1.0    Purpose and Scope

1. This procedure—

   1. sets out the principles and requirements for—

      1. the design and management of summative assessment;

      2. submission of assessment and extensions to due dates;

      3. assessment-remark;

      4. finalisation of grades; and

      5. supplementary assessment;

      6. for coursework studies at the University.

   2. applies to all students, and academic and professional staff with responsibility for teaching and/or administration of undergraduate and postgraduate courses at UQ.

2. For design and management of examinations this procedure should be read in conjunction with the Examinations Procedure.

3. Details of the University's assessment policies in relation to higher degree by research candidates are found in the policies and procedures under 4.60 Higher Degree by Research  Candidates.

2.0    Process and Key Controls

1. All assessment at UQ must be designed and implemented in accordance with principles set out in the Assessment Policy and the requirements set out in the procedure.

2. In conjunction with the Course Design Policy the course profile for each course must include, or specify the location of, all required information about assessment for that course, including but not limited to:

   1. assessment criteria, standards and due dates for each assessment task;

   2. method of weighting and aggregating individual pieces of assessment, the use of any hurdle requirements, and the method used to determine a final grade;

   3. items that are exempt or partially exempt from supplementary assessment; and

   4. in the case of oral or practical assessment items, whether the items will be recorded, the reason for the recording, and how the recording will be held and treated in confidence; and

   5. in the case of examinations, the format of the examination and permitted materials and equipment (refer to the Examinations Procedure for more information).

3. Course profiles must be released to students by the deadline specified in the Course Design Policy. No changes are permitted after the assessment lock-down date unless prior approval is provided by the Associate Dean (Academic) (section 3.2.1).

4. The University’s Grading System is specified in Appendix 7.1. The final grade for a course must reflect the numeric descriptors set out in Table A, Appendix 7.1. The circumstances in which grades can be altered, and the timeframes and responsibilities associated with determination and release of final grades to students, is outlined in section 3.8.

5. All aspects of assessment including design, delivery and outcomes must be routinely monitored and reviewed (section 3.10).

6. Academic staff at UQ are supported and encouraged to design authentic, engaging and sustainable assessment and to undertake appropriate professional development on assessment.

7. Under specific conditions outlined in section 3.7 students may apply for reconsideration of a mark or grade awarded for an item of assessment.

8. Students may also pursue assessment-related grievances in accordance with the Student Grievance Resolution Policy.

3.0    Key Requirements

3.1    Design and delivery of assessment

3.1.1    Program-level considerations

1. Assessment must provide systematic opportunities for students to demonstrate progress towards or achievement of program level learning outcomes, including development of graduate attributes and professional standards, where appropriate.

2. Assessment must be mapped against program level outcomes, or in the case of programs with multiple pathways, mapping is to be based on core courses. This is monitored through the Academic Program Review process.

3. Where feasible, course assessment takes into account the demands (including weighting and scheduling) of assessment in parallel courses within the program.

3.1.2    Course-level considerations

1. Assessment is designed to maintain high standards, and generate valid evidence, of learning through:

   1. the use of criterion-referenced assessment which makes explicit the relationships among assessment tasks, all learning objectives, the criteria used as the basis of assessment judgements, and the grades associated with different levels or standards of performance;

   2. a focus on the quality of learning outcomes (e.g. the quality of tutorial participation or contribution to a group outcome). Mere attendance (as distinct from attendance and participation) must not be a requirement to pass the course;

   3. the use of a combination of two or more assessment tasks (or a multi-component, staged task such as a thesis or a project) which reflect the range and complexity of the learning objectives, with assessment tasks spread appropriately across the teaching period. No single assessment task (or task component), including examinations but excluding research, project based assessments or thesis, may compulsorily contribute more than 70% to the final grade;

   4. the demands of the combined assessment tasks in a course being commensurate with its nominal unit value; and the relative weightings of tasks within a course being commensurate with the relative importance of the associated learning objectives; and

   5. unless it is a hurdle requirement, assessment that provides students with the opportunity to demonstrate a range of competencies in learning from minimum learning standards to learning of the highest standard.

2. Up to four assessment items may be set for courses worth 2 units, one of which may be an assessment sequence that collectively is worth a minimum of 10% (or equivalent).* The Associate Dean (Academic) may permit additional assessment items if they consider there are sound pedagogical reasons to do so.

3. Assessment is also designed in accordance with the availability of and appropriate allocation of resources for the course.

4. Criteria and standards must sufficiently distinguish students’ performance over a range of levels. The numeric descriptors listed in Table A, Appendix 7.1 provide university-wide standards for awarding final grades. Course Coordinators may develop criteria and standards for specific assessment tasks aligned with the generic descriptors.

* Note: All 2-unit courses offered for Semester 2, 2022 enrolments onwards must comply with the requirements set in clause 2 of section 3.1.2.

3.1.3    Group work

1. The ability to work in teams is an essential skill for students to develop. Where group assessment is summative, Course Coordinators must ensure that the assessment is criterion-referenced, linked to the learning objectives of the course, transparent, fair and equitable.

2. To enable compliance:

i. The need for group work must be necessary to achieve the course objectives, and hence be specified as a learning objective in the course profile; and

ii. Students must have had the opportunity to learn how to work effectively in teams / groups either by way of specific training in the course or pre-requisite course, or an online course; and

iii. Course Coordinators must provide students with resources and support within the course to enable management of cases in which groups are not functioning effectively, with directions to these resources and support given in the course profile. Guidelines on group work are available to Course Coordinators.

3.1.4    Assessment integrity

1. In designing and conducting assessment, teaching staff must give due regard to assessment integrity and security, and minimise the possibility of impersonation and cheating.

2. Electronic submission of assignments is strongly encouraged to provide authoritative proof of the date and time of submission and to allow for text matching including the use of plagiarism detection software.

