advice if issues arise during the meeting!

• Keeps the master record of decisions from the meeting, for signoff at end and then input into SITS (for transmission to students)

• BoEs may not make award recommendations in the absence of a VCR. VCRs may also stop proceedings if there are irregularities, e.g. in accuracy of paperwork.

• VCRs report back to the VC and Senate (via Academic Registrar) on any irregularities or issues, including if External Examiners express dissatisfaction with the proceedings or decisions of the BoE



Issues for Boards

• Mitigating circumstances

• Progression and re-assessment

• Awards

• Incomplete grade profiles

• Extraordinary decisions – discretion

• Justification of decisions

..and recording of decisions at all stages!



Sandwich placements (UG only)

UG degrees including sandwich placement have a separate route code, and “with professional development” in the title.

• Placement module contributes to the grade profile at Level 2 (percentage/fraction of Level 2 defined in the Programme Specification).

• If a student has undertaken placement module, then SITS will calculate (and the BoE paperwork will show) degree classification for the sandwich award title only.

• But students have the option to receive the standard award (with no placement contribution to the classification) – this may be desirable if placement grade is low and they could get a better standard classification. Board to agree both and allow student to choose.

• Placement module result will always appear on transcript (unless College has decided to remove for a particular student – see Placement Learning Policy).



Board discretion

Limited scope:

• Re-assessment timing

• Decisions about mitigating circumstances (that have been accepted by MCs Panel)

• Extraordinary situations NB if a BoE wants to do something extraordinary – i.e. against

the rules – it must refer to QAC Chair for approval on behalf of Senate. A BoE cannot unilaterally vary Senate Regulations!



Misconduct procedures (SR6)

• Consideration by both Panels and Boards must be deferred in all cases where an allegation of an academic offence has been made, until the outcome of disciplinary investigations/proceedings is known (SR6.35)

• Deviation from this regulation could prejudice a case.

• Panels or Boards must not ‘mark down’ work for plagiarism – it is to be investigated separately.



Actions re. mitigating circumstances

See Senate Regulations 4.26 – 4.31, plus further Guidance for Mitigating Circumstances Panels and Boards of Examiners

• BoE actions taken in response to accepted MCs should ensure that students are as little disadvantaged as possible as a result of the impairment which occurred, while also preserving the integrity of standards and awards.

• Board Paperwork will show where a student’s assessment results have been affected by MCs (as accepted by MCs Panel). Only Chair and Externals should have sight of actual personal details (which may

inform decisions on reassessment timing etc.)

• Potential BoE actions are outlined in SR4.40-41. Default actions are uncapped reassessment or (where confident and appropriate) assigning of grades for the affected element. Extraordinary actions must be agreed with Chair of Quality Assurance Committee.

The marks/grades for individual assessment elements (e.g. exam script, piece of coursework, etc), as confirmed by PoE, may not be altered.


http://www.brunel.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/432789/Mitigating-Circumstances-Guidance-for-MC-Panels-and-Boards-of-Examiners.pdf

http://www.brunel.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/432789/Mitigating-Circumstances-Guidance-for-MC-Panels-and-Boards-of-Examiners.pdf


Reassessment entitlements• Defined limits of, and rights to, reassessment – not at discretion

of Boards of Examiners (unless MCs).

• UG entitled to reassessment in each Level, up to max. 60 credits (Level 1) or 40 credits (Level 2, 3 and 5), where: Student fails to achieve D- (Level 1, 2, 3) /C- (Level 5) in a block or a core

assessment, or fails to achieve a pass in pass/fail assessments

Don’t forget that UG reassessment (max. 40 credits) for Ordinary is a possibility – SITS will not identify this, so BoE needs to be vigilant where students are shown as “Cannot Progress”.

• PGT entitled to reassessment in taught component assessments, up to max. 60 credits, where: Student fails to achieve C- in a block or a core assessment, or fails to

achieve a pass in pass/fail assessments

• Grades for UG reassessments are capped at D-, and PGT reassessments at C-.


