Assessment in Education Institutions an Australian Story

The pu poses of assess ent

The three main purposes of assessment are: to give a license to proceed to the next stage or to graduation; to classify the performance of students in rank order; To improve their learning. These purposes may overlap or conflict. When 'license to proceed' is a key concern, the assessment tasks should be based on core knowledge and skills and the pass/fail threshold should be absolutely secure. If the primary purpose of assessment is to place the students in rank order, the assessment tasks should be designed to differentiate the capabilities of a wide range of students. Purposes are related to summative and formative assessment. Summative assessment contributes to the marks for a module, level or degree. Formative assessment provides feedback to students during the course so they have opportunities to improve. Clearly formative assessment overlaps with feedback in learning. Course work assessment is usually both summative and formative. It is supposed to give feedback and count towards the final profile of marks. When this happens, the in-course assessment becomes part of a multiple point summative assessment.

So e prin iples of assess ent

The key principles of assessment may be derived from the model in Figure 1. They are: assessment shapes learning so if you want to change learning then change the assessmentmethod; match the assessment tasks to the learning outcomes; match the criteria to the task and learning outcomes; keep the criteria simple; be fair, reliable and valid in your marking; Provide meaningful, timely feedback.

Do you apply these princip les? THIS IS A QUESTION THAT EXAMINERS/ASSESSORS AND MARKERS GET ASKED AS PART OF THEIR PERFORMANCE REVIEW.

Common weaknesses in assessment are:

the tasks do not match the stated outcomes; the criteria do not match the tasks or outcomes; the criteria are not known to students; students do not understand the criteria; overuse of one mode of assessment such as written examinations, essays, or closed problems; overload of students and staff; insufficient time for students to do the assignments; too many assignments with the same deadline; insufficient time for staff to mark the assignments or examinations; absence of well-defined criteria so consistency is difficult to achieve; unduly specific criteria which create a straitjacket for students and make marking burdensome for lecturers; inadequate or superficial feedback provided to students; wide variations in marking between modules and assessors and within assessors (self-consistency); Variations in assessment demands of different modules.

Methods, sources and instru ents of assess ent

At the outset, it may be useful to distinguish between the three terms, methods of assessment, sources and instruments. Method refers to the approach used to assess learning such as essays, problems, multiple choice tests and so on. Source refers to the person such as the lecturer, student, employer or peer group of students. Instrument refers to the marking scheme, the explicit criteria or implicit criteria. Strictly speaking, the instrument of assessment is the source in conjunction with the instrument. Methods of Assess ent, Sources and Instru ents Examples of Methods Essays Problem sheets Unseen proses Lab reports Presentations Projects Group projects Posters Sources Lecturer Other tutors Postgraduate tutors Demonstrators Student self Student peers Employers Mentors

Co

on Assess ent Co plaints and Challenges

Instruments Implicit criteria Global Explicit criteria Criteria reference grading Specific criteria Marking scheme Dimensions Rating schedules

Work-based learning

Checklists

General Assessment Principles - A Comparison of Assessment Methods

The following table provides an overview of common assessment tasks and practical issues for consideration:

Assignments Assessment Methods

Assignment essay

Possible Objectives

Possible Advantages

Possible Disadvantages

Some Considerations
Authenticity, Plagiarism, Language, Online, Group Work

Research and Relatively easy to set. synthesise information; Appropriate for testing make an argument; higher order thinking. interpret and evaluate ideas. Problem solving; application and interpretation of knowledge; synthesise and evaluate. Knowledge and understanding.

Reduced reliability with different markers. May be time consuming to mark.

Assignment problem centred or case study

More realistic test of Cases / problems must be ability, e.g. closer to well designed to include performances required in appropriate level of professional practice. complexity and generate genuine inquiry. Reasonably easy to set. Little opportunity to make Allows broad coverage of an argument or display syllabus. Consistency in original thinking. marking.

Authenticity, Plagiarism, Online, Group Work, Disabilities Support

Assignment short answer questions

Authenticity, Plagiarism, Online, Group Work, Disabilities Support Authenticity, Plagiarism, Group Work, Online, Language

Projects and theses

Identify, define and Allows students to pursue May require unforseen solve problems; individual interests can amounts of work on the research and synthesise be highly motivating. student s part. Time information; structure Allows for creative and consuming to mark. and present an original work. Reliability in marking argument. difficult to achieve.

Exams/Quizzes Assessment Possible Objectives Methods

Exam - essay

Possible Advantages

Possible Disadvantages

Some Considerations
Online, Language, Disabilities Support

Remember, organise Relatively easy to set. and structure Allows confidence about information; structure authorship and present an argument under pressure. Problem solving; application and interpretation of knowledge; use reference materials effectively. Less study time spent on memorising; thought required in studying for the exam and in writing the response.

Different questions often require different levels of ability (e.g. describe v. criticise). Comparisons of student performance therefore difficult.

Exam - Open book

Questions should be set so Online, Language, that they require real Disabilities Support thinking and not just looking up the answer.

Exam - Oral / vivas

Oral communication May be used to confirm May be subjective. Personal Online, Language, skills; reasoning behind practical / clinical factors may influence Disabilities Support

judgement and actions. assessments.

assessor. Variability in questions asked may mean students face different tests. May be highly stressful for some students. Online, Language, Disabilities Support

Exam - Problem Problem solving; centred or case application and study interpretation of knowledge; synthesise and evaluate material. Exam - Short answer questions Knowledge and understanding.

More realistic test of Cases / problems must be ability, e.g. closer to well designed to include performances required in appropriate level of professional practice. complexity and generate genuine inquiry. Reasonably easy to set. Little opportunity to make Allows broad coverage of an argument; display syllabus. Consistency in original thinking. marking. Broad coverage of Difficult and time syllabus possible. Reliable consuming to set. Cannot marking. test ability to make an argument, defend judgment, and display original thinking.

Online, Language, Disabilities Support

Exam - MCQ, Knowledge and true / false etc. understanding; interpret data.

Plagiarism, Online, Language, Disabilities Support

In-session Tests/Quizzes

Knowledge and understanding; Interpret data; diagnosis.

Useful means of assessing Can be difficult to supervise Weightings, progress. Can provide an in large lecture theatre. Plagiarism, Online, early warning sign for Little opportunity to make Disabilities Support students who are an argument; display experiencing difficulties. original thinking. Can be used as Pre-test: help prepare students for final exams.

Exercises, Reports & Presentations Assessment Possible Objectives Methods

Laboratory exercises / reports

Possible Advantages

Possible Disadvantages

Some Considerations
Plagiarism, Authenticity, Group Work, Disabilities Support

Practical skills. Safety A learning experience as Written report rather than requirements. Follow well as an assessment practical skills usually procedures accurately. task learning by doing. assessed. Understanding of scientific method. Document experiments. Requires deep thinking about practical exercises and field placements. May help to integrate theory and practice.

Journals, Reflection on practice. diaries and log Growth in books understanding. Reasoning behind judgements and actions. Attitudes Seminar presentation

Often an unfamiliar Authenticity, Group assessment tool that Work students may resist. Difficult to assess attitudes.

Oral presentation skills. May simulate Lead a discussion. presentations required in Research, organise professional practice. information and make an argument.

Guidance on effective presentation and group facilitation skills required. Variability in audience may make comparisons difficult.

Plagiarism, Group Work, Online, Language, Disabilities Support

Demonstrations Assessment Possible Objectives Methods

Performance Interpret an artistic (music, dance, work. Creativity. theatre, etc.) Technical skill.

Possible Advantages

Possible Disadvantages

Some Considerations

Multiple assessors improve reliability of a highly subjective assessment event. Assessment by panel will improve reliability

Panel assessment can be Group Work, highly stressful for students. Online, Language, Criteria for successful Disabilities Support performance need to be clear.

Creative work (exhibitions, portfolios, websites etc.)

Creativity and originality. Technical skill. Application of knowledge

Allows students to pursue May require unforseen individual interests can amounts of work on the be highly motivating. student s part. Time Allows for creative and consuming to mark. original work. Reliability in marking Assessment by panel will difficult to achieve. improve reliability

Authenticity, Plagiarism, Online, Group Work

Simulated professional tasks

Technical skill. Closely approximates Interpersonal skills. professional work Problem solving ability. Application of knowledge. Attitudes.

Preparation of markers Group Work, checklists and training of Online, Language, assessors may be necessary Disabilities Support to ensure reliability. May be time consuming and expensive to assess. Reliability in marking difficult to achieve.

Design tasks

Problem solving ability. Creativity. Technical skills. Presentation skills.

Allows students to pursue Difficult to make reliable Group Work, individual interests can assessments of widely Online, Language, be highly motivating. differing design solutions Disabilities Support Allows for creative and clearly written and weighted original work. criteria will help Assessment by panel will improve reliability. Displays or presentations of design solutions help make standards clear to students. May improve attendance and preparation. Offers opportunity to assess student s engagement with, and ability to debate, ideas. Criteria for successful performance need to be clear. Assessment may be highly subjective and unreliable. Provision for equal opportunity for participation is required. Weightings, Online, Language, Disabilities Support

Class participation

Preparation, oral communication skills, comprehension, involvement and enthusiasm.

Self-assessment and peer assessment are not methods of assessment but sources of assessment which could be used with any method or instrument. Thus peer and self-assessment of a group project may be a useful way of encouraging students to reflect upon their team-work and the product, the project report. Explicit criteria should be used to ensure consistency and fairness.

Other considerations for Assessment: Criteria that could be used for quantification

Cases and open problems

Have potential for measuring application of knowledge, analysis, problem-solving and evaluative skills. Short cases are relatively easy to design and mark. Design of more complex cases and their marking schemes are more challenging to design and develop. Marking for grading and feedback are about as fast as essay marking.

Computer-based assessment

Much talked about. Usually software such as Question Mark will be used to format multiple choice questions, mark and analyses results. Wider range of graphics and simulations can be used. Optical Mark readers can be used - but allow for some students not marking the items clearly. Time consuming to set but marking very fast. Reliability is high but validity (match with outcomes) needs careful attention.

Direct Observation

Useful for immediate feedback, for developmental purposes and for estimating performance -providing a simple, structured system is used. The presence of the observer can change the performance so the method should be handled sensitively. Impressionistic observation can be useful if supported by constructive feedback. Can be used by a group of peers to provide feedback as well as assessment. Intensive, lengthy training is required for high reliability if detailed checklists are used. Reliability, validity and manageability are fairly high when structured observation is used.