3. Any form of summative assessment that takes place in a supervised environment at an approved university location, is the work of a single student and for which authentication of the student’s identity is required will comply with a set of examination requirements as outlined in the Examinations Procedure.

4. Insofar as repetition of previously used assessment items (e.g. examination papers or essay topics) risks the integrity of the assessment process and outcomes, assessment tasks must be substantially different at each offering. For example, in a multiple choice examination, 80% of the questions would differ at each offering.

5. Any student who enrols in a course must not be given exemption or partial credit from their previous attempt(s) for any individual piece of assessment. Instead, the student must complete all of the learning activities and assessment items within the study period of enrolment.

3.1.5    Reasonable adjustments to assessment

1. A reasonable adjustment or change to assessment may be made in specified circumstances to ensure all students are able to participate equitably in the academic life of the University.

2. Adjustments are only made when the student has formal approval under the Reasonable Adjustments - Students Policy and the adjustment retains the essential learning objectives for the course or program.

3.1.6    Timing and scheduling of assessment

1. Assessment must not be held or due during a revision period.

2. Examinations must not be held on a Sunday or public holiday.

3. Despite clause 2, the Academic Registrar may permit a variation to scheduling when they consider there are exceptional circumstances.

3.2    Communication of assessment requirements

3.2.1    Provision of assessment information

1. Assessment criteria and standards for each assessment task must be made available to students at the same time as the description and timing of the assessment task.

2. Course Coordinators must not alter the structure of course level assessment after the assessment lockdown date, which is five (5) days after the start of the relevant teaching period for the course. Any changes after the lockdown date must have prior approval of the Associate Dean (Academic). This approval will be in consultation with the Academic Registrar, with the exception of extensions to the assessment due date.

3. All changes must be communicated to students promptly. Communication must be by means in addition to notification in the course profile.

3.2.2    Consistency of information

Where more than one tutor/lecturer is involved in providing information to students about assessment requirements, consistent information must be provided.

3.2.3    Student engagement with assessment information

1. Teaching staff will provide opportunities for students to engage with information about assessment including:

   1. criteria and standards;

   2. permitted materials and equipment for examinations (e.g. approved calculators);

   3. examination formats as provided in past or sample examination papers; and

   4. students’ responsibilities in relation to assessment policies (e.g. on late submission of assessment) as listed in the course profile and in related policies and procedures.

2. Students will take responsibility for evidencing submission by the due date of all assessments in the required form, e.g. retain evidence, screenshot, email, photo and copy of submitted work.

3.3    Submission of assessment

1. Where feasible, all summative assessment items should be submitted electronically through the University's Learning Management System, with the exception of assessment completed during scheduled classes, written-based examinations, and performance-based assessment.

2. All assessment items must be due either during a scheduled class or at a pre-advised time between 1pm to 5pm, Monday to Friday.

3. Despite clause 2, the Associate Deans (Academic) (or their delegates) are authorised to make adjustments to the due time for assessment if the course coordinator presents compelling grounds for submission outside of 1pm to 5pm.

4. Where assignments are electronically submitted through Turnitin, students must have the opportunity to submit a draft assignment to Turnitin prior to submission of the final assignment.

3.3.1    Extensions to assessment due date

1. This section applies to assessment items which have a specified due date for submission, as set out in the course profile. It does not apply to examinations (including quizzes and tests) held during scheduled classes, mid-semester Saturday, end of semester examination period or deferred examination periods (as per the Examinations Procedure).

2. A student may apply for an extension if they are unable to meet an assessment deadline due to unavoidable circumstances (see section 3.3.3).

3. The Course Coordinator has responsibility to assess the request for extension against the criteria and may:

   1. grant an extension to a timescale that is commensurate with the extenuating circumstances and is not unfair to other students in the course, or

   2. determine the student is ineligible and reject the request.

4. The Course Coordinator may authorise appropriate decision makers to consider or decide upon applications on specified grounds.

5. In instances where it is not possible to extend the due date for the assessment item (e.g. a placement), arrangements must be made to provide students with the opportunity to meet the learning objectives of that assessment item, and be stipulated in the course profile.

3.3.2    Applications

1. Students applying for an extension to an assessment due date must submit a request through my.UQ and provide evidence of their circumstances, as soon as it becomes evident that an extension is needed, but no later than the assessment item submission due date and time.

2. A request for an extension to an assessment due date must be accompanied by supporting documentation corroborating the reason for the request (see section 3.3.3). A scanned image or copy of the supporting documentation is acceptable.

3. The student is to be notified of the outcome as soon as possible in a manner that gives the student time to consider the implications of the outcome.

4. Requests for extensions received after the assessment item submission due date and time in clause 1 above must include evidence of the reasons for the late request, and will require the decision maker listed in section 2.3.2 of PPL 3.60.02 Student Grievance Resolution to accept the request for consideration.

3.3.3    Grounds for extensions

A student may be eligible for an extension to the assessment due date on the grounds set out below, and as outlined in the Table of Acceptable Evidence for Extensions to Assessment.

3.3.3.1    Medical reasons

1. Requests for extensions to assessment due dates based on medical grounds must include a medical certificate obtained on or before the assessment item due date, and provided by:

   1. a registered medical practitioner or registered nurse; or

   2. a registered pharmacist obtained on the assessment item submission due date, and will only cover that one day; or

   3. a statement from a counsellor, psychologist or psychiatrist.

2. Despite clause 1, under exceptional circumstances, and only where sufficient explanation and evidence is provided, for example, a period of hospitalisation, a medical certificate obtained after the submission due date may be accepted.

3. An extension granted to a student will not exceed the number of days suffered from a medical condition, as stated on the medical certificate.

4. Medical certificates must not be provided by a near relative or close associate of the student.

5. The University reserves the right to check the validity of the medical certificate with the medical practitioner.

3.3.3.2    Student Access Plan

1. Where a student is applying for an extension on the basis of a Student Access Plan approved by Diversity and Inclusion Team, the Student Access Plan must clearly state the provision for extensions to assessment due dates.

