Skip to content
Open menu Close menu

Marking, internal moderation and external examination

The Regulations relating to assessment and moderation are provided in the Administrative Regulations Relating to Assessment.

All assessment should be subject to an accuracy check to ensure that all work has been fully marked and that marks have been accurately calculated and transcribed.

Individual assessments for modules at Levels 4, 5, 6, and 7 are subject to double consideration in a two year cycle, with at least 50% of modules being subject to double consideration in any one academic year. A minimum 10% sample of scripts is double considered on each occasion; this involves a second member of academic staff confirming the validity and equity of the marks, taking into account the marks and comments of the first marker.

Clinical and practical assessments require two assessors where the assessment forms the full assessment for the module. Projects and Dissertations in modules of 30 credits or greater should be fully double marked, either ‘blind’ or against the comments of the first marker.

Departments are required to define a clear and fair process to resolve disagreements between first and second markers. This might be achieved, for example, by asking a third internal marker to arbitrate (Regulation 2.13 Administrative Regulations Relating to Assessment).

The Chair of the Assessment Committee or Board of Examiners, as appropriate, has the authority delegated by Senate, to resolve any dispute between internal and external examiners about marks awarded, or between any External Examiners and an Assessment Committee or Board of Examiners, that cannot otherwise be resolved.

External Examines should view a sample of assessed work of sufficient size to enable him/her to form a view as to whether the internal marking has properly assessed student performance against the appropriate standards. This should be a minimum of 10%, or 10 scripts, and include examples from the top, middle and bottom of the range, including all borderline cases and fails. The Regulations explain how any recommendations to change the marks of individual or groups of students should be handled .

Marks presented to Assessment Committees are automatically rounded to the nearest whole number by the student system (SITs). Marks above 0.5 are rounded up and those below are rounded down.