Assessment

Higher Education Assessment (inclusive of FedTASKs) Procedure

Policy code: LT1254
Policy owner: Chair, Learning and Teaching Quality Committee
Approval authority: Academic Board
Approval date: 13 November 2007
Next review date: 09 December 2025

Purpose

This procedure mandates operational activities and assigns responsibilities that are required to support the implementation of Federation University Australia's Academic Governance Policy LT2069. 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 third-party providers). However it does not apply to assessment of individual students in higher degrees by research which is the subject of the Federation University Australia (Academic) Regulations 2022 (Schedule 5). It also provides context and detail to the Federation TASKs (FedTASKs) aligned with attributes aligned with industry preparedness (Section 14).

All staff and title holders of the University must comply with the Academic Governance Policy LT2069 and this procedure whenever they are engaged in any aspect of the assessment process.

Legislative context

University Statutes and Regulations
  • Federation University Australia Statute 2021
    • Part 5 – Division 1 – Academic Board
    • Part 6 – Division 2 – Award Programs
    • Part 6 – Division 3 – Academic progress
    • Part 6 – Division 5 – Suspension or exclusion on health or safety grounds
  • Federation University Australia (Academic) Regulations 2022
  • Federation University Australia (Students) Regulations 2022

Definitions

Term Definition
Academic integrity Academic integrity is the honest and respectful engagement with the scholarships of learning, teaching, research and community. It is an essential moral code to be upheld by the academic community inclusive of staff and students. See Academic Integrity Policy LT1943 and Academic Integrity Procedure LT1944.
Active participation

In learning, this can include but is not limited to:

  • Formal classroom or online discussion
  • Workshops, artistic performances, practical sessions or field trips
  • Small group discussions or written exercises
  • Class presentations, laboratory work, role plays, blogs, wikis and webinars
  • Reflecting on, critiquing, or commenting on content or presentations provided by staff or other students

Attendance alone is not normally regarded as active participation

Alternative assessment An assessment task provided to give a student further opportunity to demonstrate achievement of learning outcomes when they have been unable to do so in the assessment tasks stipulated in the Course Description.  Alternative assessment may be authorised by the Dean or nominee. Refer Higher Education Special Consideration Procedure SS1967
Assessment The process of collecting evidence and making judgements on whether the agreed learning outcomes for that course has been achieved
Assessment Task A specific, discrete learning activity or exercise designed to obtain evidence about a student’s achievement of the published learning outcomes of a course. Tasks can be diagnostic, formative or summative, including but not limited to, essays, presentations, performance, exhibition or final examinations
Course A subsidiary element of a program
Course Coordinator An academic with overall responsibility for the design, delivery and assessment of a course of study
Course Description A thorough description of the expected course learning outcomes, assessments, due dates, marking guides and sequence details of a course. It must align with Federation University Course Description template.
Course Moderator Academic staff member responsible for overseeing moderation of marking process within a course delivery period. This may be the Course Coordinator, or a designated member of the Course Teaching Team, or Course Grading Team, or a person independent from the course, if deemed appropriate by the Executive Dean.
Course Reviewer Academic staff member independent of the coordination, teaching or marking of a course within a course delivery period. They may be from within or external to the discipline area.
Course Teaching Team All teaching staff involved in teaching within a course delivery period
Course Grading Team All teaching staff involved in marking/grading assessments within a course delivery period
Course Outline A brief description of the course including learning outcomes, content and assessment which is approved by the Curriculum Committee and used as the basis for the Course Description
Deferment of Assessment An application for deferment of an assessment can only be made in exceptional circumstances, in accordance with the Higher Education Special Consideration Procedure SS1967 
Diagnostic assessment Assessment tasks used to determine students' level of knowledge, skills, and understandings prior so that curriculum and teaching can be adapted to support learning.  
External benchmarking Comparing performance outcomes and/or processes of similar courses delivered by other Australian higher education providers
Formative assessment Refers to a wide variety of assessment methods which are used to monitor students' progress against standards and provides them with feedback that compares their progress to standards and supports their learning. These assessment tasks can be integrative and support future student learning.
Final Course Supplementary Assessment Students who receive an MF grade in their final Semester 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, the course is not exempt from supplementary assessment, and the student has not been found guilty of plagiarism in that Semester. The highest grade attainable will be a Pass grade. This only applies if the student is not eligible for any other form of supplementary assessment.
Invigilated assessment Any type of supervised assessment. An invigilated assessment task (written or practical) can be delivered during the teaching semester and/or timetabled within an examination period and that forms part of the final results in a course or program, e.g. exams, in-class tests, online tests, etc.
Learning Access Plan (LAP)