3.3.3.3    Compassionate or extenuating circumstances

1. If a request for extension is based on compassionate or extenuating circumstances, a statement of reasons why the student was unable to submit the assessment by the deadline and all corroborative evidence must be submitted with the request.

2. Compassionate or extenuating circumstances could include, but are not limited to:

   1. sudden serious illness of a family member; or

   2. recent death of a family member; or

   3. serious personal or emotional trauma; or

   4. extraordinary and unavoidable work commitments beyond the student’s control.

3.3.3.4    Unacceptable reasons

1. The following are not grounds for an extension, including but not limited to:

   • computer or internet problems;

   • holiday arrangements;

   • misreading an assignment due date or time;

   • unexpected events causing the loss of a few hours of study time close to the due date;

   • difficulty studying effectively or adjusting to the demands of university life;

   • normal levels of stress or anxiety associated with study;

   • visa or financial problems;

   • ordinary family events or commitments; or

   • normal pressures relating to study or employment.

3.3.4    Penalties for late submission

1. The following penalties apply to late submission of an assessment item:

   1. A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark allocated for the assessment item, or one grade per day if graded on the basis of 1-7, or equivalent penalty if an alternative grading approach is used, will be deducted per day for up to 7 calendar days, at which point any submission will not receive any marks unless an extension has been approved. Each 24-hour block is recorded from the time the submission is due; or

   2. A penalty of 100% for a late assessment item may be set provided it is approved by the Associate Dean (Academic) as academically justified and communicated in the course profile; or

   3. An alternative penalty in certain limited circumstances, as approved by the Associate Dean (Academic).

3.4    Oral and practical assessment

1. When a student is required to complete a live oral or practical assessment item worth 20% or more, the performance will be recorded in accordance with Appendix 7.2 and retained as the official recording of the item for re-mark purposes.   

2. The Associate Dean (Academic) may waive the recording of an assessment performance under clause 3.4(1) if they are satisfied that one or more of the following apply:

   1. The assessment occurs in a setting where recording is not permitted (e.g. a clinical setting where recording of patients will compromise patient privacy and confidentiality);

   2. There is an inability to feasibly record the content required to inform examiner judgment equivalent to the original performance (e.g. face-to-face clinical assessments such as the objective structure clinical examinations (OSCEs)); or

   3. The filming process will disrupt the assessment performance and/or compromise assessment validity.

Where the recording of an assessment performance is waived, the course profile will clearly state what other means will be used to document the performance (e.g. written notes).

3.5    Provision of feedback on assessment

3.5.1    Feedback for learning

1. In addition to the mark awarded, feedback must be promptly provided on all assessment tasks, including examinations, to enable students to apply the feedback to further tasks within the course or program and/or plan for supplementary assessment, requests for re-mark, or re-enrolment. The form of feedback provided is appropriate to the task weighting, timing and context, and with reference to criteria and standards.

2. A student may request further detailed feedback about their performance on an assessment item by lodging a written request to the Course Coordinator. The Course Coordinator will then arrange for the feedback to be provided to the student in a timely manner, typically within 14 calendar days.

3. In any case, students will be given the opportunity to view their examination script within twenty calendar days of the release of the final grade and within the first two weeks of the following semester (note –  for the purpose of this clause, both semester 2 and summer semester are followed by semester 1).

3.5.2    Student responsibility

1. Teaching staff are to advise students of their responsibility to incorporate feedback into their learning.

2. Students will take responsibility for incorporating feedback into their learning in accordance with the Student Code of Conduct.

3.6    Assessment judgements

3.6.1    The basis of judgements

1. Assessment judgements must—

   1. be made with reference to criteria and standards and not to the achievement of other students;

   2. reflect the quality of the student’s performance (e.g. the quality of tutorial contribution not tutorial attendance); and

   3. be transparent; negative marking in multiple choice examinations, that is, the practice of deducting marks for providing incorrect answers or formula marking to correct for guessing, is not permitted.

3.6.2    Moderation

1. Moderation is an important part of quality assurance.

2. The minimum requirement is that moderation is conducted with reference to criteria and standards to ensure consistency of judgements about the work of:

   1. students within a course/group;

   2. students in different classes/groups within a single course; and

   3. students whose work has been peer-assessed or self-assessed within a course.

3. Moderation within a course between staff may involve discussion of the way the standards have been applied to assessed work, and/or review of the application of standards prior to marking.

4. Moderation between students taking the same course in different semesters or years is also an important part of quality assurance processes as outlined in section 3.10.

3.6.3    Avoidance of bias and conflicts of interest

1. Anonymous marking is undertaken where appropriate and practicable.

2. When a near relative or close associate is enrolled in a course for which a staff member is involved in the assessment—

   • The staff member is not to participate in the marking of assessment or the determination of a final grade, and must inform their supervisor (e.g. Head of School, Executive Dean) of the potential conflict at the earliest opportunity.

   • The supervisor will determine arrangements for assessment including setting examination questions, marking assessment, and the roles of other staff members involved in the course; an external examiner may be necessary in some cases. If any doubt exists, the supervisor is to contact the President of the Academic Board.

3.6.4    Documentation of assessment judgements

1. To ensure the integrity of assessment and to enhance feedback on assessment, clear records must be kept of assessment and/or the evaluation of assessment, including when the work does not generate evidence that can be referred to after the assessment. For example, for assessment in the form of a presentation, a supervised placement, or an oral assessment:

   1. two markers are used, or

   2. the presentation is recorded, or

   3. clear records are kept of performance against the criteria and standards.

