Student Services Department - Guidance on the Management of Departmental Examination Boards

Introduction

The following guidelines have been developed to assist academic departments in managing examiners´ meetings or boards at which decisions are taken concerning student assessment outcomes. The guidance takes account of relevant aspects of the QAA Code of Practice for Higher Education and the notes should be read within the context of guidelines on other aspects of assessment practice, to be found within the Teaching Quality Handbook.

1. Remit and Membership of Boards

1. Responsibility for the implementation of grading schemes and for the moderation of grades by external examiners lies with the departmental staff acting as examiners, commonly known as the Departmental Examination Board. A meeting of the Board must be convened when there are substantive decisions to be taken concerning the outcome of assessment.
2. The role of those attending a meeting of the Departmental Examination Board must be clear. The role of any external examiners present should be in line with the Code of Practice for External Examiners of Taught Courses of the University of Sheffield: http://tlsu.dept.shef.ac.uk/examiners/COP.doc
3. Along with the appropriate external examiners, the Board should comprise those internal examiners appropriate to the business being considered which would usually include the leaders of all contributing modules as well as Directors of Teaching and Year Tutors/Level Co-ordinators. The Board may also include representatives from other departments which contribute modules integral to specific degree programmes. An appropriate senior member of staff should take the Chair.
4. In some cases, a Faculty Officer may also be invited to attend a meeting of a Departmental Examination Board in an advisory role. Members of the department other than those participating as internal examiners might also be in attendance (for example, administrative/secretarial staff and postgraduate students involved in teaching and assessment), although responsibility for determining the final examination outcomes must clearly reside with the examiners.
5. In order for a meeting of a Departmental Examination Board to proceed, it must be quorate. The general principle for determining the quorum is that all relevant external examiners and internal examiners, as described in paragraph c above, should be present. Absence should only with be the permission of the Chair of the Board, in which case a written commentary should be submitted. It is acknowledged, however, that non-attendance at very short notice due to force majeure would make it difficult to comply with the requirement to submit a written commentary.

2. Data and Documentation

1. A full list of relevant examination results should be available for consideration by the examiners. Consideration should be given to the use of multiple copies for ease of reference. Care should be taken to ensure accuracy. Where spreadsheets are in use to assist with grades calculation, systems (such as manual spot-checks) should be in place to ensure accuracy. If penalties have been applied to grades (for example as a result of late submission) this information should be available to the examiners. 
2. Where decisions are being made on progression or award recommendation, it is important that a full list of relevant candidates is available, including complete result profiles for every student. Where programmes are credit-based, clear credit accumulation totals must also be included. 
3. During discussion it may be necessary to refer to University Regulations (such as those relating to degree classification), Faculty Conventions and documents containing departmental assessment procedures (such as course handbooks, marking schemes, etc). The relevant publications should be readily available in case of any query. If it is necessary to seek advice from the Faculty, this may be obtained via the Student Services Department.
4. Results data may be presented to the examiners in various formats, and within a range of different reports. The following is likely to constitute a ‘core’ information set in most circumstances:

• Listings of marks obtained by candidates within each examination component (eg formal examination), presented by component, by marker and/or by student.
• Listings of overall module grades obtained, presented by module and by student.
• When making decisions on progression or award recommendation, listings of grades by programme will also be required.
• Notes on special cases (see also (e) below).
• Statistical reports, including information such as the spread of marks awarded within a component or spread of grades within a module, the average grade awarded, the median grade, the standard deviation.
• A range of reports covering the above information categories is available for departmental use within the Sheffield Web Reports system (accessible via MUSE).

5. Where special cases (including cases involving medical evidence) are being considered, thought should be given to discussing the issues separately in advance of any full meeting of examiners, both with a view to protecting confidentiality and in order to expedite decision making. Relevant background information (for example extracts from student files) should be made available to the examiners, as appropriate. 
6. All personal information relating to students must be handled and recorded in accordance with the terms of the Data Protection Act (guidelines for staff dealing with personal information are available to all Departments via the CiCS website). The Chair of the meeting should inform members of the need for confidentiality at the start of the meeting and any papers should be removed from the room at the end.

3. Record Keeping

A member of staff should act as Secretary and adequate records should be maintained. In particular, the following points are emphasised:

1. An attendance list should be retained in an appropriate departmental file, for future reference.
2. If individual marks/grades are changed during a meeting, care should be taken to ensure that a definitive set of results is amended by the Secretary and that any changes are carried through on computerised records.
3. Where decisions are made on progression and award recommendation, an agreed recommendation should be recorded in respect of every case, for onward transmission to the Faculty (via the Student Services Department).
4. A record should be maintained of any written medical or other extenuating evidence which has been presented to the meeting. This should be available for future reference as necessary.
5. A summary record should be kept on how decisions have been reached in any non-standard or 'problem' cases. This might involve, for example, noting the reasons for a particular candidate being deemed Not Assessed in an examination. Alongside this, the outcome of any discussions relating to special cases should be recorded unambiguously, in case of future queries or appeals.
6. Where a recommendation is being made which is contrary to Regulations, a Special Regulation will need to be requested by the Faculty (via the Student Services Department) and it is important to ensure that such recommendations are not communicated to students until formal approval has been given. A deferred result (result code DE) should be recorded in the interim.
7. Procedures relating to the publication of examination results are distributed to departments each academic session by the Student Services Department.