A formal document that assists registered students to communicate their negotiated reasonable adjustments and/or other supports for flexible study with Institute/Schools within the University.

The LAP outlines:

  • how the elite performer/coach/athlete’s commitments or medical condition, mental health condition, or disability impacts on a student's ability to participate in education
  • the student's own strategies to address these impacts
  • the adjustments required within the student's academic program
  • in-class adjustments
  • examination adjustments
  • placement or off-campus activity adjustments
  • other services required
Moderation A quality assurance process which ensures that assessment is continuously conducted with accuracy, consistency, transparency and fairness in design, practice and marking.
Moderation of Assessment Manual A mandated resource for use in all types of assessment moderation
Program Study/research leading to the granting of an official University award or qualification – refer Schedule 5.1. A program contains subsidiary elements referred to as courses
Program Coordinator Person responsible for the overall management of a program or range of programs
Published Assessment Criteria The criteria against which a student’s performance in the course will be judged, made available in writing to students within the Course Description or via the University’s LMS. The intent is to provide students with a clear and explicit understanding of the standards they are expected to achieve relative to marks awarded.
Published Learning Outcomes

Learning outcomes that are provided in writing to students in the Course Description which is based on the Course Outline prior to the start of teaching

Learning outcomes serve as a reference point for preparation and review phases of moderation of assessment.

Ratification of results

The process used by Institute/Schools/Centre to approve student results and grades

The process of ratification should enable confidence that the result is sufficiently accurate to be representative of the total population of assessments being ratified

Reasonable adjustments Measures and adaptations put in place to facilitate student participation in Courses and Programs while ensuring that academic standards and inherent requirements of the Course are not compromised
Institute/-School/Centre Federation University Australia has a number of Academic Organisational Units
Special consideration Acknowledgement by a Dean or nominee that a student has experienced or encountered some form of disadvantage or impediment that has prevented them from performing on their merits in an assessment task/s. In such circumstances, the particular disadvantage or impediment will be taken into account in assessing the student’s work. To enable the student to demonstrate their achievement of the course learning outcomes, they may be granted deferred assessment, additional assessment, an extension of an assessment due date or other suitable accommodation as deemed necessary. Such allowance may be made for one or more assessment tasks or courses within any teaching semester. Grounds for a student to submit an application for special consideration include serious illness and/or serious psychological condition, loss or bereavement, or hardship/trauma - refer Higher Education Special Consideration Procedure SS1967
Student Any person admitted to the University in a Course or Program
Summative assessment Summative assessments are used to evaluate student learning, skill acquisition, and academic achievement at the conclusion of a defined instructional period. There are three main criteria of summative assessment: (1) Used a tool to evaluate if students have learned the expected outcomes; (2) normally given at the conclusive of an instructional period; (3) results that are often recorded as scores or grades that are then factored into a student’s permanent academic record (Reference: Link)
Supplementary assessment An assessment or examination that provides eligible students with a further opportunity to demonstrate that they have achieved the required learning outcomes of a course when they have marginally failed (45%+) previous examination/assessment tasks.  Refer Supplementary Assessment Procedure LT2032
Third Party Providers Other entities through which registered providers deliver higher education courses, either on shore or off shore, within the requirements of the Threshold Standards, regardless of mode or location of delivery and includes various models.

Actions

Each of the mandatory procedures below, details the activity which must be conducted in accordance with the assessment principles outlined below.