Essays

A standard method. There are several types of essays that test different styles of writing types of thinking. Measures understanding, synthesis and evaluation, providing you ask the right questions. Relatively easy to set. Marking for grading based on impressionistic marking is fast. Marking for feedback can be time-consuming. Keep the criteria simple. Variations between assessors can be high - and so can variations of the Assessor.

Learning logs/ diaries

Wide variety of formats ranging from an unstructured account of each day to a structured form based on tasks. Some training in reflection recommended. Time-consuming for students. Requires a high level of

trust between assessors and students. Measuring reliability is difficult. May have high validity if structure matches learning outcomes.

Mini-practical s

A series of mini-practical s undertaken under timed conditions. Potential for sampling wide range of practical, analytical and interpretative skills. Initial design is time-consuming. Some if not all of the marking can be done on the spot so it is fast. Feedback to students is fast. Reliable but training of assessors is necessary. A sequence of questions based on a case study. After students have answered one question, further information and a question are given. The procedure continues, usually for about one hour. Relatively easy to set. May be used in teaching or assessment for developmental or judgmental purposes. Can be computer - or paper-based. Can encourage reflection and analysis. Potentially high reliability, validity and manageability. A standard method. Can sample a wide range of knowledge quickly. Has potential for measuring understanding, analysis, problem solving skills and evaluative skills. Wide variety of formats from true/false to reason assertion. More complex formats not recommended: they confuse students unnecessarily and they are time-consuming to design. More demanding MCQs require more time to set. Better ones are based on case studies or research papers. Easy to mark and analyses results. Useful for self-assessment and screening. Potentially high reliability, validity and manageability. Feedback to students is fast. Danger of testing only trivial knowledge. To save time, look for banks of items on the Net or in US text books. A team of assessors, working to the same learning outcomes, can brainstorm and produce several questions in an afternoon. Tests communication, understanding, capacity to think quickly under pressure and knowledge of procedures. Feedback potential. Marking for grading can be fast but some standardisation of interview procedure is needed to ensure reliability and validity. Initially used in medicine but can be used in business, legal practice, management, psychology, science courses and social work. Particularly useful for assessing quickly practical and communication skills. Fairly hard to design and organise, easy to score and provide feedback. Could be used in induction phase to estimate key practical skills. Group OSCEs useful for teaching, feedback and developmental purposes. OSCEs can be used towards the end of a course to provide feedback or to test performance against outcomes. Reliability, validity and manageability are potentially fairly high. Probably less labour intensive than other forms of marking but several assessors required at one time. Initially, they are time-consuming to design - but worth the effort. Wide variety of types from a collection of assignments to reflection upon critical incidents. The latter are probably the most useful for

Modified Essay Questions (MEQs)

Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)

Orals

Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs)

Portfolios

developmental purposes. May be the basis for orals. Rich potential for developing reflective learning if students trained in these techniques. Require a high level of trust between assessors and students. Measuring reliability is difficult. May be high on validity if structure matches objectives of training.

Reports on Practicals

A standard method. Have potential for measuring knowledge of experimental procedures, analysis and interpretation of results. Measure know how of practical skills but not the skills themselves. Marking for grading using impressions or simple structured forms is relatively fast. Marking for feedback with simple structured forms is faster than without them. Variations between markers, without structured forms, can be high. Method is often over-used. To reduce student workload and the assessment load, different foci of assessment for different experiments recommended. Strictly speaking, a method of learning not of assessment. But could be used more widely. Self-assessed questions could form an integral part of Open Learning. These could be based on checklists, MCQs, short answer questions, MEQs and other methods. Their primary purpose is to provide feedback and guidance to the users. They can be used to integrate open learning and work -based learning when students are on placement. Reliability and validity is probably moderately high and manageability is high, in the long term, but low initially. A standard method. Has potential for measuring analysis, application of knowledge, problem-solving and evaluative skills. Easier to design than complex MCQs but still relatively slow. Marking to model answers is relatively fast compared with marking problems but not compared with MCQs. Marking for feedback can be relatively fast. Useful for assessing oral communication skills and for developing ways of giving and receiving feedback on performance. Videorecorded sessions take more time but are more useful for feedback and assessment. Peer and self-assessment can be used. Sensitive oral feedback on performance is advisable. Assessment by simple rating schedule or checklist is potentially reliable if assessors, including students, are trained. Three hours on prepared topic. Relatively easy to set but attention to criteria needed. Wider range of ability tested including capacity to draw on a wide range of knowledge, to synthesise and identify recurrent themes. Marking for feedback is relatively slow. Marking for grading is relatively fast providing the criteria are simple. Variety of methods possible including learning logs, portfolios, projects, structured reports from supervisors or mentors. Important to provide supervisors and mentors training in the use of criteria. Work experiences can be variable so reliability can be

Self-assessed questions based on open learning(distance learning materials and computerbased approaches)

Short answer questions

Simulated interviews

Single Essay Examination

Work based Assessment

low. Validity, as usual, is dependent upon clear learning outcomes.

In addition to all of the above considerations evidence to be collected by Assessors needs to also reflect the Criteria

The main criteria used for marking of assessments are:

Intuitive: implicit criteria. Hidden from other markers and students. Global: based on key features such as organisation, evidence of reading. The assessment leads directly to a single mark. Marking can be fast and reliability high. Feedback to students can be slow. Criterion reference grading: general criteria for grading students work. Usually based on degree categories. Marking can be fast and feedback to students is fairly fast. Broad criteria: based on ratings or marks. Used to assess qualities that permeate the whole of an assessment task such as fluency of style or organisation. Usually reliable and feedback can be fast if based on the criteria. Specific criteria: more detailed than broad criteria. Often overlap and meanings unclear. E.g. what is the difference between structure and organisation? Can be burdensome to use, variations between markers on specific criteria can be low; feedback to students can be fast but not necessarily useful. Numbers on a scale do not tell a student how to improve. Marking schemes: often used for linear marking such as specific subject content, operations or procedures such as the application of a standard integral, the correct use of the past pluperfect or an accurate translation of a paragraph in a passage of prose. Can be slow if errors have consequential effects so choose, if possible, problems that have only a few pathways. Usually reliable and valid. Checklists: can be used to assess sequential tasks and simple design specifications. Time-consuming for assessing complex tasks. Can be reliable. Detailed checklists: burdensome to use. Not necessarily helpful to students. Intensive training required to ensure reliability. Detailed criteria: probably the least reliable method and most time-consuming instrument of assessment.

The specification of criteria and standards takes a number of different forms within the education institution. It is, however, recommended that verbal standards be developed for each criterion to be used in making assessment judgements. The reason that this is that explicitly described standards provide students with a valuable learning resource and that they are more likely to facilitate assessment judgements that are consistent, defensible and transparent. An example of criteria and verbal standards is provided below.

Criteria

Developing standard (0-4 marks)

Competent standard (5-8 marks)

Evidence of skill in offering ideas listening, responding to and supporting others ideas and initiatives

High standard (9-10 marks)

Evidence of skill in communicating at both emotional and intellectual levels, establishing rapport and recognising others viewpoints

Interaction skills

Evidence of efforts to develop and use basic interactive skills such as listening to and contributing ideas .

Contributions to group planning

Evidence of recognition of some steps essential to working towards a solution to group problem-solving;

Evidence of acknowledgment and incorporation of others ideas when planning group problem-solving tasks

Evidence of proactive leadership through reflecting on and learning from the group problem solving experience and developing suggestions for enhanced group performance

While the above example indicates that marks or marking bands may be assigned to each verbal standard, marks are not mandated in the use of criterion referenced assessment.

Marking and moderating

At the root of the process of marking and moderating are questions of validity, feasibility and reliability. Validity, in educational assessment, is a matter of judgement: do the criteria match the assessment task and the intended learning outcomes? Feasibility is concerned with what is practical, given the time and resources available. Reliability is concerned with consistency of marking against the criteria provided. It ensures that students are marked fairly. For educational assessment, self-consistency is more important than inter-assessor consistency. If selfconsistency is high, one can adjust marks. If it is low than no amount of statistical manipulation can improve reliability. Self-consistency is challenging. One needs to know one's values, prejudices and the criteria, to mark by question, not script, and, here is the rub: re-mark if one isnot consistent. The moderator's task is to check the self consistency of the assessor. This is more important than whether first or second markers are in agreement. The more complex or open an assessment task is, the more difficult it is to obtain close agreement between assessors. This well-known finding is cold comfort to assessors, external examiners and the Qualification Authority. Fortunately, inter-assessor consistency can be improved by using simple criteria and trial marking by the module or course team. The use of broader grades increases agreement on marks but not necessarily on reasons. The moderating process should be concerned with verification, not with re-marking. When two markers disagree, it is customary to use a third marker. The third marker may be tempted to compromise rather than apply the criteria strictly. Anonymous marking of scripts and assignments is increasingly fashionable. The approach may reduce some of the biases attributable to the assessor's perception of a student but will not reduce biases due to differences in values. Anonymity is difficult to maintain in small departments and it may weaken the overall effect of assessment on improving students' learning and motivation. Personal contact still has an important role in higher education. How consistent is your marking and that of your colleagues? How do you know?

Feedback to students

The purposes of feedback are to motivate students, to inform them how well they have done and how to improve. The improvements might be to the knowledge-base, understanding, problem-solving strategies and writing skills. These purposes should be set in the context of the learning outcomes, what students are expected to do in the assignment and the criteria that are being used. Feedback has been shown to be most effective when it is timely, perceived as relevant, meaningful, encouraging and offers suggestions for improvement that are within a student s grasp. All the practical hints on providing feedback can be deduced from these findings and there are implications underlying these findings for the management of modules, one s own time management and approach to providing feedback.

Delegate the marking

Delegate some of the marking to a team of postgraduate tutors or mentors from more senior years. Provide postgraduate tutors with training, criteria or marking schemes and examples. This approach also provides useful experience for postgraduates in appraising other people s work and in providing feedback. Use peer assessment for one assignment. Provide, or better still, generate criteria with the whole class and provide them with some training in marking based on marking schemes or criteria. Divide the students into groups of four or five. Provide each group with the criteria and some assignments to assess. This task can be built in to the timetabled tutorial programme. This approach not only reduces the teaching and marking load, it also teaches students how to evaluate their own work, how to give and receive feedback and how to work in independent gr oups. The marks and comments are handed in for moderation by you. You might assign a small proportion of marks for a module for the group work on essay marking.

