Assessment

Higher Education Assessment Procedure

Policy Code: LT1254

Purpose

This procedure mandates operational activities and assigns responsibilities that are required to support the implementation of Federation University Australia's Higher Education Assessment Policy. It steps through the practical actions required and reflects the Higher Education Standards Framework 2015.

Scope

This procedure applies to assessment of all Federation University Australia undergraduate and coursework postgraduate courses and for those courses offered through collaborative provision (ie through partner providers). However it does not apply to assessment of individual students in higher degrees by research which is the subject of Regulation 5.1 Higher Doctorates, The Degree of Philosophy, Professional Doctorates and Masters Degrees by Research.

All staff and title holders of the University must comply with the Higher Education Assessment Policy and this procedure whenever they are engaged in any aspect of the assessment process.

Legislative Context

University Statutes and Regulations
  • Statute 2.2 - Academic Board
  • Statute 5.1 - Academic Awards and Courses
  • Regulation 5.1 – The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Masters Degrees by Research and Professional Doctorates
  • Statute 5.3 – Assessment
  • Regulation 5.3 – Assessment
  • Statute 5.4 – Exclusion for Reasons of Unfitness

Definitions

A complete list of definitions relevant to this procedure is contained within the Higher Education Assessment Policy.

Actions

Each of the mandatory procedures below, details the activity which must be conducted in accordance with the assessment principles that are referred to in the Higher Education Assessment Policy.

1. Sound design of assessment

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Designing assessment tasks Course Coordinator

Sound assessment design needs to consider the following elements:

1. Alignment

a. Alignment with the course learning outcomes and learning activities, specified in terms of capabilities, behaviours, knowledge, skills, application of knowledge, skills, values, and Discipline and/or University desired graduate attributes, as per Higher Education Graduate Attributes Policy (LT1228). Refer to Supplementary Guidelines (Learning Outcomes and Assessment) for additional guidance.

b. Sequence and scaffold learning logically so that knowledge builds upon previous tasks and assessment task.

2. Validity

a. The choice of task for each learning outcome should be considered best practice and evidence-based.

b. Designed to provide evidence of student attainment of the learning outcomes to enable valid judgement of attainment against learning objectives. Refer to Supplementary Guidelines (Learning Outcomes and Assessment) for additional guidance.

c. Consider content and face validity in the context of the mode of delivery (e.g. online, face to face, flexible).

d. Ensure that assessment has not been inappropriately used to measure engagement in learning, as opposed to demonstrating learning (i.e.: hurdle tasks, attendance, online logs, participation). Refer to Supplementary Guidelines (Learning Outcomes and Assessment) for additional guidance.

3. Authenticity

a. Challenges students to extend their knowledge, understanding and stimulate their interest within the context of the course, year level and program.

b. Where relevant, correlates to the knowledge, skills and values required for a career after leaving the university – i.e.: real world relevance.

c. Is feasible in relation to student workloads for course credit points

d. Is ethically sound as per Discipline, School and University codes of conduct and work-integrated learning agreements.

4. Transparency

a. Provides students with an understanding of the link to learning outcomes and explicit expectations for successful completion.

b. Assessment requirements communicated to students as per Action 6. Communicating assessment requirements to students.

5. Inclusiveness

a. Accounts for a student’s current knowledge, experience, academic literacy and digital literacy needs for successful completion of the task

b. Tasks are fair and can be undertaken by a range of students with diverse background and/or additional learning needs to minimise unfair discrimination and protected attributes.

c. Equitable across campuses/modes of offering

6. Veracity

a. Consider the need for invigilation in assessment to maintain veracity of tasks, as per the Higher Education Examinations Procedure (LT1940).

b. Undertake specific steps to maintain academic integrity of submissions and prevent the likes of contract cheating, academic misconduct, collusion and plagiarism, as per the Academic Integrity Procedure (LT1944).

c. Consider the implications of the use of social media, and/or technologies not supported by the University in maintaining assessment veracity.

7. Feedback

a. Opportunities to provide formative feedback, summative feedback, or both, for all assessment tasks.

b. Provided in a way that allows for effective understanding of progress, achievement of learning outcomes and support future assessment tasks.

c. Provided within three weeks of student submission, where possible.

8. Reliability

a. The assessment criteria clearly differentiate and articulate the evaluation components and performance levels required to achieve varying levels of learning

b. Moderation of assessment and marking processes is undertaken to ensure fair, just and consistent assessment practices.