1. Quality assurance

The Moderation of Assessment Manual provides operational guidance on three key types of assessment moderation to support Institutes/Schools/Centres with quality assurance measures for assessment design, assessment marking and assessment practices. Moderation of assessment ensures consistency, equity, integrity and compliance with contractual obligations at Institute/School/Centre level and all third-party providers.

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Implementing and overseeing all processes for each type of assessment moderation

Executive Dean (or nominee)

Dean (or nominee)

Dean, Learning and Teaching

  1. Review planned course offerings for the year
  2. Develop and publish agreed quality assurance targets - as per Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 1.2)
B. Defining roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of appointed staff involved in moderation processes

Executive Dean (or nominee)

Dean

Director, Learning and Teaching

  1. As per Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Sections 1.2. 2.2, 3.2 & 4.2)
C. Providing information about moderation of assessment processes to students and staff Program and Course Coordinators
  1. As identified within each type of assessment moderation in the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 2, 3 & 4)
D. Providing induction and training activities for all roles involved in the assessment moderation process, where appropriate

Executive Dean (or nominee)

Dean (or nominee)

Director, Learning and Teaching

  1. As per University Policy and utilising the Moderation of Assessment Manual
  2. Attend specific workshops (e.g. Academic Induction Program, Institute/School Induction Program, fdlGrades training)
E. Providing guidance as to which type of moderation is to be undertaken on which assessment tasks, as per agreed quality assurance targets.

Executive Dean (or nominee)

Director, Learning and Teaching

  1. As identified within the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 1.2)
F. Providing guidance on technical aspects of assessment moderation

Executive Dean

Dean

Director, Learning and Teaching

Course Coordinator

  1. As identified within the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 1.2)
G. Developing procedures for resolving disagreements between roles within a moderation process

Executive Dean (or nominee)

Dean

Director, Learning and Teaching

  1. As identified within the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 1.2)
H. Articulating requirements for recording decisions, reporting results and maintaining records Course Coordinator
  1. As identified within the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Sections 1.2, 2.2, 2.3 & 2.4)
I. Ensuring that the Moderation of Assessment Manual is up to date and approved for distribution to all stakeholders involved in the process

Dean, Learning and Teaching

Learning and Teaching Quality Committee

Global Professional School

  1. Access the current version of the Moderation of Assessment Manual.
J. Ensuring all Course Descriptions for courses to be offered during the year include the requisite information on learning outcomes and assessment, including moderation of marking model used, and are approved for distribution to students

Executive Dean (or nominee)

Dean

Course and Program Coordinators

  1. Check requisite information in Course Description form (docx, 245kb).
  2. Check appropriate approvals are in place
  3. As per Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 3.2 & 5.2)

2. Sound design of assessment

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Designing assessment tasks Course Coordinator

Sound assessment design needs to consider the following elements:

  1. Alignment
    1. 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 FedTASKs, as described in Section 14. Refer to Supplementary Guidelines (Learning Outcomes and Assessment) (docx 480.5kb) for additional guidance.
    2. Sequence and scaffold learning logically so that knowledge builds upon previous tasks and assessment task.
  2. Validity
    1. The choice of task for each learning outcome should be considered best practice and evidence-based.
    2. 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) (docx 480.5kb) for additional guidance.
    3. Consider content and face validity in the context of the mode of delivery (e.g. online, face to face, flexible).
    4. 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) (docx 480.5kb) for additional guidance.
  3. Authenticity
    1. Challenges students to extend their knowledge, understanding and stimulate their interest within the context of the course, year level and program.
    2. Where relevant, correlates to the knowledge, skills and values required for a career after leaving the university – i.e.: real world relevance.
    3. Is feasible in relation to student workloads for course credit points
    4. Is ethically sound as per Discipline, Institute/School and University codes of conduct and work-integrated learning agreements.
  4. Transparency
    1. Provides students with an understanding of the link to learning outcomes and explicit expectations for successful completion.
    2. Assessment requirements communicated to students as per Action 6. Communicating assessment requirements to students.
  5. Inclusiveness
    1. Accounts for a student’s current knowledge, experience, academic literacy and digital literacy needs for successful completion of the task
    2. 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.
    3. Equitable across campuses/modes of offering
  6. Veracity
    1. Consider the need for invigilation in assessment to maintain veracity of tasks, as per the Higher Education Examinations Procedure LT1940.
    2. 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.
    3. Consider the implications of the use of social media, and/or technologies not supported by the University in maintaining assessment veracity.
  7. Feedback
    1. Opportunities to provide formative feedback, summative feedback, or both, for all assessment tasks.
    2. Provided in a way that allows for effective understanding of progress, achievement of learning outcomes and support future assessment tasks.
    3. Provided within three weeks of student submission, where possible.
  8. Reliability
    1. The assessment criteria clearly differentiate and articulate the evaluation components and performance levels required to achieve varying levels of learning
    2. Moderation of assessment and marking processes is undertaken to ensure fair, just and consistent assessment practices.
  9. Manageability
    1. 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) (PDF 310.4kb) for additional guidance.
    2. Assessors able to moderate and mark the tasks within the allocated staff workload hours as per the Academic Workload Guide that applies at the time.
  10. Evaluation
    1. 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).
    2. 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
  1. Ensure course learning outcomes, tasks and assessment are aligned and sequenced to the broader objectives and structure of the program, and the Universities FedTASKs (See section 14).
  2. Course assessment must consider and contribute to the achievement of AQF standards required of the program, as approved by Academic Board.
  3. Ensure each program has an appropriate variety of types of diagnostic, integrated, summative and formative assessments
  4. Course assessment must consider type and timing of submission with other course assessments and workloads, studied within the same semester.
  5. 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 Director, Learning and Teaching, Global Professional School (GPS) and/or the staff of the Centre for Academic Development (CAD)
  6. Consider any relevant accreditation requirements.
  7. Proposed changes to curriculum require the completion of appropriate Program and/or Course Modification documentation for presentation to Institute/School Board prior to submission for approval and/or noting at the University level 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 Executive Dean/Dean (or nominee)
  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 CAD staff and Director, Learning and Teaching.
  3. Meet criteria in the University's Learning and Teaching Plan, and Teaching Expectations for Academic Staff, for quality teaching and assessment practices.

3. Moderation of assessment design (type I)

This type of assessment moderation ensures independent review of all elements of assessment design and subsequent supports for student success. Completed PRIOR to course delivery, it focuses on providing checks on, and support for, the preparation of evidence-based best practice assessment tasks.

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Preparing and submitting items for independent review Course Coordinator and academic staff responsible for setting assessment tasks
  1. As outlined in Type I - Steps 1 – 3 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 2)
B. Reviewing and providing feedback on proposed assessment tasks Course Reviewer
  1. As outlined in Type I - Step 4 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 2)
  2. Peer Enhancement of Learning and Teaching Procedure LT1964 can be followed to facilitate both reporting and record-keeping of the moderation of assessment design
C. Resolving any disputes arising from the moderation process Director, Learning and Teaching, Executive Dean/Dean or nominee, academic staff members and Course Coordinator and Course Reviewer
  1. As outlined in Type I - Step 5 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 2)
D. Releasing assessment tasks for use Course Coordinator
  1. As outlined in Type I - Step 5 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 2)
E. Recording the outcomes of the moderation of assessment design process Course Coordinator
  1. As outlined in Type I - Step 5 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 2)

4. Formalising assessment requirements

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Developing templates for Course Outline and Course Description 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)
    • Model of marking moderation used
    • Adopted Reference Style
    • Supplementary Assessment
    • Work integrated Learning (if appropriate)
    • FedTASKs
  2. Modifications to the assessment within Course Outlines must adhere to Action 2: Sound design of assessment and requires approval from the relevant Institute/School Board, and must be noted by the 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 (Higher Education) CG1703
  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) (PDF 310.4kb) such as:
    • Assessment criteria
    • How and when feedback and marks will be provided
    • Resources and/or services to support successful completion of the task

5. Communicating assessment requirements to students

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A Communicating assessment requirements to students Course Coordinator/Third-party providers
  1. All details for successful completion of assessment tasks to be available to students as per Action 4: 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 enable 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 CG1445.