The problem of plagiarism

The pressures on students, whether, academic or financial, can lead to temptation to plagiarise. Three broad strategies can be used to combat it: prevention, monitoring and punishment. Perhaps the most important preventive measure is to teach students what plagiarism is and is not, how to paraphrase and summarise and how to use quotations. Do not confuse the issue of plagiarism with other forms of academic misconduct or cheating.

Monitoring the styles of writing or the presentation of solutions in an assignment is relatively easy. You can benefit from technology and use search engines such as Google to check for passages obtained from the Web and the sites that provide written assignments (see Evans, 2000). Punishment, or the threat of punishment, can inhibit plagiaristic behaviour but, in the long term, once that threat is removed, the behaviour may re-emerge so it is better to work on attitudes and values. Prevention is better than punishment.

A compulsory examination for all assessors

This is currently a process of validating the way the assessor contextualised the marking process.

Answer all questions. This examination is un-timed. Consultation with others (including students) and reference to texts and other sources is RECOMMENDED. 1. What intended learning outcomes do you assess? How well does your approach to assessment align with these outcomes? 2. Justify and criticise your choice of assessment methods and tasks used to assess the outcomes in question 1. 3. Refer to relevant research on assessment in your answer. 4. Describe, justify and criticise your use of criteria, methods of grading and/or marking. 5. Outline and justify your approach to providing feedback to students. Refer to relevant research in your answer.

6. With reference to research findings, describe, justify and criticise your marking techniques to overcome the following: a. variations in standards on a single occasion; b. variations in standards on different occasions; c. variations between assessors; d. Differences in students handwriting. 7. How do you ensure that your standards are similar to standards adopted in c omparable assessments and examinations? 8. What values underlie your approach to assessment in higher education? How are they manifest in your practice? Evaluate your answers to questions 1 7.

Marking Responsibilities
Marking is the process of assigning an assessment score or grade and/or comments to a piece of work produced, performed or submitted by a student according to criteria for that assessment task.
y

Responsibilities for Marking Lecturers-in-Charge must ensure that: o marking is fair and consistent across the student cohort, particularly in units where more than one marker is used (including a moderation process); o marking is not be delegated to any other member of staff, except to academic staff contracted to mark assessment, without the approval of the Head of School; o where other markers are employed, specific information is provided by the Lecturer-in-Charge as to what is to be marked, the marking scheme, how many pieces of work are involved, and the date by which assessed work must be returned to the Lecturer-in-Charge; o Comments on the assessment tasks submitted by the student are made on the exercise/assignment or on a marking sheet that is returned to the student with the assignment.

Feedback on a student s progress in a unit should be both in a quantified form, such as scores or grades, and a qualitative form such as comments, model answers or suggested readings. Marks for assessment tasks in large classes may be posted on a noticeboard to indicate the group mean and distribution of marks or grades. Student numbers only must be used in any such posting to preserve confidentiality. The Lecturer-in-Charge will provide students with the opportunity to discuss their performance and the feedback received, personally or with another appropriate academic staff member. Students may apply to the Lecturer-in-Charge to view their final examination script after the official release of results.

A generalised process of review or script review is as follows:

1. There will be three formally scheduled script viewing sessions over a semester. The dates of the sessions are available from the School offices. 2. Students must register for a scheduled script viewing session at the school office no later than 48 hours prior to the start of the session. 3. Students can register for one 15 minute viewing session for each of their final examination scripts.

4. Students must present valid student cards to gain entry to the room to be allowed to view a script. 5. Other than the examination paper, students can take no materials into the room with them when viewing the script, i.e., no pens, paper, bags, etc. to be taken in to the viewing room. 6. Students may not discuss the contents of their examination script with one another while in the script viewing session, nor with the invigilators. 7. Course coordinators will continue to be available to provide general feedback on a student's performance even after the final exam. However, the coordinator may not have the exam script in his or her office, and the feedback provided after the final exam will not extend to any detailed review of marks awarded for specific items of assessment. 8. Where students request a remark of the examination paper, Academic Policies apply. Lecturers-in-Charge may discuss final result grades, including final examination results, with students after the official release of results.

Examinations
Preparation for Examinations
1. Examinations for all classes of the same course will normally be conducted at the same time. 2. The Education Institution in Australia has a duty of care, as far as possible; ensure that students will not be required to take more than two examinations per day. 3. It is the responsibility of the Education Institution to publish on their website the timing and location of examinations no later than six weeks prior to the beginning of the relevant examination period. 4. Any request for a change to the scheduled exam date or time from students must be approved by the Dean of the Faculty or their nominee. Where requests for a change to exam date/time or venue cannot be accommodated, students will be required to apply for a deferred examination.

Preparation of Examination Papers

1. The deadline for production and printing of all on-campus only examination papers is 2 weeks before the start of the examination period. 2. The deadline for production and printing of all external examination papers is 5 weeks before the start of the examination period. 3. The examination paper preparation deadlines are included in the significantdate s register of the Education Institution. 4. At all stages in the preparation for examinations, examination papers will be securely stored so that no opportunity occurs for any unfair advantage for any individual or group of students. 5. The Examinations Section of the Student Management Division is responsible for the distribution of all examination papers to campuses outside the Education Institution and to all external examination centers. This department can vary within education institutions. 6. The Examinations Section of the Student Management Division is responsible for the central distribution of examination papers to supervisors for all on-campus examinations scheduled at the campus.

Examination Adjustments for Students with Disabilities

1. The Education Institution must make adjustments to examinations for students with disabilities (including students with Chronic Medical Conditions), so that these students are provided an equitable opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and competency for assessment purposes. Such students must register with Disability Resources, Student Services and provide supporting evidence to substantiate their disability, chronic medical condition or disadvantage. It is the sole responsibility of the student to register with Disability Resources. 2. Students with a pre-existing disability should initially register at least six weeks before examination and students with a short-term disability two weeks before the examination period. Alternative arrangements for examinations will be recommended after considering standard practices that redress the impact of a student's disability on their performance in examinations. These can include adjustments such as: extensions of time, use of assistive technology, separate room, use of reader, scribe or computer where necessary, use of ergonomic chair, alternative formatting of exam papers or negotiation of an alternative assessment.

Supervision of Examinations
There are a number of rules and regulations in relation to managing the appointment of supervisors, examiners, student conduct, etc. These are not relevant.

Marking/Grading of Examination Papers

1. The Dean of a Faculty/Department/Head of School is responsible for arranging the marking/grading of all examinations for classes offered by the Faculty. 2. When it is known that all or many of the results of a course will be released as RN , it will be the responsibility of the Dean of the Faculty or their nominated representative to advise the students and International Partners (where necessary), of this result and to inform them of when the grades will be finalised. This communication will be by email or other form of electronic communication and should occur before the Result Release deadline.

Academic staff availability during the scheduled examination

The Examiner, Moderator, or other member of the course team must be available to be contacted by phone throughout their scheduled examination period so they can attend to any questions or issues arising with the examination paper. The contact phone number must be made available to Faculty Administration prior to the scheduled examination day.

Collection of Examination Scripts by Examiners

When the examination is over, the scripts for each examination paper are sorted in seat number order. Seat number order will correspond to examination number order, which in turn matches the order in which candidates appear on the anonymous mark sheets provided to examiners (see Mark Sheets below). A paper copy of the relevant mark sheet for examiners is available on request from the Examinations Office. Examiners may not collect scripts directly from an examination venue.

Arrangements for Candidates with Disabilities and/or Special Needs

Where special arrangements have been made for a student to sit an examination in a separate venue, their scripts are available separately to the main bundle of scripts submitted by other candidates for that paper. These scripts must also be signed out of the Examinations Office. Since students with disabilities may elect to waive their right to

anonymity, some examination scripts may carry the student's name openly on the cover, while others may carry only the candidate's examination number.

Anonymous Marking Protocols

Some of the Education Institutions do have procedures for anonymous marking. The basic procedures to be followed in relation to the anonymous marking of examinations are outlined below. Schools, disciplines or course offices may decide to record marks and transmit mark sheets between examiners and Student Services Key Holder in electronic format or in hard copy only or a combination of both methods. Stepbystep instructions for examiners and Student Services Key Holder on the handling of marks and electronic mark sheets.
y

Mark Sheets - Mark sheets for each examination paper are sent in electronic format to examiners before the commencement of the examination session. These mark sheets list candidates by examination numbe in r examination number order within class*. A paper copy of the relevant mark sheet for examiners is available on request from the Examinations Office, or within their designated department.

Procedures for Examiners - As the scripts are marked by the examiner(s), the marks are transferred to the anonymous mark sheet, which is then signed by the examiner(s), and submitted to theStudent Services Key Holder. This role is varied in Education Institutions. A copy of the mark sheet should be retained by the examiner At this point the anonymous (provisional) marks for the paper are on record. In the event of alleged bias, a student has the right to request, through their tutor, access to this anonymous examination mark. In the case of double or second marking of examination scripts, the eventual mark agreed between the examiners should be recorded as the original anonymous (provisional) mark.Where it is necessary, in order to arrive at an overall mark for a course/module, to combine the marks for an examination paper with continuous assessment marks held by the examiner, the examiner must first submit the signed mark sheet to the Student Services Key Holder. The Student Services Key Holdercan then release a copy of the master version of the mark sheet (including names, student numbers and examination numbers) to the examiner, who can then add assessment (or other examination) marks to the mark sheet and compute the overall mark for that component. To avoid errors, where data is transferred, matching should be done on student number, not name. The completed mark sheet is then signed by the examiner(s) and returned to the Student Services Key Holder.