9. Manageability

a. Students are able to complete the tasks within the time allocation prescribed, as per the learning hours/credit points assigned to the course. See Supplementary Guidelines (Student Workload Guide) for additional guidance.

b. Assessors able to moderate and mark the tasks within the allocated staff workload hours (60 minutes per student per 15 credit point course as per University workload model).

10. Evaluation

a. Consideration given to how to evaluate, measure and/or review both the student and facilitator use of the assessment task(s) in achieving alignment to the learning outcome(s).

b. Utilise feedback from a range of sources, such as student surveys, course coordinators reports, and ratification processes.

B. Aligning with program learning outcomes Program Coordinator

Ensure course learning outcomes, tasks and assessment are aligned and sequenced to the broader objectives and structure of the program, and the Universities graduate attributes.

Course assessment must consider and contribute to the achievement of AQF standards required of the program, as approved by Academic Board.

Ensure each program has an appropriate variety of types of diagnostic, integrated, summative and formative assessments

Course assessment must consider type and timing of submission with other course assessments and workloads, studied within the same semester.

Ensure that the specification of assessment tasks for a new course, or changes to assessment tasks in an existing course, are:

  • reviewed by at least one other academic within the discipline responsible for the course or a cognate area
  • discussed with peers within the discipline base or other appropriate staff including the Program Coordinator, the Associate Dean Teaching Quality (ADTQ), Centre for University Partnerships (CUP) and/or the staff of the Centre for Learning Innovation and Professional Practice (CLIPP)
  • Consider any relevant accreditation requirements.

Proposed changes to curriculum require the completion of appropriate Program and/or Course Modification documentation for presentation to School Board prior to submission for approval at Higher Education Curriculum Committee.

C. Aligning with course learning outcomes Course Coordinator

1. Ensure assessment is aligned to course intended learning outcomes, and course learning activities

2. Ensure each course has an appropriate variety of types of summative and formative assessments

3. Schedule opportunities to give constructive meaningful feedback, comparing drafts/progress to expected standards

4. Where feasible, a small low weighted assessment task that provides summative feedback is completed within the first four weeks of teaching. This forms the basis of identifying any early interventions if a student does not perform satisfactorily.

5. Ensure that all students have access to the appropriate supports and/or resources to undertake the assessment. For example, opportunities for students to build digital literacies and competency with technologies to enable the successful completion of online assessments. Scaffold academic skills and other relevant skills and provide access to further support materials and/or services.

D. Developing staff competence in the design and implementation of assessment Dean

1. Arrange access to appropriate training through formal qualifications or professional development programs. Collate evidence of progress in this area through Performance Review Development Program

2. Encourage staff to seek assistance from CLIPP staff and ADTQ.

 3. Meet criteria in the University's Learning, Teaching and Student Success Plan, and Teaching Expectations for Academic Staff, for quality teaching and assessment practices.

2. School Moderation Arrangements

Schools will utilise the Moderation Resource which will elaborate on the School’s expectations within the framework provided by the Higher Education Assessment Policy and ensure that the resources used at School level and Partner Providers reflect local needs, circumstances and characteristics.

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Defining roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of all those engaged in moderation Dean
  1. As identified within the Moderation Resource
B. Providing information about moderation to students and staff, including moderators Program  Coordinators
  1. As identified within the Moderation Resource
C. Providing induction and training activities for moderators where appropriate Dean/nominee/ADTQ
  1. As per University Policy and utilising the Moderation Resource
  2. Attend specific workshops (e.g. Assessment for Learning - refer Academic Induction Program)
D. Providing guidance as to which assessment tasks are to be moderated, with particular reference to moderation of assessment – implementation (MAI) for courses offered collaboratively Course Coordinator
  1. As identified within the Moderation Resource
E. Providing guidance on technical aspects of moderation Dean/ADTQ/Course Coordinator
  1. As identified within the Moderation Resource
F. Developing procedures for resolving disagreements between markers and moderators Dean/ADTQ
  1. As identified within the Moderation Resource
G. Articulating requirements for recording decisions, reporting results and maintaining records Course Coordinator
  1. As identified within the Moderation Resource
H. Determining expectations and responsibilities for monitoring the implementation and outcomes of moderation, including provision for continuous review by the School Dean/ADTQ/ Course Coordinator
  1. As identified within the Moderation Resource 
  2. Moderation outcomes must be documented and recorded in the University approved records management system