PROGRESSION AND AWARD RULES


Progression and Award rules

• Defined minimum grade profile requirements for progression and threshold awards

• Classification determined by simple GPA requirement

• “Borderline” mechanism is strictly deterministic (no BoE discretion)

• No compensation/condonation mechanisms other than strict borderline mechanism

• Credit is not “awarded” – credit is solely a volume/weighting metric

• “Core” assessments can be defined (must be passed at threshold level)

• Standard reassessment rules across University (reassessment volume entitlement = limit)

• No ‘trailing’ allowed (except for some cases of MCs and with individual Senate approval)



UG progression and reassessment

At Levels 2 and 3, a student may meet the minimum profile, but without re-assessment their possible degree classification is limited (e.g. for a 1st, no Es at L2 or L3 allowed).

• At Level 2 therefore, any student with E’s in their profile would be unwise not to go for re-assessment (as they do not know what Level 3 will bring).

• At Level 3, students will be able to take an informed decision.



UG Final Awards – Honours Bachelors

Set out in SR2 Appendices. Based on Level 2 and Level 3 Weighted Grade Profile (1:2 weighting of credit between L2:L3)

• Requirements for Other UG Awards (Integrated Masters, Ordinary, DipHE, CertHE) are also set out in SR2 Appendices


Class

Maximum credit

volume of Grade F

Maximum credit volume of

assessment blocks

containing core assessments

below D-

Maximum (non-weighted) credit volume of non-core Grade Band E (E+, E, E-)

Minimum

weighted GPA*

Level 2 Level 3 Level 2 + 3

1st 0 0 0 0 0 14.02.1 0 0 20 0 20 11.02.2 0 0 40 20 40 8.03rd 0 0 40 40 60 NA


PGT Final Awards – Master’s

Set out in SR3 Appendices.

• Requirements for PGDip and PGCert Awards are also set out in SR3 Appendices

• If dissertation can be included in the profile for a PGDip award, this must be set out in programme specification


Class

Maximum credit volume

of Grades E+, E, E-, F

Maximum credit volume of

assessment blocks containing

core assessments

below C-

Maximum (non-weighted) credit volume of non-

core Grade Band D (D+, D, D-)

Minimum Taught Part Weighted

GPA*

Minimum Dissertation

Grade

Distinction 0 0 0 14.0 A-Merit 0 0 0 11.0 B-Pass 0 0 30 NA C-


UG Final Awards – new borderline mechanism (PGT very similar)

Set out in SR2 (and SR3 for PGT) Appendices


Volume of grades (weighted by assessment block credit value and by Level weighting) in Class or better

Class

1st 2.1 2.2

Minimum Weighted GPA

At least 41% of grades (weighted) in Class or better 13.5 10.5 7.5




At least 58% of grades (weighted) in Class or better 11.5 8.5 NA

At least 62% of grades (weighted) in Class or better 11.0 NA NA

At least 66% of grades (weighted) in Class or better 10.5 NA NA


Progression at Level 3 or 5

Minimum profile requirements apply.

Main progression decisions:

• Reassessment required

• Progress to Provisional Award

• Progress to Award (completed)

• Progress to next Level (UG – e.g.,MEng, MMath)

• Withdraw



Progression to Ordinary (at Level 2)

If after reassessment at Level 2 a student has not met the minimum profile for Honours, AND the Programme Specification includes an Ordinary award:

• they must be considered for progression to Level 3 but award capped at Ordinary (with no way back to Honours).

• which modules and how many credits does a student take at Level 3 for Ordinary? – 100 possibly but not 120!


QUESTIONS


Links to guidance and resources• See www.brunel.ac.uk/about/quality-assurance/assessment


• And also www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/senate-regulations

http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/quality-assurance/assessment

http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/senate-regulations

Chairing Boards of Examiners and Panels of Examiners BEEC Academic Practice workshop January 2016 Dr...

Documents

Transcript of Chairing Boards of Examiners and Panels of Examiners BEEC Academic Practice workshop January 2016 Dr...