The Role of the Student Services Key Holder - In the context of anonymous marking procedures, the term key refers to a master list which contains the full name, student IDnumber, anonymous examination number, and class for each candidate for a given examination paper. In order to protect the anonymity of candidates during the marking process, the master lists or keys are received in electronic format and are kept by the Student Services Key Holder'. The mark sheets received by Student Services Key Holderare identical to the mark sheets provided to examiners except that they also have student numbers and names on them. The identity of candidates is only revealed to examiners after they have submitted the anonymous (provisional) marks to the Student Services Key Holder on the anonymous mark sheets provided. The Head of Department normally acts as Student Services Key Holderfor examinations within the Department. The Head of Department may, however, delegate this role to another member of staff if he or she deems it necessary or appropriate to do so. TheStudent Services Key Holder is responsible for ensuring that a file copy is retained of each signed mark sheet recording the original marks awarded by examiners to the anonymous candidates. The right of external examiners to change a mark for a student is not affected by this requirement. As noted above, these marks are provisional until confirmed by the appropriate Court of

Examiners. A paper record of any subsequent changes to these marks made by an external examiner, or by a Court of Examiners, must be retained in the Department.
y

Duration of Anonymity - In general, anonymity should be preserved throughout the marking process unless and until the Head of Department is satisfied that it is necessary to verify a candidate's identity in the best interests of the candidate. For example, in the event that a candidate has obviously made an error in recording, or has omitted to record, their examination number on an answer booklet, the sealed flap of the examination answer booklet may be opened, but not until all questions answered by the candidate have been marked, and those marks recorded by the examiner on the mark sheet and the mark sheet returned to the Student Services KeyHolder. The Head of Department must ensure that a record is kept of all instances where a candidate's anonymity has been breached, the stage in the process at which this occurred, and the reasons for it.

Retention of Scripts and Mark Sheets

Retention of Scripts and Mark Sheets Both examination scripts and original anonymous mark sheets must be retained for 24 months from the date of the meeting of the Board of Examiners or Assessment Review Committee which moderates the marks in question. Examination scripts and other completed written assessment materials relating to work done in an earlier year that has not been finally marked and/or moderated should be retained until the work of the final Board of Examiners or Assessment Review Committee has been completed. In the case of students going off books, scripts for which the marks have been moderated by the Board of Examiners or Assessment Review Committee prior to the student going off books are not normally retained for longer than 24 months.

Conflict of Interest Challenges

Lecturers-in-Charge, or other staff appointed to mark assessment items, have a responsibility to assess students work fairly, objectively and consistently across the student cohort in a unit. Academic staff who considers that they may be or be perceived to be affected by a conflict of interest must bring this to the attention of their Head of School. This principle is usually contained in the Staff Code of Conduct.

Allocating Final Result Grades

Lecturers-in-Charge are responsible for collating and recording the results for all assessment tasks and recommending a final result grade or interim result for each student in a unit. Each student s aggregate marks for a unit are allocated a grade according to the descriptors for each grade as listed in the Grading Descriptors. A guide as to the typical proportion of grades assigned across a unit is usually provided in the Academic Regulations. Where the final grades in a unit significantly deviate from the standards listed, the Lecturer-in-Charge will provide to the School Assessment Review Committee, relevant evidence to substantiate the decision. This will normally reflect the Lecturer s confidence in the efficacy of assessment procedures in equitably determining the standard to which students have achieved expected learning outcomes and characteristics of the student cohort. The Head of School or nominee ratifies the final grade results. Using peer-reviewed, tested examination questions, marking criteria that clearly differentiate standards of performance, and transparent moderation processes are examples of strategies that contribute to confidence in assessment procedures.

Final result grades are not provided to students until results have been officially released by the Education Institution as per the above referenced.

Grading Descriptors Notation Range Guide (%)29

85-100

Descriptor10

Final Result Grade

High Distinction HD

Clear attainment of all learning outcomes, with complete and comprehensive understanding of the unit content, development of relevant skills and intellectual initiative to an extremely high level. Substantial attainment of most learning outcomes, with a high level of understanding of the unit content and development of relevant analytical and interpretative skills to a high level. Sound attainment of some major learning outcomes, with good understanding of unit content and development of relevant skills. Satisfactory attainment of a range of learning outcomes, with basic understanding of unit content and development of relevant skills. Some attainment of learning outcomes with basic understanding of some unit content and some skill development. Attainment of the learning outcomes as per the unit outline.

Distinction

DI

75-84

Credit

CR

65-74

Pass

PA

50-64

Pass Conceded

PC

Pass (ungraded) PS

Fail

NN

0-49

Little or no attainment of learning outcomes, with limited understanding of course content or skill development.

*Note: This grade is awarded by Heads of School only in exceptional circumstances. Guidelines for this are generally contained in the Academic Regulations of an Education Institution.

Results Entry
DEEWR rules are that rules are published after ratified (i.e. agree to internally in the Education Institution). A sample of the due dates is as follows:

y y y

Summer semester results are due by 28 February 2011. Semester 1 results are due by 12 July 2011 (sups due 2 August). Semester 2results are due by 7 December 2011 (sups due 28 December).

Results should be posted as soon as finalised. Refer to the Grading Timelines for some sample due dates. The mass post process usually is undertaken on the next working day following the due date. It is a requirement that the marker or assessor will need to partial postany grades that have been finalised. Faculty access is required to change posted grades. This is a sample of a Grading Timeline:

Month
FEB

Date
11-Feb-11

Function
Grade Rosters generated Summer Sem Mass Post by Exams Office Summer Sem Mass Post by Exams Office Tri1 Grade Rosters generated Sem 1

Term
3105

MAR

01-Mar-11

3105

MAY

02-May-11

3133

JUN

14-Jun-11

3110

Glossary: Sem = Semseter Tri = Trimester QT= Quadmester Term CN = Continuing

3146 3120

Grading Bases
Markers are generally provided the relevant grading basis for the course that they are marking.

Current Mark and Grade Schemes

Generally endorsed by Academic Board and approved by the Vice -Chancellor and or Academic Chair on a yearly basis. These are samples of marking schemes in Higher Education: M10 Mark Scheme 10 this scheme is the norm for courses in undergraduate and postgraduate coursework programs. This scheme applies to the course final result. Both Marks and Grades are required. Grade Fail No Submission Grade reflects following criteria for allocation of grade: Reported on Official Transcript No work submitted for assessment FNS

Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction Result Pending Continuing No Formal Examination

A mark between 1-49 A mark between 50-64 A mark between 65-74 A mark between 75-84 A mark between 85-100 An interim result Continuing No Formal Examination

F 50-64 P 65-74 C 75-84 D 85-100 HD RP CN NFE

GS8 Grade Scheme 8 this scheme may only be used if it has been approved by the Executive Dean or delegate, on exceptional pedagogical grounds: see Assessment for Coursework Programs Policy, Teaching Procedure 5.f. Grade Fail No Submission Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction Non-Graded Pass Result Pending Continuing No Formal Examination Grade reflects following criteria for allocation of grade: Reported on Official Transcript No work submitted for assessment A mark between 1-49 A mark between 50-64 A mark between 65-74 A mark between 75-84 A mark between 85-100 Satisfactory performance An interim result Continuing No Formal Examination FNS F P C D HD NGP RP CN NFE

GS5 Grade Scheme 5 - Honours For the final result in Honours programs Grade In Description 1 2A 2B 3 CN NAH NFE WH First class Second class div a Second class div b Third class Continuing Not awarded No Formal Examination Withheld Convert Grade 80+%* 70-79%* 60-69%*

50-59%*

* The numerical value for the Honours grade will not appear on an Academic Transcript, i.e. only the honours class will appear. SYS Systems-allocated Grades these are allocated automatically, in the circumstances described in the Description column, and represent the course final result. Grade In Description CMP WDN WF WNF F Completed Withdrawn Withdraw Fail Withdraw No Fail Systems-allocated Fail grade

In addition to the above;

Example of a Validation Report

from the Government.

this is expected to be produced to the Auditors (if asked)

ASSESSMENT VALIDATION REPORT

When complete this report is filed with Quality documents for the course.

Validation at development stage Once Assessment strategy and associated assessment instruments have been designed, they must be validated using this report. Validation may be conducted by an individual assessor, a peer review, an industry representative or any of the above. Panel must have these documents for validation Training and Assessment Strategy (TAS) that includes this unit Unit of competency from Training Package Assessment tools relevant to this validation Assessment mapping matrix Unit Competency outline/Assessment schedule Title of unit (s) AQF level

Unit Code(s)

Qualification

Cluster

Learner Cohort

Assessment Version no.

Date of validation

Participants in this validation

Assessment method/s used to assess this unit

F Demonstration F Project F Report F Documents F Work observation

Other ______________________________

(Must match method/s showing on TAS matrix)

F Knowledge test F Interview F Presentation

Timing of validation

Assessment Development Assessment Review Course Review

Any special points regarding delivery and assessment

Training and Assessment Strategy (TAS)

Yes

No

Comment / suggested improvement

1.

Industry/enterprise has been consulted in development of assessment strategy

2.

Assessment tool/s meet any related regulatory or licensing requirements

3.

Learner needs have been considered in development of assessment strategy

Assessment brief

Yes

No

Comment/ suggested improvement

1.

Assessment instructions and assessment conditions are clearly identified

2.

Assessment tool is written in clear English

3.

Evidence/marking guides or checklists have been provided to students

4.

Due dates and other important information are clearly stated

Assessment of competency

Yes

No

Comment/ suggested improvement

1.

Performance criteria are addressed sufficiently

2.

Underpinning knowledge is addressed

3.

Underpinning skills are addressed

4. 5.

Critical aspects of evidence are addressed Level of difficulty is appropriate to the competency or competencies being assessed

6.

Assessment tool reflects workplace practice

Reflects principles of assessment Valid:

Face validity refers to the degree to which the instrument actually measures what it says it measures and is practical to use

Yes

No

Comment/ suggested improvement

Reliable:
Individual learners would get a similar result if tested on different occasions, given the same set of circumstances

Flexible:
The assessment instrument can be adapted to suit work needs and site needs

Fair:
1. 2. 3. Instrument is non-discriminatory and inclusive Instrument can be reasonably adjusted Language, literacy, numeracy requirements are appropriate for the competency level

Moderation and validation

Reflects rules of evidence Valid:

Content validity means the evidence covers the knowledge and skills that are essential to competent performance as set out in the unit of competency.

Yes

No

Comment/ suggested improvement

Sufficient:
There is sufficient quality and quantity of evidence aspects of evidence for the unit of competency. as set out in the Critical

Authentic:
The assessor is assured that the evidence presented for assessment is the candidate s own work.

Current:
Evidence is current

Check that there is an agreed understanding of the criteria being used to arrive at an assessment of competent. Check that the agreed criteria are being used consistently by all trainer/assessors assessing competencies (even with different groups of students or in different courses or contexts). Check that was graded assessment is used, that trainer/assessor would assess the same piece of work to the same standard. Check that the weighting of graded assessment leads to an accurate reflection of the students work as a holistic approach.