3. Preparing and Implementing the Annual Moderation Cycle

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Reviewing Moderation Resource and Course Moderator role statement in light of previous year’s moderation reports and update, as necessary Director, CLIPP/Learning and Teaching Committee/CUP
  1. Identify any issues from previous year’s annual moderation report /and/ or any other relevant documentation
B. Ensuring that the Moderation Resource is up to date and approved for distribution to moderators Director, CLIPP/Learning and Teaching Committee/CUP
  1. Access the current version of the Moderation Resource
C. Ensuring all Course Descriptions for courses to be offered during the year include the requisite information on learning outcomes and assessment, including moderation and are approved for distribution to students Dean, Course and Program Coordinators
  1. Check requisite information in Course Descriptions
  2. Check appropriate approvals are in place
D. Implementing and overseeing the moderation process Dean/nominee/ADTQ
  1. Review planned course offerings for the year
  2. Determine how many moderators will be required
  3. Develop and publish the annual moderation schedule in the agreed format
  4. Appoint and mentor moderators, as required, utilising the Moderation Resource

4. Moderation of assessment - preparation (MAP)

This stage of the moderation cycle covers preparation for assessment moderation in accordance with University policy and the Moderation Resource. Its aim is to provide checks and support for the preparation of best practice assessment tasks. The processes by which this occurs will vary according to the nature of the assessment tasks, the number of courses involved, the number of locations at which the same course is to be delivered, and the moderation situation (i.e. whether by a single individual or a moderators’ meeting).

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Submitting items for MAP Academic staff responsible for setting assessment tasks
  1. Teaching team design assessment items and write assessment criteria (and marking scheme)
  2. Provide designated Course Moderator with a copy of the task (e.g. exam paper) and any related information
  3. Scrutinise assessment items by colleagues/ course team
B. Reviewing and providing feedback on proposed assessment tasks Course Moderators and academic staff
  1. Course Moderator will review the proposed assessment tasks according to the Moderation Resource and criteria and liaise with the responsible staff member to provide feedback and discuss any matters of concern
  2. Peer Enhancement of Teaching procedure can be followed to facilitate both reporting and record-keeping of the preparation of moderation of assessment
C. Resolving any disputes arising from the moderation process ADTQ, Dean or nominee, academic staff members and Course Moderators
  1. Typically resolution will occur through discussion, but the Moderation Resource also provides for disagreements to be referred to Moderation Committees
D. Releasing assessment tasks for use Course Moderators
  1. The Course Moderator will sign off on the assessment task once any concerns have been resolved
  2. A written report will be provided to the Dean/nominee that the task is suitable for use
  3. All MAP processes should be documented and stored in the University approved records management system

5. Formalising assessment requirements

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Developing templates for Course Outline and Course Description Higher Education Curriculum Committee 1. Ensure approved electronic templates are provided for the Course Outline and Course Description via the University website under 'Program Approvals and Reviews | Academic Board', and via relevant online document management systems where practicable.
B. Preparing and approving  assessment within Course Outlines Program and Course Coordinator

1. As a governing document, the Course Outline must provide a brief description of:

  • Learning Task
  • Assessment Type
  • Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Weighting (range)
  • Adopted Reference Style
  • Supplementary Assessment
  • Work integrated Learning (if appropriate)
  • Graduate Attributes

2. Modifications to the assessment within Course Outlines must adhere to Action 1: Sound design of assessment, and requires approval from the relevant School Board, and must be noted by the Higher Education Curriculum Committee and Academic Board.

3. Approved changes will be documented in the University approved document management system

4. Approved Course Outlines are loaded to and accessible from the University's website, and relevant online document management systems.

C. Preparing and approving assessment within Course Description  Course Coordinator

1.  As an operational document, the Course Description must provide a description of:

  • Learning Task (including purpose and task description/instructions)
  • Assessment Type (including any specific learning technology tools)
  • Learning Outcomes Assessed
  • Mode of submission
  • Due date and time
  • Weighting
  • Word length (or equivalent if using creative work,presentation, video or audio tools)
  • Approximate time to allocate for completion
  • Referencing Style if applicable
  • Minimum number of references

2. The information in the Course Description must align with the information in the corresponding approved Course Outline.