6. Implementing Assessment

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Ensuring academic integrity Course Coordinator/Third-party provider
  1. Educate students about required standards of academic integrity and how to adequately and consistently correctly research, present and reference their work for an Australian educational environment.
  2. The University will use text matching and authorship verification software where available for assessments. Students must agree to the use of such software when submitting their assessments. The academic receiving the assessment must ensure all student submissions are treated equally, and as such, if the student has not agreed to the use of text matching and authorship verification software where it is required, such software must be used prior to marking.
B. Assessing students with disability or special circumstances Program/Course Coordinator/Third-party provider
C. Eligibility for supplementary assessment Program/Course Coordinator/Third-party provider
  1. Refer Student Access, Progression and Wellbeing Policy SS1965 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 academic misconduct 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 Institute/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 Executive 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

Global Professional School

  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 Institute/School/Third-party provider/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, an Institute/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 SS1967 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 SS1967 and associated forms

7. Ensuring security of student submitted assessment materials

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Collecting and recording submitted assessment tasks Course Coordinator/Third-party provider
  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/Third-party provider/Executive Dean/Dean (or nominee)
  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 Executive Dean/Dean immediately, and appropriate action will be undertaken.
C. Protecting confidentiality of students Course Coordinator/Third-party provider
  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/Third-party provider
  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/Third-party provider
  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.

8. Moderation of assessment marking (type II)

This type of assessment moderation ensures all marking of assessment tasks are fair, consistent and accurate in line with published assessment criteria, regardless of the type of assessment, number of markers or delivery location.

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Model or marking moderation Course Coordinator
  1. As outlined in Type II - Steps 1 – 2 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 3)
    • Select and communicate to students the model or models of marking moderation used to maintain fairness, consistency and accuracy of the marking process
    • Note any contractual obligations of third-party vendors on choice of model
B. Marking and grading assessment is based on criterion referencing Academic/Third-party provider 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)
C. Moderating marks and grades Course Moderators
  1. As outlined in Type II - Steps 3 – 5 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (Section 3)
    • Undertake selected model(s) of marking as per process outlined
D. Requesting second marking Course Coordinator/Third-party provider
  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 Federation University Australia Statute - Part 6 - Division 3and the Federation University Australia (Academic) Regulations (Schedule 6)  
  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.
E. 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 Institute/School has enough evidence to make an appropriate decision regarding grade assessment, this may be granted on approval of the Executive Dean/Dean.
  4. Otherwise, refer to the Student Access, Progression and Wellbeing Policy SS1965 and associated procedures and forms in relation to Special consideration - deferred examination
F. Assessing supplementary assessments Course Coordinator/Third-party provider
  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
G. Recording assessment results Institute/School/Third-party provider
  1. Record results in the University's approved record management system
H. Recording outcomes of the moderation of assessment marking process Course Moderators, Course Coordinator
  1. As outline in Type II - Step 6 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (refer Section 3)

9. Approving and reporting of moderated marking results

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Confirming and approving students' results Institute/School Board
  1. Executive Dean/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 Executive Dean/Dean and Student HQ
  1. Marks will be entered into the currently endorsed University records management system for grading in accordance with the Moderation of Assessment Manual
  2. Marks will be made accessible to students via the University's approved records management system.

10. Providing students with feedback on assessment

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Providing feedback Academic staff/Third-party provider 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/Third-party provider 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 Executive Dean/Dean (or nominee)
  1. A student may appeal, in accordance with the procedure specified in the Regulations, to the Executive Dean/Dean of the relevant Institute/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 Appeal Policy CG1488 and Student Appeal Procedure CG1464 with reference to the appropriate Statute/Regulation
D. Notifying student of their opportunity to complete supplementary assessment Institute/School/Third-party provider
  1. Advise any student eligible for supplementary assessment of their eligibility, in accordance with Action 6 | Steps C and E.  

11. Moderation of assessment practice (type III)

This type of assessment moderation evaluates the success of the assessment tasks, course learning plan, and facilitation practices undertaken in enabling and demonstrating student learning. Completed POST course delivery, this process provides a vehicle for continuous improvement through acknowledgment of successes and challenges, and provision of recommendations to mitigate challenges for future assessment and course learning plan design, development and delivery.