FOSP Panel members Name Chair* Signature Date

[*This person has responsibility for seeing that recommendations are carried out and significant improvements are noted in th e Improvements register]

This is an example of an Assessment Matrix that a Co-Coordinator would use to create the framework for the Assessment.

Comments (Optional)

ASSESSMENT MATRIX FOR UNIT OF COMPETENCY

Insert national qualification code Insert name of qualification Insert name of competency Insert national competency code Insert unit descriptor

National ID Qualification Competency National Code Description

ELEMENTS /PERFORMANCE CRITERIA

Copy and paste elements and p.c from unit of competency

Assessment methods/task
Indicate which assessment covers which requirement
See Assessment Guide below for description A B C D

1.

2.

3.

REQUIRED SKILLS

Copy and paste from unit of competency

REQUIRED KNOWLEDGE

Copy and paste from unit of competency

DIMENSIONS OF COMPETENCY

Task skills (which assessment(s) or class activity will test that the candidate can demonstrate a single task?) Task management skills (which assessment(s) or class activity will test that the candidate can meet the performance criteria whilst completing other tasks) Job/role environment (which assessment(s) or class activity will test that the candidate can meet the performance criteria within their job) Contingency management skills (which assessment(s) or class activity will test that the candidate considers what might go wrong and takes action to prevent or correct)
SPECIFIC EVIDENCE REQUIREMENTS / CRITICAL ASPECTS OF EVIDENCE

Copy and paste from unit of competency [Describe how each is covered across the assessment methods)

ASSESSMENT GUIDE

Reference to assessment matrix

Methods assessment

of

Description of task

Employability Skills

Initiative & enterprise

Planning & organising

Self-Management

Problem Solving

Communication

Technology

Teamwork

A B C D

Teacher Delivery and Assessment Checklist

The Teacher Delivery and Assessment Checklist (TDAC) lists activities ALL TAFE Teachers are responsiblefor when they deliver and assess units. It also:

Identifies the tasks to be undertaken when planning the delivery and evaluation of VET courses; Assists coordinators to plan and ensure the required delivery and assessment material has been developed and/or reviewed before delivery of the course commences; Assists coordinators to allocate responsibilities to ensure compliance with all TAFE quality standards required such as ISO 9001 and AQTF.

Instructions
This is provided by the Head of Department or Program Coordinator prior to commencing teaching. If you tick: YES: NO: This is the desired answer to all items as this indicates compliance. If Yes is ticked, evidence must be available and able to be produced upon request. This means evidence is not yet available and the program is not compliant. This must be amended to Yes as soon as possible by implementing the required actions and collecting the evidence required. Not applicable is allowed on questions that do not reflect your current program delivery.

N/A:

Sample of the Assessment Checklist:

Teacher s Name: Department:

Learning

School: Supervisor s Name: Unit Code:

Unit Name:

MARKETING & RECRUITMENT Before enrolment: Do students receive information on y y y y y

Yes

No

selection criteria, enrolment orientation, fees and charges Specific course selection information e.g. police checks?

Do you use the approved Communications Guide templates when presenting information to students or industry clients?

SELECTION CRITERIA & RECORDS Do you select students based on the department s selection criteria for this course? Do you keep selection records for this course indicating why/why not students were selected? Do you provide new students with the department s student information pack (hardcopy or online)? Did you conduct an orientation session for students in this course?

Yes

No

N/A

PROGRAM/COURSE PLANNING Do you have a copy of your departments Department Delivery and Assessment Management Plan (DDAMP) for this Training Package? Is a copy of your Course Delivery and Assessment Checklist (CDAC) available for your review? Do you have a current version of the Unit Descriptors for each unit you are teaching? http://www.ntis.gov.au Do you have the timetable for this Program/Course? Do you have a document that details:
y

Yes

No

core units, electives, streams etc. according to the Training Package rules

how nominal hours will be delivered e.g. face to face, on the job training and assessment, Elearning strategies, etc.

Is there is a difference between the nominal and actual teaching hours? If yes, has information on how this difference is covered been provided to your students? Have you revised and updated Program / Course learning materials? Are the current versions of learning materials clearly identified?

TEACHER QUALIFICATIONS & VOCATIONAL COMPETENCIES Do you have your Certificate IV in Training & Assessment or equivalent? If no, do you use the Direct SupervisionandTeam Assessment Guidelines? Are your vocational competencies equal or above the level you deliver and/or assess at? Can you demonstrate current industry skills directly relevant to the units you deliver and/or assess? Do you continue to develop your VET knowledge and skills? Do you continue to develop your training and assessing competencies?

Yes

No

N/A

ATTENDANCE AND PARTICIPATION RECORDS Do you maintain an accurate attendance/participation record for every unit/s you teach? Do you maintain an accurate attendance/participation record for everyclustered unit? Do you identify who marked attendance and participation records, if there are more than one teacher delivering this unit, Do you inform the Head of Department (or Program Coordinator) of students who are attending who are not on an official list? Do you inform the Head of Department (or Program Coordinator) of unexplained and/or repeated student absences? Do you monitor student progress and report any concerns to the Program Coordinator?

Yes

No

N/A

UNIT OUTLINES Do you have a Unit Outline for each unit/group of units you teach? Does your Unit Outline include:
y

Yes

No

N/A

Assessment details including tasks, dates, grading category

y y y y y

Books and resources that the student must obtain e.g. Knives, uniforms Delivery and assessment plan including due dates for assessments Unit content and assessment criteria including elements, performance criteria& weighting Unit details including code, title, nominal hours, core/elective, pre-requisites Your contact details and availability

Is the unit outline given to your students at the first class?

UNIT ASSESSMENT Do you review and update assessment tools for all units that you deliver and / or assess? Do you consult with industry and incorporated their feedback in your assessments tools? Do you have a validation plan for your unit/s? Do you conduct moderation of assessment for your unit/s? Do you know:
y y y y y y y y y

Yes

No

N/A

Therequirement to maintain a cumulative (ongoing) assessment record for each unit/s? Thenumber of attempts a student can have for each assessment? The grading category for your unit/s? The TAFE result codes and their correct use? Theprocess for recording final results and submitting to student administration? How to provide students with feedback about their assessments? How students are officially notified of results? The appeals process? the process to lodge and return assessed work

Do you know where to find information regarding Plagiarism to give to your students? EVALUATION Is there a feedback process in place for your Program / Course? Do you know the process in place for evaluating and actioning feedback received by students? Yes No N/A

PRACTICAL PLACEMENT AND STUDENT EXCURSIONS Are the relevant agreement and forms completed and signed before practical placement?

Yes

No

N/A

Are the relevant agreement and forms completed and signed before excursions are conducted?

STUDENT SUPPORT Do you use the department s tool to identify Language, Literacy and Numeracy (LLN) issues? Do you know what learning support is provided to students and how to access it? Do you modify your delivery method for students with LLN issues? Are the learning materials appropriate for the group of students you are teaching?

Yes

No

N/A

OTHER Do you have the relevant legislation, guidelines or industry standards (e.g. OHS) that are relevant to unit/s you teach? Are you aware of the specific requirements for apprentices, VETIS or international on-shore (ESOS) students?

Yes

No

N/A

RECORD KEEPING
Records must be kept and filed by the teacher and be available upon request for audit purposes:

Record Unit Outline Assessment Tools Teacher Delivery and Assessment Checklist Samples of Student work for the purposes of moderation and validation 2 years 2 years 1 year 1 year

Minimum Retention Period

Records to be kept by the teacher and forwarded to the Head of Department for filing. These records must be available upon request for audit purposes.

Record Student Attendance / Participation Records Student Attendance Records for students undertaking a TAFE apprenticeship or traineeship On-going (Cumulative) Assessment Records Excursion Forms

Minimum Retention Period 2 years following date of last entry 7 years after last entry

2 years after completion of training 7 years after excursion where no accident has

Record

Minimum Retention Period occurred or 20 years after excursion if accident has occurred

Practical Placement Agreement Form

7 years after contract has expired or if legal proceedings arise, record to be kept permanently

Teacher s signature

Date

Supervisor s signature

Date

This is a sample of a current Marking Guide Used in both TAFE and University. This is just a handwritten document.
Marking Guide Name:________________________________________________________
Assessment Task Instructions for task Criteria 

Feedback

Assessment Task Instructions for task Criteria 

Feedback

Result Signed Signed Assessor Name Assessor Name

Date

Moderation and validation of assessment TAFE procedure

Procedure
Intent:To ensure that:
y

the educational design of a program is validated by checking that the characteristics of assessment methods/tasks across the program are well-defined and are aligned with the requirements of the competencies and/or learning experiences; assessment activities for new, amended or varied courses are consistent with the competencies/module learning outcomes, and assessment context and learning activities as appropriate o fair with respect to weighting and timing of assessment across the program o where graded assessment occurs, to ensure marking criteria for each grade are clearly specified and are at an appropriate standard For each assessment task/activity, agreed judgments about interpreting (a) evidence of competence or (b) marking criteria in order to maximise consistency, fairness and reliability are established.
o

Scope: TAFE Procedure 1. Validation of assess ment strategy

Procedure 1.1 (a) Develop and document in the program implementation plan, the overall program assessment strategy that meets the requirements of the:
y

Responsibility Program Co-ordinator and Program team (this can also be called Unit or Course Co-Ordinator and Unit Program Team)

Timeline Prior to new program approval and before each variation

Training package and assessment guidelines or accredited curriculum Competencies (or module learning outcomes) Student group and/or enterprise Assessment context

y y y

1.1 (b) Document in the program implementation plan, the process to be used to validate the program assessment strategy. 1.2 Conduct appropriate industry consultation in the development of the assessment strategy and document evidence of consultation in the program implementation plan. 1.3 Programs Committee endorses the assessment and validation strategy as part of program approval process (new programs only). Program co-ordinator and appropriate Prior to new industry stakeholders (egg, industry program approval bodies, enterprises, commercial and before each partners, trainees) variation Programs Committee Prior to a new program being offered

2. Moderation and validation of program course assessment

Procedure 2.1 Select and design the assessment tools/activities to meet the requirements of the:
y y y

Responsibility

Timeline

All lecturers/teachers/facilitators Prior to first offering and involved in the course when assessment is varied