2. Where practicable, recordings should be made of oral assessments.

3.6.5    The method of representing and aggregating results

1. The aggregation of the results of individual tasks to determine a course grade must be a deliberate process that is readily defensible. Only percentages, marks, weighted grades, verbal descriptors, or letter codes are to be used to represent a students' levels of achievement on assessment items. Course Coordinators may develop criteria and standards for specific assessment tasks aligned with the numeric descriptors specified in Appendix 7.1.

2. The method of weighting and aggregating individual pieces of assessment, the use of any hurdle requirements, and the method used to determine a final grade must be made explicit in the course profile. Profiling of grades, use of weighted grades, or weighted marks and percentages may be used provided that details (including any cut-offs) are published in the course profile. Ad hoc variations are not to be made without the approval of the Associate Dean (Academic) in consultation with the Academic Registrar.

3. Post hoc variations to grade cut-offs may be permissible where there is justifiable academic reason for the change:

   1. On the approval of the Head of School, grade cut-offs may be lowered where the change does not disadvantage students; and

   2. In exceptional circumstances, with the approval of the Associate Dean (Academic) in consultation with the Academic Registrar, grade cut-offs may be increased.

4. Deducting marks for failure to undertake a specified task that is not part of the summative assessment is not permitted.

3.6.6    Release of assessment item marks and grades

1. Students are only provided with their individual marks and grades, and not those of other students. Results must not be displayed in public places or student forums (e.g. physical or online noticeboards).

2. Results for all summative assessment items are to be made available to individual students through the eLearning Management System on completion of marking, with the exception of the final assessment item which is to be released only after the final grade for the course has been released (refer to section 3.8).

3. Despite clause 2, the Academic Registrar may approve the early release of marks for a final assessment item.

4. Staff must not disclose any information to unauthorised persons about the marks or grades of a particular student.

3.7    Assessment re-mark

3.7.1    Purpose of a re-mark

1. The purpose of reconsidering assessment judgements (section 3.6) is to ensure the marking criteria and standards have been applied appropriately.

2. If the request for a re-mark is approved the work will be re-assessed against the marking criteria and standards.

3. If the mark is found to be incorrect due to a mathematical error in the calculation of the final result, this is not a re-mark. Amendments to a final result because of (i) a mathematical error or (ii) non-inclusion of the marks from a piece of assessment, are considered a procedural error. 

4. Reconsideration of a mark that involves review of the academic judgement will in all cases be treated as a re-mark request.

3.7.1.1    Re-mark of Individual assessment

Where a student has completed an individual assessment item and the student believes the judgement of their work and the resulting mark or grade they were awarded for an assessment item does not reflect their performance, as measured against the published assessment criteria, then the student can apply for a re-mark.

3.7.1.2    Re-mark of group work involving peer assessment or individual components marked individually

In the case of a group assessment which includes a peer assessment for each individual student, or there are components of the assessment item that are marked individually, then these items are treated as an individual assessment item.

3.7.1.3    Re-mark of group assessment

In the case of a group assessment item for which only one mark is awarded irrespective of individual contributions, and at least 50% of the group members agree that the resulting mark does not reflect the group’s performance as measured against the published assessment criteria, those group members can apply for a re-mark.

3.7.2    Grounds for consideration

1. An application for a re-mark is considered only when—

   1. it is feasible to reconsider the original assessment judgement. Assessment that may be excluded from a re-mark may include the performance of a practical task or an oral examination where there is no official recording retained by the University; and

   2. the student, or one or more members of the student group, has sought and received feedback about their performance on the assessment from the Course Coordinator or lecturer concerned (or has viewed the piece of assessment and, where available, model answers/written comments or other feedback); and

   3. after receiving feedback, the student, or at least 50% of members of the student group in the case of group assessment, provides a sound written academic case to demonstrate how the mark or grade awarded for an entire task, or a discrete component of a multi-component task, does not reflect their performance against the advertised criteria and standards for that work. In the case of a course thesis or project, a case must be made with reference to the criteria and standards, not against the examiner’s report per se. Students should reference the published assessment criteria for the assessment item and clearly show where they believe there are grounds for reconsideration of the assessment judgement; and

   4. the request for re-mark is submitted within the timeframe specified in section 3.7.3.

2. Re-mark requests which do not include a sound academic case will not be approved.

3. The following reasons are not grounds for approval of an assessment re-mark:

   1. the desire for extra marks to achieve a higher grade for the course;

   2. sound performance in other courses;

   3. comments made by the teaching staff at the time of feedback about the marking;

   4. diminished performance due to ill-health or other circumstances such as inadequate examination conditions; or

   5. the requirement to pass the course to facilitate graduation.

3.7.3    Applications for assessment re-mark

1. An application for re-mark of assessment is made online through my.UQ.

2. If the application is for a re-mark of group assessment where only one mark is awarded irrespective of individual contributions, then:

   1. the Group Member Acknowledgement form must be completed by the students and attached with the request; and

   2. if not all group members are a party to the application, the Head of School or Associate Dean (Academic) will send a notification to all group members. The notification is for information purposes only and should refer the students to this procedure such that all group members are aware of the process.

3. A request for re-mark must be submitted no later than 21 calendar days following the release of the mark for that piece of assessment, with the exception of the mark for the final assessment item, the date of which is no later than the end of week 3 of the following semester (note – for the purpose of this clause, both semester 2 and summer semester are followed by semester 1).

3.7.4    Approval of assessment re-mark

1. A re-mark may be approved by the Associate Dean (Academic) or Deputy Associate Dean (Academic), in consultation with relevant academic staff members, for re-mark requests submitted prior to or after the finalisation of grades.

2. Where a re-mark request is approved, the Head of School will arrange for the assessment item to be re-marked, and communicate the outcome of the re-mark to the students with feedback.

3. Where the outcome of the re-mark results in a change to a final grade, the School and/or Faculty will follow the procedure to change a finalised grade as specified in section 3.8.