3. If applicable, include any enhancements to assessment tasks identified from previous iterations, in the Course Description ‘Closing the Loop’ section, as per Step 5: Evidence of Corrective Action in the Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching Procedure (CG17003)

4. Peer review process undertaken as per Model 2: Course Description Peer Enhancement in the Peer Enhancement of Learning and Teaching Procedure (LT1964)

D. Publishing assessment requirements Course Coordinator

1. Provide the approved and published version of the Course Description to the University's LMS site for the course, two weeks prior to the commencement of the teaching semester.

2. If such has not been included in the Course Description, the following must also be provided to students, via the University's LMS, based on the appropriate release of assessment as outlined in the Supplementary Guidelines (Student Workload Guide):

  • Assessment criteria
  • How and when feedback and marks will be provided
  • Resources and/or services to support successful completion of the task

6. Communicating assessment requirements to students

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A Communicating assessment requirements to students Course Coordinator/Partners

1. All details for successful completion of assessment tasks to be available to students as per Action 5: Formalising assessment requirements - Point D

2. Additional and repeated forms of communication should be considered such as emails, broadcast via the LMS, online forums via the LMS, hardcopy formats, direct emails to students, and reminders during scheduled lectures, laboratories and tutorials.

3. Students should also be informed about where and how to access any additional resources and supports to support their successful completion of tasks. e.g.: online resources on how to use video or eportfolio’s, Library resources on referencing or support workshops

4. Reasonable adjustment needs to be made when communicating to students with protected attributes, as per the Equal Opportunity and Valuing Diversity Policy.

7. Implementing Assessment

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Ensuring academic integrity Course Coordinator/Partner

1. Educate students about required standards of academic integrity and how to adequately and consistently correctly research, present and reference their work in an Australian educational environments.

2. In the implementation of assessment employ strategies, such as using a text-matching software tool prior to submission and supervising examinations, to prevent and detect plagiarism and cheating - refer Academic Integrity Procedure and the Learning, Teaching and Student Success Plan

3. Students will be required to submit all assessments electronically accompanied by a completed declaration form, that they have complied with requirements, unless specific circumstances require otherwise

B. Assessing students with disability or special circumstances Program/Course Coordinator/Partner

 1. Provide access to reasonable adjustments in collaboration with the DLAU

2. Refer to Student Access, Progression and Wellbeing Policy and associated procedures and forms, in particular:

C. Eligibility for supplementary assessment Program/Course Coordinator/Partner

1. Refer Student Learning and Wellbeing Policy and associated procedures and forms, in particular:

2. Students who receive an MF grade in their final semester and are not eligible for any other form of supplementary assessment, may apply to the Program Coordinator within 7 days of the publication of results for supplementary assessment if that course is the only outstanding course required to complete the degree and the student has not been found guilty of plagiarism in that semester. The highest grade attainable will be a P

3. If an international student has returned to their country of origin and then applies for a supplementary assessment, the School will determine the appropriateness of the type of assessment and whether it is feasible to be completed in the student's own country

D. Approving supplementary assessment Dean or nominee, such as Program Coordinator 1. Approve the  proposed supplementary assessment task/s
E. Notifying student of their opportunity to complete  supplementary assessment Student HQ/CUP

1. Immediately upon the release of end of semester grades, send an email (with a copy to the Course Coordinator and Examinations) to the student’s University address notifying them of the opportunity to complete a supplementary assessment:

  • Detailing the type of assessment (i.e. examination, invigilated test or non-invigilated assessment)
  • For non-invigilated assessments, the type of assessment (e.g. essay) and the contact details of their Course/Academic Coordinator
  • For examinations, advise that further details will be emailed by the Examinations Office. Students must be given a minimum of five (5) working days notice for a supplementary examination.
  • For invigilated tests, the contact details of their Course/Academic Coordinator, who will provide the time and place of the test. Students must be given a minimum of five (5) working days notice for a supplementary test.

2. In the case of a non-invigilated assessment, students must contact the Course/Academic Coordinator within 7 days of the notification of eligibility for supplementary assessment. The designated due date would normally be before the close of the official deferred examination period.

F. Conducting supplementary assessment School/Partner/Student

1. If a student cannot complete a supplementary assessment in the normal time-period specified above, an outcome will be negotiated that both reflects natural justice and is reasonable to the student, while being consistent with all other University procedures.

2.  In the case of an examination, a School may choose to schedule a supplementary examination at a mutually convenient time, or defer it until the end of the next semester in which that course runs.