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Review any outcomes from undertaking moderation of assessment design (type I) and/or moderation of assessment marking (type II) Course Coordinator
  1. As outlined in Type lll - Steps 1 – 2 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (Section 4)
B. Provide recommendations for future enhancements to assessment design, assessment marking model or process Course Reviewer
  1. As outlined in Type lll - Step 3 – 5 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (Section 4)
C. Maintaining records of the outcomes of the moderation of assessment practice process Course Coordinator
  1. As outlined in Type lll - Steps 6 – 7 of the Moderation of Assessment Manual (Section 4)

12. Ratifying results, posting of grades and managing appeals

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Preparing for ratification Executive Dean/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 an Institute/School level whereby all course results are presented and discussed to determine if any modifications/changes are required.
  3. The Federation University 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, ratification will progress to the Ratification and Assessment Committee (Institute level) and subsequently to the Institute/School Board.
B. Ratifying results Executive Dean or nominee (such as Program Coordinators)
  1. Institutes/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

Ratification and Assessment Committee

Institute/School Board

Director, Learning and Teaching

  1. All assessment ratification must be approved by the Institute/School Board before results can be published
  2. Results are submitted to the Board
  3. Board approves results in the form relevant to each program.
D. 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 Institute/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 Institute/School to resolve any issues
  6. On the morning of results' publication, post approved grades in student management system
E. Dealing with assessment appeals in a timely manner Executive Dean/Dean or nominee
  1. In accordance with the Student Appeal Procedure CG1464, 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 Federation University Australia Statute - Part 6 - Division 3 - Academic Progress, read in conjunction with Federation University Australia (Students) Regulation 2022 - Division 5 - Assessment
  3. The Institute/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 Student Appeals Committee in accordance with Federation University Australia (Students) Regulations 2022 - Division 7 - Appeals

13. Continuous improvement

The following actions refer to the continuous improvement of all elements of assessment through internal and external benchmarking, and monitoring and acting upon moderation outcomes

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Collating an Annual Moderation Report

Executive Dean/Dean/nominee

Dean, Learning and Teaching

Director, Learning and Teaching

  1. The Annual Report should, at a minimum, cover the conduct and outcomes of the moderation of assessment types undertaken, including any comments or advice from Course Coordinators, Reviewers and Moderators
B. Consider the Annual Moderation Report Institute Learning and Teaching 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 Institute/School Board for noting
C. Contributing to the Institute/School's annual report on assessment and moderation

Executive Dean/Dean/nominee

Director, Learning and Teaching

  1. Collate relevant information into report for Academic Board / Learning and Teaching Quality Committee
D. Monitoring the conduct and outcomes of all/any moderation types across the University Executive Dean/Dean/ Learning and Teaching Quality Committee
  1. A consolidated report from each Exec. Dean/Dean on the conduct and outcomes of moderation will be sent to Learning and Teaching Quality Committee
  2. Following due consideration of moderation outcomes by the Learning and Teaching Quality Committee any key factors arising are identified and noted
  3. The Committee will make recommendations for necessary changes to assessment policy or procedure that arise from moderation reports
E. Benchmarking of assessment Director, Learning and Teaching 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
F. Undertaking external/internal benchmarking process Director, Learning and Teaching 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 Institute/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 Institute/School Board
G. Following up on continuous improvement changes identified on assessment tasks Director, Learning and Teaching
  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

14. Federation TASKs (Transferable Attributes Skills and Knowledge)

The Federation TASKs (FedTASKs) are an important part of the University's response to becoming a Co-Operative Learning institution.

Mapping of FedTASKs can occur at the course and program level through university approval record management system (for example fdl). It is important to look at the holistic experience of the student and the skills being developed as they progress with their learning journey.  Not all FedTASKs will be relevant at every course and therefore, staff are encouraged to discuss this initiative with peers and your Director, Learning and Teaching as you align course learning outcomes and assessment with FedTASKs. These FedTASKs may also align with accreditation expectations and other mapping activities.  