3.7.5    Conducting a re-mark

1. Where possible, the re-mark will be conducted by an independent marker who will be provided with examples of different levels of performance against the criteria and standards.

2. Where a peer assessment re-mark is approved, then the peer assessment process and peer submissions should be reviewed by an independent marker. If appropriate the marker should interview all peer assessors to enable an academic judgement on the peer mark.

3. In all cases where a re-mark is approved, the assessment item submitted by an individual student will be re-marked in its entirety. Similarly, for a group assessment item, the item that is completed by the group will be re-marked in its entirety. In exceptional circumstances the Associate Dean (Academic) may permit only a discrete section of the assessment piece be re-marked. Such exceptions may be an examination comprising short answer and multiple choice questions where only the short answer questions are re-marked.

4. In applying an amended grade on the basis of a re-mark, Faculties and Schools must take into account whether adjusting a condition for one student may have implications for other students in the course. The result of re-marking should not unfairly disadvantage other students in the course.

5. A re-mark will be conducted once only on the piece of assessment.

6. In all cases, a re-mark will replace the original mark for the piece of assessment in the calculation of the final grade which could result in a higher or lower grade. The only exception to this applies to a graduated student, where the result will be reviewed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) for a final decision.

3.8    Finalisation of grades

3.8.1    Final grade in a course

1. Grades in each course must be awarded in the numeric range of 1–7 using the grade descriptors set out in Table A, Appendix 7.1, unless clause 2 or the other grade descriptor tables in Appendix 7.1 apply.         

2. If the numeric grades 1-7 are not appropriate (e.g. in competency-based assessment), it is appropriate to use the non-graded pass (P) and the non-graded fail (N), using the grade descriptors set out in Table B, Appendix 7.1. Heads of Schools need to make a case to the Executive Dean to endorse the course being assessed on a pass/fail basis.

3. Subject to Appendix 7.1, the Enrolment Procedure and the relevant program rule(s), a grade of 4 is the lowest passing grade.

4. Course Coordinators must ensure that grading outcomes are reliable and are a genuine reflection of student performance against the assessed criteria.

3.8.2    Certification and release of final grades

1. The Executive Dean is responsible for ensuring that appropriate processes are implemented by the Faculty and Schools to conduct moderation, accurate calculation and determination of grades, in a format and timeframe set by the Academic Registrar.

2. The Academic Registrar is responsible for the official release of final grades.

3. If a student’s final grade is unable to be released (e.g. due to the granting of a deferred examination, or when a student has not completed the Academic Integrity modules) the final grades for that student will be released at a time determined by the Academic Registrar.

3.8.3    Amendments to grades

3.8.3.1    Prior to release

1. Before submitting grades to the Executive Dean, the Head of School may adjust a grade to comply with any relevant assessment practices.

2. A grade may be altered by the Executive Dean and Head of School—

   1. to correct a procedural error, or

   2. if the Executive Dean is satisfied the grade should be reconsidered (for example, after completion of assessment re-mark, or incomplete assessment).

3.8.3.2    After release

1. Once a grade is released it becomes a final grade.

2. A final grade may be changed only in the following circumstances—

   1. to correct a procedural error,

      1. within one year of the grade being finalised, if the Executive Dean or Associate Dean (Academic) is satisfied the change is needed to correct the error; or

      2. at any time, if the Academic Registrar is satisfied the change is needed to correct the error.

   2. following a re-mark, if the re-mark is completed before the re-mark finalisation date (see clause 4 below) and the Executive Dean or Associate Dean (Academic) is satisfied—

      1. the original final grade reflects a marking error; and

      2. the assessment re-mark processes (section 3.7) have been followed.

   3. in special circumstances where a student has applied for and is granted removal of course in accordance with PPL 3.50.10 Removal of Courses Due to Special Circumstances Procedure, in which case the final grade will be changed to a grade of W (withdrawal without academic penalty).

3. In clause 2, where a deferred examination or supplementary assessment has been granted and undertaken, the date of release of the final grade will be regarded as the date of release of the grade recorded following that assessment.

4. In clause 2 the re-mark finalisation date means—

   1. for first semester grades — the final day of second semester; and

   2. for second semester grades — the day after the end of the mid-semester recess in the first semester in the next year; and

   3. for summer semester grades — the final day of first semester.

5. Actions that should be taken by faculties and central administration when amending grades are specified in the Amendments to Grades Guideline.

3.8.4    Non-finalised and incomplete grades

1. This section does not apply to a course undertaken as the thesis component of a PhD or MPhil or Professional Doctorate.
2. Despite clause 1 in section 3.8.3.2 (After Release), where a student has been granted—
   1. a deferred examination, or
   2. an extension,

the grade released will be classified as 'non-finalised' (in the case of (i)) or 'incomplete' (in the case of (ii)) until approved by the Head of School, and submitted to the Executive Dean or Academic Registrar for certification.

3. An 'incomplete' (INC) grade must be recorded as an X grade (as though no assessment was received from the student) if a final grade has not been determined prior to the set date set out in Table 1, Column,3.

4. Clause 3 does not apply if before the day set out in that section—

   1. the Head of School submits a new grade to the Executive Dean; or

   2. the Executive Dean approves the grade remaining incomplete for a single additional period.

The additional period must end on or before the date set out in Table 1, Column 4, or as approved by the Academic Registrar.

Table 1

3.8.5    Audit of grade changes

1. The Associate Dean (Academic) and the Academic Registrar must put procedures in place to ensure that the processed grade changes are accurate, and that Grade Change Reports from SI-net are checked and sent to Examinations section on a regular basis.

2. The UQ Change Grade Report must be generated by the Faculty on a fortnightly basis, and include all grade changes processed within the period.

3. A staff member, who did not perform the grade changes in the system, must check and reconcile the report against the grade change requests.