Training Package Program implementation plan Competencies (or module learning outcomes) y Student or student group y Assessment context 2.2 (a) Clearly specify the competencies, including All lecturers/teachers/facilitators Prior to first offering and elements and performance criteria, (or module involved in the course. when assessment is varied learning outcomes) in the Course Guide. (b) For graded assessment tasks, develop and clearly specify in the Course Guide the marking criteria for each grade. 2.3. Check that the variety, weighting and timing of Program Co-ordinator and assessment is fair and appropriate (at course and program team members program level) 2.4 Validate the program s assessment strategy, according to the process described in the implementation plan and which must include: Prior to program commencement and at each iteration

Program Co-ordinator and At least once annually and appropriate internal/external prior to next offering and/or stakeholders (internals could each variation of the include program team members, program, or as required by y program team meetings to review cross Portfolio teaching staff in professional accreditation effectiveness of methods, tools and delivery of common units; body activities y analysis of student feedback e.g., student externals could include: other RTOs, industry bodies, satisfaction surveys, student-staff consultative committees enterprises, professional y participation in external validation meetingsaccreditation/ registration bodies, where suitable networks operate e.g., other students) RTO s y cross Portfolio validation where the program includes competencies/modules from other training packages/curriculum y Industry input 2.5 Modify or adjust aspects of the program s Program Co-ordinator and Following validation assessment strategy, in line with the outcomes of program team validation, document improvements in the program log and update course guides. 2.6 Modify or adjust assessment tools/activities Course teacher and/or marking criteria in line with the outcomes of validation and document improvements in the program log and update course guides. Following validation

3. Grading and grading standards

Procedure 3.1 Compare a sample of assessment grades to ensure consistent interpretation of the competency or learning outcome. For graded assessment tasks, a sample of assessments is marked by more than one assessor against the same marking criteria, to compare opinions and reach agreement on the standard required for each grade. Responsibility All teachers involved in assessment of the course Timeline Prior to marking.

3.2 Where there are variations or anomalies across different markers, All teachers involved implement an appropriate strategy to increase consistency and reliability in assessment of the in assessment outcomes (e.g., cross marking borderlines items or course consensus techniques; third party reports) 3.3 Validate grading standards by modifying marking standards in line with outcomes of the assessment process. All teachers involved in assessment of the course

After initial marking and prior to finalising results

Prior to the next iteration

4.

Roles and Responsibilities both TAFE and HE representations

The specific roles and responsibilities related to assessment presented below are complementary to those outlined in the Academic Honesty Policy of which each Education Institution in Australia must have in place and must be continually reviewed.
y

4.1 Students (can also be known as clients) It is the responsibility of students to: o engage actively in the learning process and participate according to unit and assessment requirements; o complete assessment tasks diligently and honestly to provide evidence of learning achievements in a unit; o meet assessment requirements as specified in the unit outline, including submission of work by the due date; o where relevant, consult the Disability Adviser as early as possible about any disability issues; o discuss any concerns they have regarding their progress in coursework and assessment as early as possible with relevant teachers/lecturers and/or the Course Co-ordinator and/or Student Services; o consult with the Lecturer-in-Charge (in the first instance) and Course Co-ordinator, or with the Head of School as early as possible, if personal circumstances are affecting participation or performance in assessment o raise any concerns they may have regarding the marks for each assessment task promptly, rather than wait until the final grade is awarded in the unit; o check that their name is on the unit list after classes commence and if not, to contact the Student Centre and/or their Course Co-ordinator; o in the case of late enrolment, it is the responsibility of the student to obtain the unit outline from the Lecturer-in-Charge in the first week of attendance in the unit; o Access and abide by all policies, procedures and regulations relating to assessment and seek clarification, where necessary.

4.2 Lecturers/Teachers/Facilitators-in-Charge It is the responsibility of Lecturers-in-Charge (in consultation with other relevant staff as appropriate) to: o design and specify the number and type of assessment tasks and their weightings; o prepare the unit outline in accordance with the procedures and provide an electronic copy to the School Office prior to the start of the study period; o make the unit outline available electronically to all students enrolled in the unit during the first week of the study period; o be available for student consultation on a regular basis, informing students of their availability for consultations (both with and without appointments); o In exceptional circumstances, where the need arises, seek approval of the Head of School to change assessment tasks or criteria for a unit after the first week of the study period. Such changes should not result in disadvantage to any student and all students must be advised, in writing by email, of approved changes; o where compulsory attendance is specified in the unit outline for designated classes, maintain and collate records of attendance; o Following advice from a Disability Adviser, make appropriate learning and assessment adjustments for students with disabilities. Such adjustments shall be in accordance with the student s Education Inclusion Plan, where one has been approved; o ensure that lecturers receive guidelines on how to provide appropriate adjustments for students with disabilities in School examinations and tests; o submit examination requests, if required, by the due date and prepare and submit the examination paper(s) for central examinations by the due date; o prepare and arrange the conduct of all School-based assessment tasks for the unit and alternative/additional assessment tasks, as required; o give consideration to and approve, if appropriate, applications for consideration of personal circumstances affecting assessment, e.g. applications for extensions for assessment; o liaise with the Program/Unit or Course Co-ordinator, as required, with regard to applications for consideration of personal circumstances affecting assessment; o provide appropriate guidelines to lecturers and markers, where used, on assessment criteria, marking procedures, moderation and methods for calculating final results; o Maintain and collate records of each student s marks for all assessment components in accordance with the assessment schedule in the unit outline. A secure record of each student s results, both electronically and in hard copy/writing (black pen), must be kept for at least one standard study period after the release of final results; o allocate final result grades or interim results for ratification by the Head of School (by the date specified by the Head of School) and provide substantiation, when requested; o provide final result grades to replace any interim grades by the date specified in the Academic Regulations; o ensure that any necessary changes to grades are made within six months of the original allocation and approved by the Head of School; o where appropriate, e.g. for large classes, provide students with timely feedback on the range, mean and distribution of marks or grades for a given assessment task; o if requested, provide clarification to students about a result for an assessment task or grade in a unit; o communicate effectively with all staff teaching and/or marking in a unit to ensure quality of practice; o Make recommendations to the Head of School regarding assessment policy, procedures and outcomes.

4.3 Lecturers/Teachers/Facilitators
y

It is the responsibility of lecturers to: o participate in the assessment of students;liaise with the Lecturer-in-Charge to ensure that assessment practices are conducted in a consistent and coherent manner; o be available for student consultation on a regular basis, informing students of their availability for student consultations (both with and without appointments); o advise the Lecturer-in-Charge within a reasonable time of student progress and how effectively students are learning; o keep a secure record of each student s results, both electronically and in hard copy/writing (black pen), for at least one standard study period after the release of final results; o Provide data relating to results in assessment tasks and attendance, if required, to the Lecturer-inCharge.

4.4 Markers/Assessors
y

It is the responsibility of markers to mark assessment tasks accurately, consistently and fairly, as guided by the Lecturer-in-Charge.

4.5 Program/Unit/Course Co-ordinators y It is the responsibility of Course Co-ordinators to: o give consideration to and approve, if appropriate, applications for consideration of personal circumstances affecting assessment and liaise with relevant staff, as required; o Determine applications for alternative assessments and/or adjustments to assessment tasks in consultation with the Lecturer-in-Charge and/or the Disability Adviser, where the application is by a student with a disability. In the latter case, reference should also be made to the Education Inclusion Plan, where one has been approved; o overview students progress and provide academic advice based on assessment outcomes and, if necessary, consider submissions from students to show cause why enrolment should not be terminated; o Monitor the conversion of interim grades to final grades by the relevant due date. 4.6 Heads of School/Heads of Department/Head of Faculty
y

It is the responsibility of Heads of School to: o oversee all the units offered by that School; o appoint Lecturers-in-Charge for each unit administered by their School; o Evaluate and approve requests from Lecturers-in-Charge to change assessment tasks or criteria for a unit after the first week of the study period. Such changes should be made only in exceptional circumstances and not disadvantage any student; o ensure that unit outlines are reviewed and accurate prior to publication; o ensure that examination papers are reviewed and accurate prior to submission, and are submitted by the relevant due date; o Give consideration to and approve, if appropriate, applications for consideration of personal circumstances affecting assessment and liaise with relevant staff, as required. Such approvals shall include Education Inclusion Plans developed for students with disabilities; o Ensure Lecturers-in-Charge receive appropriate guidelines on how to provide, in a manner that is compliant with the Disability Standards for Education of the Disability Discrimination Act, appropriate adjustments for students with disabilities in School examinations and tests. Such guidelines shall include information on how to employ disability support workers such as scribes and signing interpreters if required;

o o o

o o o o o o o

consider recommendations from Lecturers-in-Charge for the allocation of final result grades in accordance with the Academic Regulations, seeking the advice of a School Assessment Review Committee [Note: The Head of School may nominate another staff member in the School to ratify grades; award Pass Conceded grades in exceptional circumstances; review the performance of students undertaking units offered by the School, paying particular attention to results that are borderline between grades; monitor the appropriateness of allocation of grades in accordance with the Academic Regulations and the effectiveness of assessment practices in units administered by the School (with advice from the Assessment Review Committee); ensure all ratified grades are submitted by the due date; consider reports from Lecturers-in-Charge about alleged breaches of academic honesty and determine in line with the Academic Honesty Policy; ensure that University quality assurance processes for assessment, such as moderation of assessment in units, are followed; ensure the University Assessment Policy and Procedures and Academic Regulations are implemented; consider requests for review of grade; consider requests for review of termination of a student s enrolment; Oversee the status of interim grades and ensure their timely conversion to final grades.

4.7 Assessment Review Committees/Examination Board

y

An Assessment Review Committee will be established by a Head of School to review assessment outcomes for the School. The role and responsibilities of the Assessment Review Committee will be specified by the Head of School at the time of its establishment and should be reviewed annually. Responsibilities so delegated by the Head of School may include the following:
o o

o o o

review the performance of students undertaking units offered by the School, paying particular attention to results that are borderline between grades; Monitor the appropriateness of allocation of interim and final grades in accordance with the Academic Regulations. Evidence to substantiate recommendations regarding grades may be requested from Lecturers-in-Charge; advise the Head of School, who ratifies the final results prior to submission; monitor the effectiveness of assessment practices in units offered by the School using, amongst other means, statistics on grade distribution; Make recommendations to the Head of School regarding assessment policy, procedures and outcomes.