3. All extensions of time for the completion of supplementary assessment must be in accordance with the Higher Education Special Consideration Procedure and use the appropriate form. Wherever possible, supplementary examinations will be completed in the published deferred examination period.

4. Results must be lodged within ten (10) working days of the submission or completion of the supplementary task. Refer Higher Education Special Consideration Procedure and associated forms

G. Moderating marks and grades Course Coordinator

1. Following the marking of students' work, for every teaching period provide a designated statistically valid sample of student work for all summative assessment tasks and for designated continuous assessment tasks

2. Consult with the markers, as needed, to provide feedback on findings

3. Adhere to  procedures for resolving disagreements between markers and moderators as directed by the Moderation Resource

4. Undertake moderation of assessment – implementation (MAI) of student work referred for moderation to ensure that, marks and grades awarded are internally consistent across locations, delivery approaches, cohorts, tutorial groups and different teaching staff and comply with Statute 5.3

5. Determine corrective action on the basis of moderated results

6. Advise the outcome of the moderation to the appropriate School Teaching Quality Committee

7. Seek advice about corrective action, as appropriate and report to Program Coodinator/Dean

8. Record feedback in a Course Coordinator/Moderators report.

8. Ensuring security of student submitted assessment materials

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Collecting and recording submitted assessment tasks Course Coordinator/Partner 1. Arrange for the collection and recording of assessment tasks submitted by students utilising the University's approved Learning Management System
B. Ensuring security of submitted assessment tasks Academic staff/Partner/Dean

1. Following University policy, securely store assessment tasks submitted by students while they are being assessed and prior to their return to the student. This process should be managed virtually utilising the University's approved Learning Management System, wherever possible, in accordance with the University's approved records management procedures

2. If a breach of the secure storage of an assessment task occurs, the Academic staff member must contact the Dean immediately, and appropriate action will be undertaken.

C. Protecting confidentiality of students Course Coordinator/Partner

1. If the need arises for the Course Coordinator to discuss the work of a student with staff or other students, the discussion does not identify the author either directly or indirectly

2. If work is to be used as an exemplar, permission of the student must be obtained prior to use

D. Returning assessment tasks Academic staff/Partner

1. Return all assessment tasks submitted by students to the original author/creator

2. Assessment tasks are not to be collected by friends or colleagues unless authorised in writing by the author/creator of the work

3.  Where appropriate, this process should be managed virtually, utilising the University's approved Learning Management System.

E. Returning assessment feedback Academic staff/Partner

1. Return all assessment feedback to the original author/creator.

2. Where appropriate, this process should be managed virtually, utilising the University's approved Learning Management System.

9. Ensuring assessment tasks are appropriately marked and graded

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Marking and grading assessment is based on criterion referencing Academic/Partner marking submitted assessment tasks
  1. Identify any issues with the marking guide/rubric/expectations to assist in developing consistent responses/grades
  2. If applicable, mark selected assessment tasks for discussion with colleagues to assist in developing consistent responses/grades
  3. Assess student performance against attainment of intended learning outcomes or graded against the level of attainment of intended learning outcomes using explicit, pre-specified, and/or negotiated criteria (rather than assessed relative to the performance of other students in a cohort)
B. Requesting second marking Course Coordinator/Partner
  1. During a teaching period, a student can request a second marking for an assessment task by providing a written justification referring to the specific marking criteria they are querying. The request should generally be considered positively when the grade for the assessment task differs substantially from the grades received for other assessment tasks- refer Statute 5.3 – Assessment and Regulation 5.3 Assessment  
  2. Second markers will be given a clean, unmarked and anonymous copy of the assignment.
  3. When the second marker disagrees with the original marker (either increasing or decreasing the mark), course coordinators will arrange mark reconciliation.
C. Handling illness or other condition which prevents a student from completing an assessment or examination Invigilator/Academic
  1. If a student commences but is unable to finish an assessment task or examination due to illness or other eligible cause they must be advised to inform the academic or exam invigilator
  2. Academics supervising assessment tasks will inform the Course Coordinator of the circumstances of the terminated assessment. Exam invigilators will note the time of exit from the exam and reason associated
  3. If the School has enough evidence to make an appropriate decision regarding grade assessment, this may be granted on approval of the Dean.
  4. Otherwise, refer to the Student Learning and Wellbeing Policy and associated procedures and forms in relation to Special consideration - deferred examination
D. Assessing supplementary assessments Course Coordinator/Partner
  1. Assess the supplementary assessment task. For all supplementary assessment granted, only the grades of pass and fail (P and MF) will be awarded for the course involved
  2. Report supplementary assessment results in a timely manner to avoid disadvantage to the student
E. Recording assessment results School/Partner
  1. Record results in the University's approved record management system
F. Reviewing sampled work Course Moderators
  1. Provide for review of moderation of assessment for all courses offered collaboratively (e.g. through partner providers)
  2. Conduct a review of sampled work against the Moderation Resource's criteria