3.9    Supplementary assessment

1. In particular conditions as specified in this section, a student may be awarded supplementary assessment only after receiving a failing final grade of 3 or N for a course.

2. Supplementary assessment is designed to provide a second opportunity for a student to demonstrate that they have achieved all the required learning outcomes for a course.

3. A grade of 4 (or P) is the highest grade that can be awarded in a course where supplementary assessment has been granted.

3.9.1    Determining appropriate supplementary assessment

1. Supplementary assessment may not be available for all courses, or for some of the assessment items for a course because the relevant learning objectives assessed by the course/assessment item cannot be validly reassessed in other ways. For courses which are supplementary-exempt, or partial supplementary-exempt, the Course Coordinator must identify this clearly in the course profile. This must be based on sound academic judgement and have the approval of the Associate Dean (Academic).

Examples:

a. Supplementary assessment will not be available in the course because:

i.     Assessment is based on the successful development of professional competencies over a 10 week practicum;

ii.    Assessment is based on the process of a semester-long group project.

b. Supplementary assessment will not be available in part of this course because assessment of the practical component is based on the laboratory notebook which records laboratory work undertaken throughout the semester.

2. Supplementary assessment can take any form (e.g. oral, written, examination etc.). For example one approach is to set supplementary assessment that tests all learning objectives of the course. Another is to set supplementary assessment that tests specific learning objectives tailored to the individual student and is administered as School-based assessment. 

3. In determining appropriate supplementary assessment, the Course Coordinator must consider which learning outcomes have not been met.

4. The Associate Dean (Academic) must approve the form of supplementary assessment to ensure that the minimum requirements of the course are met (section 3.9.2 below). Where the Associate Dean (Academic) is unavailable or it is not reasonably practicable for them to approve relevant supplementary assessment, the Associate Dean (Academic) may authorise the relevant Course Coordinator to act in their place.

3.9.2    Eligibility and approval of supplementary assessment

1. Subject to clause 2, the Associate Dean (Academic) will only grant supplementary assessment in a course in which supplementary assessment is available and the student gains a grade of 3 (or N subject to clause 3 below).

2. In any given semester the Associate Dean (Academic) will grant supplementary assessment to a student for—

   1. up to 4 units (to a maximum of 8 units in an academic year); or

   2. a single course worth more than 4 units.

3. Supplementary assessment on a grade of N will only be awarded where, in the judgement of the Associate Dean (Academic), the student has marginally failed to attain the level of competence required for a passing grade.

4. The provisions in clauses 1 and 3 have precedence over program rules unless the program rules are more generous to students.

3.9.3    Application for supplementary assessment

1. Supplementary assessment is only awarded after the finalisation of the grade for the course.

2. All requests for supplementary assessment must be made no later than the end of the fourth calendar day after release of the final grade for the course in which the supplementary assessment is being requested.

3. Requests for supplementary assessment must be submitted through the online facility. This process will be available to all students who are eligible for supplementary assessment.

4. Students are notified of the outcome of their request by email. The status and outcome of requests submitted will be accessible to students through the online facility.

5. Once submitted, a supplementary assessment request cannot be rescinded by the student.

3.9.4    Timing of supplementary assessment

1. Students will be advised in a timely manner of the composition, format and duration of the supplementary assessment.

2. Supplementary examinations must be held during the following periods —

   1. for first semester courses – July and August of the same year;

   2. for second semester courses – December of the same year and January of the following year; and

   3. for summer semester courses – the following March.

3. Supplementary assessment undertaken other than by examination must be submitted by the end of the period specified in clause 2.

4. Despite clauses 2 and 3—

   1. If a supplementary assessment is unable to be held within the period listed in clause 2, the supplementary assessment must be held no later than 4 weeks after the Associate Dean (Academic) grants a student supplementary assessment.

      • For example, late finalisation of a student’s grade following a deferred examination held during that period, or following finalisation of an incomplete grade.

   2. The Academic Registrar may vary the timing of supplementary assessment for any or all courses, but not for an individual student.

5. No student can be given permission to defer a supplementary assessment. Options available to students who are unable to complete the supplementary assessment are:
   1. Finalisation of the grade for the course based on the completed assessment; or
   2. Where there are exceptional and unavoidable circumstances, supported by documentary evidence –
      1. apply for Removal of Course, or
      2. apply for alternative assessment under the Reasonable Adjustments – Students Policy.

3.9.5    Finalisation of grades for supplementary assessment

1. Unless the course profile states otherwise, where a student has been granted supplementary assessment and the form of assessment is a written examination held during the University's designated deferred and supplementary examination period—

   1. the final grade awarded will be based on the results of the supplementary examination only, and a passing grade for the course will be awarded only if the student receives a passing grade or mark on the supplementary examination/s; and

   2. their grade for that course will typically be finalised within—

      1. 10 calendar days of the examination date for first semester supplementary examinations;

      2. 21 calendar days of the examination date for second semester supplementary examinations; or

      3. 10 calendar days of the examination date for summer semester supplementary examinations.

2. Where a student has been granted supplementary assessment and the form of assessment is NOT a written examination held during the University's Deferred and Supplementary examination period, grades will typically be finalised within 10 calendar days of the supplementary assessment submission date. The course profile will specify how the post-supplementary grade will be calculated.

3. The grade will be shown on the student record as xSy (with ‘x’ being the original final grade awarded for the course, and ‘y’ being the grade achieved following the supplementary assessment).

3.10    Quality assurance and quality enhancement

3.10.1    Monitoring the effectiveness of assessment

1. Evidence of assessment outcomes and the effectiveness of assessment is collected and monitored to quality assure course-level and program-level considerations (see sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2).

2. In addition:

   1. students are provided with the opportunity to evaluate the quality of teaching, courses and programs, including assessment, and students are expected to provide fair and honest feedback on the quality of teaching, courses and programs, including assessment (as per the Student Code of Conduct); and

   2. data on assessment outcomes and the effectiveness of assessment are collected from other sources (e.g. peer reviews, professional accreditation processes, and audits).