4.8 Deans (not at VET TAFE). If no Dean is present, then these responsibilities fall to the Head of the School.
y

It is the responsibility of Deans to: o establish requirements for the evaluation and moderation of assessment practices within the Faculty; o appoint Course Co-ordinators for each course administered by their Faculty; o monitor assessment outcomes for the Faculty with regard to the distribution of grades; o resolve reviews/appeals of a Head of School s decision regarding a grade in a unit or termination of a student s enrolment or refer them to the Faculty Appeals Committee;

Consider and approve, where appropriate, waivers/special dispensation based on the Academic Regulations.

4.9 Chair, Academic Board

y

A student may appeal to the Chair of Academic Board in relation to the outcome of an appeal to the Dean regarding a review of a decision regarding a grade in a unit or termination of a student s enrolment (only on the basis of failure by the Education Institution to comply with the relevant Academic Regulation). The Chair of Academic Board will deal with the appeal at his or her discretion in accordance with the Academic Regulations.

4.10 Student Services

y

y y

Academic Skills Advisers, Campus Ministers, Student Services Co-Ordinators, Counsellors and Disability Advisers offer assistance to students in regard to their performance at University and/or their academic progress. They receive information in confidence from students and may reveal information to Lecture rs-inCharge, Course Co-ordinators or Heads of School about a student s circumstances only to the extent authorised by the student. Disability Advisers determine and coordinate requests for learning and assessment arrangements from students who have permanent or temporary disabilities. Disability Advisers may recommend a range of inclusive strategies, including: o adjustments to teaching, learning and assessment, including alternative assessment; and o Consideration for factors affecting assessment performance.

4.11 Student Administration

y

Student Administration is responsible for the administrative procedures associated with the assessment and progression of all students in undergraduate and postgraduate coursework award, non -award and crossinstitutional programs. Student Administration can be centralised or de-centralised and each department can have either a representative or a direct link to Student Administration. It is the responsibility of Student Administration to: o apply, as appropriate, the rules, regulations, policies and procedures of the University relating to students and give effect to academic decisions relating to assessment, progression, exclusion and termination of enrolments; o arrange the conduct of central examinations for units which are taught in Australia in standard study periods and which are notified to Student Administration within the required timelines as requiring a central examination; o arrange the conduct of deferred examinations; o provide advice to Schools relating to the requirements for submission of results; o Ensure the efficient and timely publication of results and notification to students.

Sample TAFE Division Grading Categories:

TAFE DIVISION
Grading Categories, Result Codes and Descriptions

G1 CD CM CY CN G3 S N J

Grading Category 1 Competent with Distinction Competent with Merit Competent Not Yet Competent Grading Category 3
VCE Assessment Only

G2 CY CN

Grading Category 2 Competent Not Yet Competent

Satisfactory Not Satisfactory Did Not Complete

G4 A B C D E F

Grading Category 4 (80 - 100) (70 - 79) (60 - 69) (50 - 59) (40 - 49) (0 - 39)

Other Result Codes and Descriptions CS Continuing Studies (Assessment Not Complete) CR Credit Transfer NG Recognition of Prior Learning - not granted RG Recognition of Current Competency - granted RN Recognition of Current Competency - not granted WD Withdrawn UP Ungraded Participation ** Module/Unit Awaiting Result Superseded Grading Categories GEN All result codes available COM Result codes CD and CM not available Superseded Result Codes CP Credit Pass P Pass PY Pass NC Assessment Not Yet Complete NP Not Passed PN Not Passed

Moderation and validation of assessment Higher Education

Procedure
Intent and objectives To specify a moderation and validation process which assures that?
y y

the characteristics of assessment are well defined and are aligned with program capabilities course assessment tasks and assessment criteria are: clearly stated so that students are able to determine what outcomes are expected and how they will be assessed o consistent with course objectives/learning outcomes and learning activities o consistently applied across campuses and modes of delivery o of an appropriate standard o appropriately weighted For every assessment task which contributes to the final grade, there are agreed judgments interpreting evidence of capability or marking criteria in order to maximise consistency, fairness and reliability.
o

Scope: Higher Education Procedure

1. Validation of assessment strategy Procedure 1.1 The Policy and Procedures for the Development, Re-development, Renewal and Amendment of Programs, require that a Program Guide be developed which includes (a) a Program Capabilities Map; and (b) the philosophy of assessment throughout the program These shall be developed with reference to the Assessment Design Checklist and the development team should ensure that:
y y y y y

Responsibility Timeline Team leader As Part of the development/ renewal process

all capabilities are assessed there is appropriate sequencing of capability development there is no unnecessary duplication of assessment of capabilities assessment strategies are progressive across levels there is diversity of assessment strategies across the program Portfolio Board -

1.2 Portfolio Boards shall validate the Program Capabilities Map and Philosophy of Assessment as part of the process of endorsing the accreditation/renewal documentation. 1.3 Programs Committee shall approve the Program Capabilities Map and

Programs

Philosophy of Assessment as part of the process of endorsing the accreditation/renewal documentation.

Committee

1.4 Should the program require accreditation by an external accrediting Prof/Industry authority, documentation relating to assessment shall be provided in accordance with their instructions. This shall constitute external validation.

2. Moderation and validation of program course assessment Procedure Program/Course Coordinators or equivalent shall ensure that moderation and validation of assessment takes place through a) consistent practices that achieve the following outcomes:
y

Responsibility Program/Course Coordinator or equivalent.

Timeline -

scheduling of program assessment across the semester is fair and equitable; assessment tasks provide adequate evidence that the stated outcomes have been acquired; assessment is appropriate for the level of study; assessment is designed to minimise plagiarism; assessment criteria, where appropriate, should include the proper citation of sources (refer Plagiarism Procedure); course guides (Part A) show how course capabilities are assessed; course guides (Part B) include assessment tasks and weightings, assessment criteria for each task, and due dates for each task Consultation around assessment occurs with coordinators / managers of all programs in which the course is prescribed where practicable b) program/course reviews of the appropriateness of the assessment strategy, and the documentation of any resulting modifications in the program/course log and program/course guides. For programs this activity may be incorporated into the Program Annual Review and documented in the Program Annual Report. c) External input to and scrutiny of the assessment moderation and validation strategy may also be achieved through the submission of the Program Annual Reports to Program Review Committees.

y y y

y y

3. Grading and grading standards Procedure Responsibility Timeline

Heads of School shall ensure that: 3.1. there are consistent moderation practices in place that promote fairness, consistency and reliability of assessment grading and comparability of assessment within courses across multiple markers, campuses and sites, and student cohorts (offshore, onshore, online etc.) 3.2. where there are variations or anomalies across different assessors, an appropriate strategy to increase consistency and reliability in assessment outcomes is implemented 3.3. All staff, including those in partner institutions, is aware of the processes adopted to ensure consistent standards of assessment.

Heads of School

Flowchart

Current Business Processes High Level

Manage Assessment
Notifying students of all assessment criteria and types of assessment, modifying the original course assessment details, the submission of assessments including requests for extensions and the collection of assessments for marking.

Manage Exam
The submission of an exam form, the approval of the proposed exam event (which provides input for the preparation of a timetable), and the conduction of the exam. An external agent may include the Victorian Police, a private organisation or other Registered Training Organisation.

Guidelines for Moderation of Assessment

One of the key roles of the responsible role that will effect moderation is to ensure that all assessment is undertaken with fairness, reliability, validity and flexibility.

EXTRACT FROM DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND WORKPLACE RELATIONS (DEEWR) Assessment includes all forms of assessment including RPL/RCC, workplace assessment, Industry Placement assessment and all approaches such as written assignments, tests and examinations, evidence portfolios, oral presentations, practical demonstrations, role plays, simulations etc.
All assessments should be moderated to


Check that marking guides adequately cover all of the relevant information such as performance criteria, evidence guides, range statements and employability skills.

 

Check that the evidence which is collected meets the rules of evidence (valid, sufficient, current and authentic). Check that the students are assessed against the level of competence required by the unit of competency.

Check that students are being assessed taking into account language, literacy and numeracy skills and employability skills to the level required in the competency.

 

Check that there is an agreed understanding of the criteria being used to arrive at an assessment of competent. Check that the agreed criteria are being used consistently by all teache assessing competencies (even with rs different groups of students or in different courses or contexts).

Check that was graded assessment is used, that teachers would assess the same piece of work to the same standard.

Check that the weighting of graded assessment leads to an accurate reflection of the students work.

Key Questions for the Moderator/Assessor on Moderation of Assessment

  

How were the assessments for the competencies/modules (or clusters) in this field of study moderated? Are you confident that the assessments from different assessors were consistent and equivalent? What actions do you intend to take to improve moderation processes in this field of study to ensure that assessments are reliable across a range of assessors, over a range of contexts and over time?

 

How have the assessment strategies, tools and processes for this field of study been validated? Have all relevant stakeholders (i.e. students, teachers, employers, industry, other RTOs) given feedback on the assessment processes and tools used in this field of study so that they might be improved?

  

Are the assessment strategies chosen appropriate for all target groups? Do the strategies allow students the best opportunity to succeed? Do the assessment instruments or activities address the performance criteria as well as evidence guide, range statements and employability skills for the competencies being assessed?

What assessment instruments or activities worked best for specific target groups? instruments or activities did not work?

What assessment

 

How will this information be used to improve assessment instruments and activities? Have samples of student work and/or assessment records from a range of levels been kept (including RPL/RCC)? If so, where are they located?

Have assessment tools, such as assessment instruments (assignments, tests, evidence summaries, activity sheets etc.), marking guides and results recording sheets, for this semester been archived? If so, where are they stored?

Is there sufficient information stored about assessment so that there is consistency across different semesters or years? This can be through:
y

Keeping samples of student work and assessment (For example a very good, medium, barely there and not yet competent student assessment with marking sheets and commen which clearly indicate ts reasons for assessment).

y y

Keeping video or other records of student activities or assessment for comparative purposes as above. Keeping performance criteria and marking guides with explanatory materials and examples about how the criteria were applied.

Possible Approaches to Moderation of Assessment


Preliminary moderation meetings for major assessment tasks
o o o o

Review marking guides and check agreed interpretation of criteria. Assess a high, medium and low piece of work from previous year. Compare grading and review marking guides and mark another piece of work if necessary. Where a teacher is not assessing at the same level as other teachers, engage in further moderation checks on assessments.