Note: Further FedTASKs descriptors are currently under development. These descriptors will be further expanded to other AQF levels. This information will be made available at a designated website focused on FedTASKs and the Co-Operative Learning Model.

FedTASK Descriptor (AQF Level 7)

FedTASK 1

Interpersonal

  • Students will demonstrate the ability to effectively communicate, interact and work with others both individually and in groups.
  • Students will be required to display skills in-person and online in:
    • Using effective verbal and non-verbal communication
    • Listening for meaning and able to influence via active listening
    • Showing empathy for others
    • Negotiating and conflict resolution skills
    • Working respectfully in cross-cultural and diverse teams

FedTASK 2

Leadership

  • Students will demonstrate the ability to apply professional skills and behaviours in leading others.
  • Students will be required to display skills in:
    • Creating a collegial environment
    • Showing self-awareness and the ability to self-reflect
    • Inspiring and convincing others
    • Making informed decisions
    • Displaying initiative

FedTASK 3

Critical Thinking and Creativity

  • Students will demonstrate an ability to work in complexity and ambiguity using the imagination or original ideas to create new ideas.
  • Students will be required to display skills in:
    • Reflecting critically
    • Evaluating ideas, concepts and information
    • Considering alternative perspectives to refine ideas
    • Challenging conventional thinking to clarify concepts
    • Forming creative solutions in problem solving

FedTASK 4

Digital Literacy

  • Students will demonstrate the ability to work fluently across a range of tools, platforms and applications to achieve a range of tasks.
  • Students will be required to display skills in:
    • Finding, evaluating, managing, curating, organising and sharing digital information
    • Collating, managing, accessing and using digital data securely
    • Receiving and responding to messages in a range of digital media
    • Contributing actively to digital teams and working groups
    • Participating in and benefiting from digital learning opportunities

FedTASK 5

Sustainable and Ethical Mindset

  • Students will demonstrate the ability to consider and assess the consequences and impact of ideas and actions in enacting ethical and sustainable decisions.
  • Students will be required to display skills in:
    • Making informed judgements that consider the impact of devising solutions in global, economic, environmental and societal contexts
    • Committing to social responsibility as a professional and a citizen
    • Evaluating ethical, socially responsible and/or sustainable challenges and generate and articulate responses
    • Embracing life-long, life-wide, and life-deep learning to be open to diverse others
    • Implementing required actions to foster sustainability in their professional and personal life

Responsibility

  • Academic Board (as Approval Authority) is responsible for monitoring the implementation, outcomes and scheduled review of this procedure and will receive annual reports as part of the annual Program Performance Report from each Institute/School.
  • Chair, Learning and Teaching Quality Committee (LTQC) (as Document Owner) is responsible for maintaining the content of this procedure as delegated by Academic Board.
  • Executive Officer, Learning and Teaching Quality Committee is responsible for the administration support for the maintenance of this procedure as directed by the Chair, Learning and Teaching Quality Committee (LTQC).
  • Executive Deans/Deans of institutes/schools are responsible for oversight of the operational implementation of this procedure.

Promulgation

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

  • A FedNews announcement and on the ‘Recently Approved Documents’ page on the University’s Policy Central website
  • Learning and Teaching Quality Committee
  • Institute/School meetings
  • Academic Induction Program
  • Third-party provider 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 Institute/School Administrative Office Institute/School Administrative Officer While the Course is continued to be offered
Course Outline Institute/School Administrative Office Institute/School Administrative Officer While the Course is continued to be offered
Course Handbook Entry Institute/School Administrative Office Institute/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 University's approved learning management system 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 Institute/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 Institute/School teaching the course Permanent
Moderation of Assessment Schedule and Record University's approved student management system Coordinator - Programs of the Institute/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 of Assessment Manual University's approved records management system CAD/GPS Permanent
Record of Assessment University's approved records management system Coordinator - Programs of the Institute/School teaching the course Permanent
Re-issue of Statement of Results University's approved records management system Coordinator - Programs of the Institute/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 Institute/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 Institute/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