10. Providing students with feedback on assessment

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Providing feedback Academic staff/Partner teaching a course
  1. Except for exams, provide feedback to students on submitted assessable tasks, both formative and summative, within three weeks of submission/the due date where possible, with sufficient information to allow the student to determine how their work could be improved. This might include identifying areas that require further study and any other strategies that may assist the student in the learning process. Provisional (unmoderated) marks and/or grades awarded may be disclosed to students via the University grades management or Learning Management System.
B. Discussing assessment attempts with students Academic staff/Partner teaching a course
  1. Allocate time for students to meet with academic staff to discuss their studies and assessable tasks. The option to discuss feedback should be made as an explicit invitation as part of returning a marked assessment.
C. Appealing against an assessment outcome Dean
  1. A student may appeal, in accordance with the procedure specified in the Regulations, to the Dean of the relevant School, against any final grade awarded to the student in a course
  2. Students wishing to appeal a final grade must refer to the Student Appeals Policy and Procedure with reference to the appropriate Statute/Regulation
D. Notifying student of their opportunity to complete  supplementary assessment School/Partner
  1. Advise any student eligible for supplementary assessment of their eligibility, in accordance with Activity 7, Steps C and E.  

11. Moderation of Assessment - Review (MAR)

This stage of the moderation cycle covers activities following the implementation of the assessment tasks  in accordance with the Higher Education Assessment Policy and the Moderation Resource. This resource is designed to provide feedback and support to staff who are responsible for marking student assessment. The processes by which post-assessment moderation occurs will vary according to the nature of the assessment tasks (e.g. exams or performances), the sampling techniques and sample size, and the number of markers for and/or locations at which the same course is to be delivered.

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Overseeing the assessment of moderation – review (MAR)  process Dean or nominee
  1. Oversee the moderation of assessment – review (MAR) process according to the Moderation Resource
B. Completing and documenting the moderation process Course Moderators/Dean/nominee
  1. Store completed document/s in the University approved records management system
C. Reporting provisional results Dean/nominee
  1. Receive report/s and ensure that any necessary actions (such as re-marking) are taken
  2. As directed by the School and the Moderation Resource, a moderators' meeting may be convened for this purpose 
  3. Provide a report on the results of moderation of assessment to the School Board at the end of each teaching period

12. Approving, recording and reporting of moderated results

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Confirming and approving students' results School Board
  1. Dean/nominee will submit a report of provisional results to the Board in the  approved format.
B. Recording and releasing final results Executive Officer in conjunction with the Dean and Student HQ
  1. Marks will be entered into the currently endorsed University records management system for grading in accordance with the Moderation Resource
  2. Marks will be made accessible to students via the University's approved records management system.

13. Recording and monitoring moderation processes and outcomes

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Recording the outcomes of the  moderation of  assessment – preparation (MAP) process Dean/ nominee/ADTQ
  1. The record should, at a minimum, contain information on the number of assessment tasks moderated and the number and nature of changes to tasks arising from the process 
B. Maintaining records of the moderation of assessment – implementation (MAI) Dean/nominee/Course Coordinator
  1. For each course, include in the Course Coordinator’s report:
    • Variations to the conditions under which assessment tasks were completed
    • Instances where the moderation resource was not applied during assessments
    • Sampling strategy used to select assessment tasks for moderation
    • Explanations of unexpected or unusual patterns of grades awarded
    • Number of marking discrepancies identified
C. Maintaining  records of the outcomes of the - moderation of assessment – review (MAR) process Dean/ nominee
  1. The record should, at a minimum, contain information on the number of courses moderated and any follow-up actions taken after MAI
D. Collating an Annual Moderation Report Dean/nominee/ADTQ
  1. The Annual Report should, at a minimum, cover the conduct and outcomes of both the preparation and review phases of moderations of assessment, including any comments or advice from Course Coordinators and Moderators
E. Consider the Annual Moderation Report School Teaching Quality Committee
  1. Submit report to designated committee in agreed format
  2. The Committee will monitor assessment practices and outcomes and consider if any improvements or amendments to its practices may be required
  3. Refer Actions Arising from committee meeting's minutes to the School Board for noting
F. Contributing to the School's annual report on assessment and moderation Dean/nominee/ADTQ
  1. Collate relevant information into report for Academic Board / Learning and Teaching Committee
G. Monitoring the conduct and outcomes of moderation across the University Dean/ Learning and Teaching Committee
  1. A consolidated report from each Dean on the conduct and outcomes of moderation will be sent to Learning and Teaching Committee
  2. Following due consideration of moderation outcomes by the Learning and Teaching Committee any key factors arising are identified and noted
  3. The Committee wil make recommendations for necessary changes to assessment policy or procedure that arise from moderation reports