3. Course Coordinators will make available to the Faculty and School, on request:

   1. the final component marks and/or grades in the course for all students; and

   2. the distribution of grades in the course and the process used to determine grade boundaries.

3.10.2    Program-level considerations

1. Assessment practices at the program level are monitored systematically through the 5-yearly Academic Program Review (APR) process, which requires each program and sequence of study to be reviewed inter alia in terms of assessment.

2. Assessment at the program-level must be consistent with best practice guidelines:

   1. Assessment tasks, when viewed across a program, are selected, timed, sequenced and weighted in ways that promote achievement of the program's desired learning outcomes and development of the University's graduate attributes; and

   2. There should be evidence of various forms of assessment in the program, tailoring of assessment to year-level, and opportunity for the development of independent judgement.

3. Program Directors are to respond to the outcomes of the APR process in ways that enhance assessment and assessment outcomes for the program.

3.10.3    Course-level considerations

3.10.3.1    Course evaluations and Curriculum and Teaching Quality and Risk Appraisal (CTQRA)

1. Assessment practices at the School level are monitored on a semester-by-semester basis through the review of assessment outcomes, Student Evaluation of Course and Teaching (SECaT) and course grades.

2. Each time a course is offered, students enrolled in that course are invited to evaluate their course using one of the instruments in the SECaT. Course evaluations include the items: assessment requirements were made clear to me and I received helpful feedback on how I was going in the course.

3. The Annual Programs, Plans and Courses Quality Assurance process requires evidence-based reflection on the overall quality of the School's teaching. This includes review of student satisfaction for undergraduate and postgraduate courses offered by the School, including review of responses to the SECaT items: assessment requirements were made clear to me and I received helpful feedback on how I was going in the course and student success (e.g. pass rates, completions and grade distributions).

4. Teaching staff are to respond to student performance on assessment, student evaluations of assessment and reviews of assessment and assessment outcomes (including student grades) in ways that enhance assessment and assessment outcomes for their course.

3.10.4    Chief Examiners

1. Chief Examiners play an important role in ensuring quality assurance in summative assessment. 

2. It is mandatory that Heads of Schools appoint an academic staff member as Chief Examiner for a School, discipline or a program, as appropriate.

3. Chief Examiners report to the Head of School, and in consultation with the School Teaching and Learning Committee, ensure:

   1. School compliance with University policies and procedures related to assessment; and

   2. that appropriate records of all assessment results, and component parts, are kept in accordance with University policy.

4. In addition, the Chief Examiner will work with the School Teaching and Learning Committee to ensure quality assurance in assessment in the School, including:

   1. setting of assessment tasks;

   2. moderation;

   3. feedback; and

   4. compilation and review of grades.

5. Chief Examiners are responsible for ensuring all examinations set by Course Coordinators have been checked, and undertaken by a discipline peer where practicable. This process is to enable the minimisation of errors in examination content and provide assurance that the length of the examination is appropriate. If it is not practicable for a discipline peer to undertake the examination, then the School must ensure there is a process to enable the minimisation of errors.

3.10.5    Institutional support for assessment

Academic staff are supported and encouraged to design authentic, engaging and sustainable assessment and to undertake appropriate professional development on assessment. They are also recognised for excellence in assessment (e.g. through annual staff review and promotion processes and through University awards for teaching (refer to the Teaching and Learning Awards Policy)).

4.0    Roles, Responsibilities and Accountabilities

The academic roles and accountabilities associated with implementation of this procedure are specified in the Teaching and Learning Responsibilities Policy.

5.0    Monitoring, Review and Assurance

1. Compliance monitoring is conducted in conjunction with section 3.10 of this procedure and the Curriculum and Teaching Quality and Risk Appraisal Policy.

2. The School Teaching and Learning Committee reports to the Head of School and the Faculty Teaching and Learning Committee, and is responsible for monitoring all aspects of assessment including assessment design, compliance with examination processes, moderation of results, and finalisation of grades.

3. Review of, and compliance with, this procedure is overseen by Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic).

6.0    Recording and Reporting

1. Student grades are recorded in SI-net.

2. Schools must keep appropriate records of all assessment results, and the evaluation of assessment, in accordance with the Information Management Policy. Guidelines on Protecting Grade Integrity are available to academic and professional staff.

3. Unless authorised by the Academic Registrar, course material containing assessment, completed examination scripts and uncollected student assignments must be retained for a minimum of 12 months from the date of certification of grades. For the requirements associated with the release of examination papers see section 3.10 of the Examinations Procedure.

4. Records and reports are managed in conjunction with the Annual Programs, Plans and Courses Quality Assurance procedures.

7.0    Appendix

7.1    Grading system

7.1.1    Numeric grade descriptors

Grade descriptors for numeric grades 1-7 are:

Table A: Grade Descriptors

In addition to Table A the following grade descriptors may also apply under specific circumstances:

7.1.2    Grade descriptors for non-graded pass and fail

1. Grade descriptors in Table B apply to non-graded pass and fail:

Table B: Grade Descriptors for Non-Graded Pass and Fail

2. If a grade of P or N is awarded and it is necessary to calculate a student’s GPA—

   1. A course in which P is awarded must be excluded from the calculation; and

   2. N must be regarded as a grade of 2.

7.1.3    Grade descriptors for supplementary assessment

1. The grade descriptors listed in Table C apply to when supplementary assessment has been awarded:

Table C: Grade descriptors for supplementary assessment

2. The maximum grade available for a course in which a student is granted a supplementary assessment is a grade of 4 (or P).

3. The final grade for a student who has undertaken a supplementary assessment in a course is the higher of the grades obtained from either the original assessment or following the supplementary assessment. The GPA will be calculated on the basis of the higher of the two grades.