Team assessment of demonstrated tasks or evidence interviews

o

A sample of assessments are chosen where all teachers observe the same demonstrations and independently blind mark against the criteria in the marking guide and debrief. (Could be a videotaped demonstration from a previous year or live demonstrations with a current class). Where assessments are within tolerance, teachers continue to assess independently. Where assessments do not agree, revisit marking guides to provide clearer direction for teachers and then engage in another team assessment to check again.

o o

Cross marking of all or selected assessment tasks

o o

All teachers choose one or more assessment tasks from their class at random. Teachers assess the work and pass on to other teachers until all teachers have assessed the work against the same criteria. The gradings are collected by the Moderator. Conduct a moderation meeting to discuss results or assessments especially where marks are discrepant to decide on interpretation of criteria. If necessary amend marking guides to reflect agreed interpretation of criteria and moderate another piece of work to ensure consistency.

Meeting to debrief on assessments which have already been conducted

o o

Discussion of how criteria have been applied with amendments made where discrepancies are identified. Professional development provided where a teacher is marking discrepantly.

Samples of graded assessments from previous years

o o o

Distributed by the moderator with explanatory notes of how the criteria have or have not been met. Written assessments, video tapes of selected demonstrated assessments as exemplars. Evidence portfolios from previous years demonstrating acceptable evidence for each element.

This is a sample of an Exam Request Checklist:

PLEASE PROVIDE THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST TO THE STAFF MEMBER RESPONSIBLE FOR REQUESTING EXAMS

EXAM REQUEST CHECKLIST

1.

Course: clearly identify the name of the exam paper (e.g. UG, PG, Bradford, etc.) Course ID Subject Cat Paper Title

2.

Clearly identify the details of other courses that will use this same exam paper: Course ID Subject Cat Paper Title

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Is the exam compulsory? YES or NO Indicate the mode of exam: Wayville (formal) or In Department Are the majorityof students sitting the paper expected to graduate? YES or NO Is more than 10 mins reading time required? If so, add the additional recommended reading time to the writing time. How much writing timewill students need? (Include any additional recommended reading time). Select 60, 120 or 180 or ______ mins (every non-standard duration results in more announcements and disruptions for students). Is any part of this exam Open Book (double-desks required)? YES or NO Doesany part of the exam have to be collected early (e.g. Part A after 1 hour)? If so, provide details: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________

10. If 50 students or morelist the details of common course combinations (i.e. where students will also sit another particular exam).

This may help the Examinations Office to spread those exams apart.

Course ID

Subject

Cat

Paper Title

11. Do students complete the exam in separate answer books? YES or NO 12. Indicatetype and quantity of books each student will need? (Students will be issued extra pink books on request).

BLUE (2 hrs. or more) PINK (less than 2 hrs.) GREEN (short answers in separate books) QPAB (covers only for question paper answer books)

______ ______ ______ ______

books per student books per student books per student covers per student PLEASE TURN OVER _

13. What materials are students permitted to bring into the exam? Specifycalculator and dictionary types, books, notes, etc. All

materials allowed must also appear on the rubric. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________
14. Are there any attachmentsto the exam paper? If so, specify (e.g.Graph paper, formulae, tables, etc.):

____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

16. Listall exams that must be conducted at the same time as this exam:

Course ID

Subject

Cat

Paper Title

17. Listall exams that mustprecedethis exam:

Course ID

Subject

Cat

Paper Title

18. Listall exams that mustbe conducted on the same day as this exam:

Course ID

Subject

Cat

Paper Title

AM or PM

19. Will any additional students (other than those enrolled) sit this exam? If so, provide list. 20. Do you require a supplementary exam to be scheduled? YES or NO 21. Who will conduct the supplementary exam? Exams Office or InDepartment

Sample Memo sent by a Centralised Examinations Office to the Examiners - Instructions

MEMORANDUM
TO: Examination Contact Officers FROM: Gary Dwyer, Examinations Officer, & Kumar Ramachandran, Examinations Coordinator, Student Administration DATE: Monday, 9 May 2011 SUBJECT: Semester 1, 2011 Final Examination Timetable _____________________________________________________________________________ Please find attached the Final Examination Timetable for Semester 1, 2011. You may post this timetable on your departments noticeboard. Students c an view their own personalised timetables on the Student Portal. The Semester 1, 2011 Examination Period will run from Monday 6 to Friday 24 June inclusive .

GUIDELINES ON THE PREPARATION OF EXAMINATION PAPERS

Examiners Declaration Cover Sheet: Each department will be supplied with an Examiners Declaration cover sheet for each of their examinable subjects. This cover sheet, including the special requirements section must be completed by the relevant examiner and submitted with their examination p aper to Student Administration. These cover sheets will be forwarded shortly to all departmental examination contacts. Please pass them on to the relevant examiners in each case. Presentation of Examination Papers: The first page of every examination paper should include the information below where applicable. A sample format is attached. The University of Melbourne Semester 1 Assessment 2011 Department Name Subject Number(s) and Title(s) if the examination paper is common to more than one subject, all subjects should be listed.

 Provision for Students ID Number only, no name if the student is required to answer directly on to the examination paper, there should be a space for this. Reading Time Writing Time Number of pages in the examination paper including the first page reproduced mathematical tables, formulae, copied anecdotes, etc., as attachments to the examination paper should also be included in the numbering. Authorised Materials must be clearly stated. Please indicate which, if any, dictionaries, texts or other materials are authorised. It should be noted that invigilators are under instruction not to permit use of any unauthorised material. Calculators will only be allowed if stated on the examinationpaper. If restrictions are placed on the type of calculator allowed, it will be the examiners responsibility to enforce this in the examination room during reading time. Instructions to Invigilators please provide information to assis t invigilators in setting up the examination room. Note what materials students are to receive, for example, script books, computer answer sheets, mathematical tables, graph paper, etc. All materials except script books are to be supplied by the department . Special requirements required multiple choice answer sheets, graph paper or other. Indicate whether the examination paper is to remain in the examination room papers to remain in the examination room will have the first page printed on pink pap er by Student Administration. Instructions to Students provide whatever information is necessary to instruct the student on how to progress through the examination paper. Baillieu Library indicate whether the examination paper can be archived in the Baillieu library for future student reference. Number every page of the examination paper commencing with the first page e.g. Page 1 of 7. Print the words End of Examination at the end of the paper. Include instructions such as please turn over or continued next page as appropriate throughout. Deadlines for the Receipt of Examination Papers: For exams scheduled during the period 6 to 10 June,two copies # of each paper are to be delivered to Student Administration by 13 May. For exams scheduled during the period 14 to 17 June,two copies #of each paper are to be delivered to Student Administration by 20 May. For exams scheduled during the period 20 to 24 November,two copies #of each paper are to be delivered to Student Administration by 27 May.

Please note that every subject that appears on the timetable must have its own exam paper. For common content subjects, this means a paper for each subject.
# two

examination papers must be supplied, one original and the other marked COPY on the cover sheet. If more than one paper is being delivered, please ensure that they are separated and not all bunched together. Please do not staple papers, use paperclips only. If any of the above deadlines are not met, the responsibility of printing the examination papers in sufficient quantities will fall with the department. If you are printing the examination papers in -house you should provide enough copies for the number of students enrolled plus an additional 10% as spares and deliver them to Student Administration 2 days before the examination date. Departments will be responsible for providing all materials other than script books for use in examinations, e.g. graph pape r, computer answer sheets, mathematical tables, etc. These should be supplied in sufficient quantity for all students enrolled in the subject plus an additional 10% and delivered to Student Administration along with the examination paper. All examination papers must be hand -delivered to Student Administration by a departmental representative. Upon delivery, the paper must be signed -in by that person. Under no circumstances should examination papers be sent via the internal mail system or as email attachm ents. Printing of Examination Papers:

Poor quality examination papers (including attachments) that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced will be returned to the department. If resubmitted to Student Administration quickly enough , normal printing arrangements will resume. Examination papers that must remain in the examination room will have the first page printed on pink paper. Examination papers that students may remove will have the first page printed on white paper. If you are printing in -house, please follow these guidelines, as it will assist invigilators in the collection of papers at the conclusion of the examination. Unless otherwise requested, all examination papers will be printed double-sided . Examiners: Examiners are required to sign -in at the appropriate examination venue and must be in attendance for at least the reading time of the examination to respond to student queries. This regulation is contained in the University Calendar under Section 5 of Stat ute 12.3 Conduct of Assessment: Duties of Examiners. Examiners are also required to remain in reach of contact for the duration of the examination; for this reason, they should not use contact numbers that are likely to be unattended or connected to an answering machine. Students with Clashing Examinations or prior Alternative Examination Arrangements (AEA): Students with clashing examinations or prior AEA (generally through the Disability Liaison Unit) should be directed to Student Administration, whe re alternative arrangements will be made for them. The relevant Examination Contact Officer will also be informed of the alternative arrangements for these students shortly before the start of the examination period. These students will sit their examinati on on campus. An examiner (or delegate) is still required to be in attendance. FURTHER ENQUIRIES Please direct any enquiries regarding these instructions to either Gary Dwyer on x48022 or Kumar Ramachandran on x46026 or via email to garyjd@unimelb.edu.au or kram@unimelb.edu.au .

SAMPLE FIRST PAGE

Student Number

The University of Melbourne Semester 1 Assessment 2011

School of Nursing NURS50006Nursing Science 2
Reading Time 15 minutes Writing Time 3 hours This paper has 24 pages.
Identical Examination Papers : If students from more than one subject are sitting This examination, list all the other Subject Numbers and Titles here. Common Content Papers: If this examination paper is similar to papers of other subjects, List all the other Subject Numbers and Titles here. Authorised Materials: The following items are authorised: (list here) OR

Students may have unrestricted access to all materials. OR No materials are authorised.

Paper to be held by Baillieu Library: Indicate whether the paper is to be held with the Baillieu Library.

Instructions to Invigilators: Indicate what handouts, if any, students require: script books, computer answer sheets, mathematical tables, graph paper, etc. Indicate if the examination paper is to remain in the examination room. These papers will have their first page printed on pink paper. Instructions to Students: Provide whatever information you consider appropriate such as instructions about answering questions, writing on the examination paper, marking breakdown, etc.

Extra Materials required (please tick & supply)

Sample Examination Script and report:

Hesterman, Guzzomi and Stone; How to Mark Markers? Please click on link http://www.aaee.com.au/conferences/papers/2007/paper_06.pdf