14. Ratifying Results

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Preparing for ratification Dean or nominee

1. Results will be entered into the currently endorsed University records management system. All final grades will be reported as whole numbers, as such appropriate rounding to a whole number will occur.

2. Ratification preparation occurs at a School level whereby all course results are presented and discussed to determine if any modifications/changes are required.

3. The FedUni Course Coordinator Report must be completed and presented at all ratification meetings. This report provides evidence of learning and teaching quality assurance at the course level and allows the Course Coordinator to reflect at the conclusion of the teaching semester.

4. Once satisfied, the ratification will progress to the School Board then Curriculum Committee.

B Ratifying results Dean or nominee (such as  Program Coordinators)

1. Schools will review robustly and objectively through a documented discussion

 2. The review of the student file will ensure:

  • Assessment evidence matches duration of program/course (start and end dates)
  • Valid and authentic completed assessment tasks as listed in the program/course outline meet the principles of assessment and rules of evidence
  • There is appropriate and adequate feedback to the student against each assessment task
  • There is sufficient evidence of the recording of results at task, course and program level
C Approving ratification School Board

1. All assessment ratification must be approved by the School Board before results can be published

2. Results are submitted to the Board

3. Board approves results

15. Posting of Grades

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Posting Grades

Manager,

Student HQ or nominee

1. In the week of results' publication, create grade roster in approved student management system

2. Send email to School Coordinator of Programs advising of the date for results publication and the date and time that files need to be forwarded to the service desk for uploading into student management system

3. Upload grades into the student management system on the business day prior to results' publication day

4. Undertake agreed process to identify any missing grades

5. Conduct follow up process with School to resolve any issues

6. On the morning of results' publication, post approved grades in student management system

16. Assessment Appeals

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Dealing with assessment appeals in a timely manner Dean or nominee
  1. In accordance with the Student Appeals Procedure, an appeal against a final grade must be submitted in writing and lodged within 10 working days of the publication of the final grade or result
  2. Following due consideration (within 30 days) the student will be provided with a written response to the appeal, including reasons for the decision - Refer Regulation 5.3 Assessment
  3. The School must notify Student HQ of any amended results following an appeal
  4. If the student is not satisfied with the decision, they can submit an appeal to the Appeals Committee in accordance with Regulation 2.2

17. Ensuring quality of assessment (Continuous Improvement)

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Benchmarking of assessment Associate Dean, Teaching Quality or nominee
  1. Both internal and external benchmarking are considered critical components of the overall assessment cycle and as such, benchmarking activities should be well documented to capture a rigorous, evidence-based practice across the University to demonstrate quality processes that meet audit requirements
  2. Determine which areas to benchmark
  3. Identify benchmarking partners
  4. Determine types and level of benchmarking
  5. Prepare benchmarking documents and templates including the purpose, scope of project, performance indicators, performance measures and performance data
  6. Design benchmarking process
  7. Implement benchmarking process
  8. Review results
  9. Communicate results and recommendations
  10. Implement improvement strategies
B. Undergoing external/internal benchmarking process Associate Dean, Teaching Quality or nominee
  1. Subject samples of assessment tools and instruments, and assessment decisions to undergo an external benchmarking process to ensure a quality consistent with sector standards and procedures
  2. Document the results within the University's approved records management system
  3. Report the results of benchmarking to the School Board
  4. Internal benchmarking against other relevant courses offered by Federation University Australia should also be undertaken
  5. Document the results within the University's approved records management system
  6. Report the results of benchmarking to the School Board
C. Following up on continuous improvement changes identified on assessment tasks Associate Dean, Teaching Quality
  1. Drawing on moderation, benchmarking and ratification reports, identify areas for continuous improvement
  2. Implement continuous improvement on assessment tasks
  3. Review implemented after 12 months to confirm their success