7.1.4    Other grade descriptors

1. In certain circumstances, the following grade descriptors in Table D may also apply:

Table D: Other grade descriptors

2. For grades of G, M, K or X, an equivalent numerical grade of 0.00 will be applied for the purpose of GPA calculation.

7.2    Recording of oral and practical assessment for re-mark purposes

The following conditions apply to the recording of oral and practical assessment covered under Section 3.4:

1. Schools must ensure that the technology used for recording is suitable to conduct a re-mark of the assessment task should one be approved. For example, an audio-only or Echo-360 recording of screen plus audio may be sufficient in some cases, but if the marking rubric includes criteria that can only be judged with video of the student, then the recording method must include video of the student.

2. Students are reminded ahead of assessment that their performance will be recorded as outlined in the course profile.

3. If the assessment occurs in a setting where recording is not permitted (e.g. hospital or other clinical setting), students are made aware that a record of their performance will be made using other means such as written notes and this is stated clearly in the electronic course profile.

4. Participants in a recorded assessment session must be aware when recording is taking place.

5. The identity of the student(s) recorded must be captured in the recording, verbally and/or visually.

6. If recording fails during the assessment, then the assessment should continue unrecorded.

7. Recordings must be stored in a secure manner and should only be accessed for the purposes of

   1. moderation of marking;

   2. provision of feedback to the student(s) recorded; and/or

   3. re-marking following a successful re-mark application.

8. Recordings must be retained for at least one year following the release of the final grade for the course.

9. Access to the recording may be sought by the student under the Queensland Right To Information Act 2009 (the RTI Act).

7.3    Definitions, terms and acronyms

Associate Dean (Academic) – the relevant Associate Dean (Academic) of the Faculty administering the award. For course-level details and non-award study, the Associate Dean (Academic) of the Faculty administering the course.

Academic integrity – the moral code or ethical policy of academia, including:

1. A commitment to the values of honesty, responsibility, transparency, respect, trust and courage; and
2. the ethical principles that underpin academia and student life, such as maintenance of academic standards, honesty and rigour in assessment responses, research and academic publishing.

Assessment – how students demonstrate both what they are learning and what they have learned. It requires the teacher to make judgements about the ongoing and cumulative learning of each student against criteria and standards.

Assessment sequence – an assessment sequence is a set of two or more assessment tasks of similar nature or common purpose, which may be used as developmental learning opportunities for students or to comprehensively assess a particular learning outcome. The sequence may be used progressively or at significant points in a course.

Criterion – a property or characteristic by which the quality of something may be judged.

Course Coordinator – a member of academic staff responsible for coordinating the development, preparation, delivery and assessment of a course.

Deferred examination – an examination (sat at a specified later date) that may be approved where extenuating or exceptional circumstances affected attendance on the day of the original examination (such as illness or unexpected personal circumstances).

Executive Dean – the Executive Dean of the Faculty administering the award. For course-level details and non-award study, the Executive Dean of the Faculty administering the course.

Formative assessment – guides ongoing learning and provides feedback that can be used by students to support and develop their learning techniques, and by teachers to understand student progress and improve teaching. Formative assessments usually contribute little or nothing towards the final grade.

GPA – Grade Point Average (GPA) is defined as the average of the grade of results obtained by the student in all courses in which the student is enrolled, weighted by the unit value of each course in accordance with the following formula—

∑(GP)/∑(P) 

where:

G = the grade of result in a course; and

P = the unit value of that course.

If a student is enrolled in a course but gets no result, G=0.

Head of School – for the purpose of these procedures only, Head of School includes the Chief Examiner for the MD and MBBS programs.

Hurdle requirement – an assessment requirement identified in the course profile that must be satisfied in order to receive a specific grade.

Moderation – a process for developing consistency or comparability of assessment judgements and applies in a range of assessment contexts.

Partial supplementary-exempt course – a course where supplementary assessment may not be available because it is not possible to re-assess some of the minimum learning requirements, for example, those involving peer collaboration and interaction.

Reasonable adjustments for students – measures taken to enable students to participate on the same basis as a student without a disability in areas of the University’s operations, including:

• admission and enrolment,
• academic activities,
• curriculum development, assessment and certification requirements,
• physical access to buildings and facilities,
• information access, and
• support services.

Reasonable adjustments are to be provided in consultation with the student, within a reasonable time after notification of the need for adjustments. When making an adjustment it is reasonable for the University to maintain the academic requirements of the course that are inherent in or essential to its nature (in accordance with the Disability Standards for Education 2005), however, this does not mean that all assessment or activities must be the same for all students.

Re-mark – reconsideration of a mark or grade awarded for an item of assessment against the marking criteria and standards.

Semester - for the purpose of this procedure, semester includes trimesters.

SECaT – Student Evaluation of Course and Teaching.

Supplementary assessment – assessment offered after a failing final grade of 3 or N that is designed to provide a second opportunity for a student to demonstrate that they have achieved all the required learning outcomes for a course.

Supplementary examination – supplementary assessment that takes the form of an examination.

Supplementary-exempt course – a course where supplementary assessment is not available under any circumstance because it is judged as academically inappropriate – it is not feasible to reassess the learning outcomes for the course. This may include for example courses involving professional experience, or peer collaboration and interaction, or requiring the demonstration of certain professional capabilities and competencies.

Standard – a definite level of achievement aspired to or attained. Standards specify levels of quality (or achievement, or performance) for each criterion.

Student Access Plan – the document that sets out the reasonable adjustments that have been agreed by the Faculty. This plan is drafted by the Diversity and Inclusion Team and is then communicated to those UQ staff members who need to know, in order to put the adjustments in place.

Study period – a semester, trimester, research quarter, or teaching period.

Summative assessment – evaluates the student’s performance against specified criteria. Summative assessments contribute towards the final grade.