Responsibility

  • Academic Board (as Approval Authority) is responsible for monitoring the implementation, outcomes and scheduled review of this policy and will receive annual reports as part of the annual Program Performance Report from each School
  • Chair, Learning and Teaching Committee (L&T) (as Policy Sponsor) is responsible for maintaining the content of this policy as delegated by Academic Board
  • Executive Officer, Learning and Teaching Committee is responsible for the administration support for the maintenance of this policy as directed by the Chair, Learning and Teaching Committee (L&T)
  • Deans of schools are responsible for oversight of the operational implementation of this policy
  • Schools will utilise the University Approved Moderation Resource and training as provided.
  • The resource, approved and monitored by The University, covers:
    • Definition of roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of all those engaged in moderation
    • Provision of information about moderation to students and staff, including moderators
    • Provision of induction and training activities for moderators where appropriate
    • Guidance as to which assessment tasks are to be moderated, with particular reference to moderation of assessment - implementation (MAI) for courses offered collaboratively
    • Guidance on technical aspects of moderation
    • Procedures for resolving disagreements between markers and moderators
    • Requirements for recording decisions, reporting results and maintaining records
  • Expectations and responsibilities for monitoring the implementation and outcomes of moderation, including provision for continuous review will be directed by the school's Associate Dean, Teaching Quality
  • The Dean of School or their nominee is responsible for ensuring that individual Course Moderators are appointed and that moderation is carried out according to the Moderation Resource. Staff development opportunities to support the start up and continued implementation of moderation will be identified and provided
  • Course Moderators are responsible for conducting and reporting the outcome of moderation of assessment - preparation (MAP) and moderation of assessment - review (MAR), in accordance with the Moderation Resource

Promulgation

The Higher Education Assessment Procedure will be communicated throughout the University community in the form of:

  • An Announcement Notice via FedNews website and on the ‘Recently Approved Documents’ page on the ‘Policies, Procedures and Forms @ the University’ website to alert the University-wide community of the approved Policy
  • Learning and Teaching Committee
  • School meetings
  • Academic Induction Program
  • Partner communication and training

Implementation

The Higher Education Assessment Procedure will be implemented throughout the University via:

  • Information Sessions; and/or
  • Training Sessions

Records Management

Document Title Location Responsible Officer Minimum Retention Period
Course Description School Administrative Office School Administrative Officer While the Course is continued to be offered
Course Outline

School

Administrative Office

School Administrative Officer While the Course is continued to be offered
Course Handbook Entry School Administrative Office School Administrative Officer While the Course is continued to be offered
Assessment Criteria and Associated Marks and Student Feedback for each Student for each Course Course Coordinator Course Coordinator

Destroy 18 months after the Appeals Period for that semester has ended

Dispose of hard copy records as per disposal process in the Records Management procedure

Assessment Benchmarking/Validation Schedule University's approved records management system Coordinator - Programs of the School/Centre teaching the course

Destroy 3 years from date of last action

Dispose of hard copy records as per disposal process in the Records Management procedure

Final Assessment Results University's approved student management system Coordinator - Programs of the School teaching the course Permanent
Moderation of Assessment Schedule and Record University's approved student management system Coordinator - Programs of the School teaching the course

Destroy 3 years from date of last action

 Dispose of hard copy records as per disposal process in Records Management procedure

Moderation Resource University's approved records management system CLIPP/CUP Permanent
Record of Assessment University's approved records management system Coordinator - Programs of the School teaching the course Permanent
Re-issue of Statement of Results University's approved records management system Coordinator - Programs of the School teaching the course

Destroy 1 year from date application made

Dispose of hard copy records as per disposal process in the Records Management procedure

Student Assessment materials Relevant online business system Coordinator - Programs of the School teaching the course

Destroy 2 years after administrative use has concluded.

Dispose of hard copy records as per disposal process in Records Management procedure

Validation of Assessment Schedule & Record Relevant online business system (electronic) or School (hard copy) Coordinator - Programs of the School teaching the course

Destroy 3 years from date of last action

Dispose of hard copy records as per disposal process in Records Management procedure