School of Social Work and Human Services Assessment Policies Introduction:... 2 General Principles... 3 University Policy... 3 Grammar... 3 Number... 3 Course-specific assessment requirements... 3 Length... 3 Guidelines... 3 Penalties for excessive length... 4 Due dates... 4 Submission... 5 Penalties for late submission... 5 Resubmitting assessment pieces... 5 Extensions... 6 Returning Marked Assessment... 6 Re-marking... 7 Compulsory Pass Grades for individual pieces of assessment... 7 Student Integrity and Misconduct (including plagiarism and collusion)... 8 Group Work... 8 Take Home Exams... 9 Examinations... 9 Deferred Examinations... 10 Attendance and Participation... 10 Moderation... 11 Practicum Requirements... 12 Awarding Grades... 13 Further Information... 17 Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 1 of 17
Introduction: The University has a number of policies and procedures related to assessment and these are located in the Policies and Procedures Library (PPL) section 3.10 (with particular attention to 3.10.02) at https://ppl.app.uq.edu.au/content/3.10-curricula-and-assessment. These policies guide the process of assessment at this university, however, they do not cover the many and varied issues that arise at school level. For this reason, the following school policies and procedures have been developed. The aim of this set of school assessment policies is to establish a number of consistent practices within the school to guide the way that we assess our students. In standardizing these practices, we are not attempting to curb staff creativity or flexibility in designing innovative assessment tasks for their students. Rather, these policies provide a framework, as well as guiding principles, around which assessment tasks can be created and developed. It is school (and university) policy that students must know what is required of them to achieve grades for each and every course in which they enroll. This information must be described to them in unambiguous terms at the first class meeting of the semester. It must be clearly and explicitly stated in the Electronic Course Profile (ECP) and cannot be altered or changed during the semester. Assessment within each course, and across all courses within each program in the school, needs to be grounded in, and explicitly linked to, the course learning objectives. These links, as well as the mapping of the Graduate Attributes on to assessment tasks, needs to be explicit in ECP. Assessment tasks should be varied and allow the students the opportunity to demonstrate that they have met the course learning objectives. The grading of each piece of assessment is based on pre-specified criteria that are outlined in the ECP. It is important that criteria reflect genuine standards of achievement (e.g., a piece of assessment graded as a 7 must truly be seen as excellent or exceptional ). Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 2 of 17
General Principles University Policy Staff are reminded of university policy with respect to the setting of assessment tasks. In brief: More than one form of assessment in a course must be used Assessment to be spread across the semester to enable students to learn from earlier assessment and feedback No single item of assessment to contribute more than two-thirds (70%) of total assessment for the course - In line with these policies, the school encourages staff to also consider formative as well as summative assessment, and to consider non-graded as well as graded tasks. Further school policies to note: Grammar The use of correct grammar and spelling is considered to be an essential aspect of each piece of written assessment. This should be made explicit in the assessment criteria. It is acceptable (and expected) that markers will make comment on grammar and spelling, where necessary, throughout the student s work. Number Within each course there should be 2-4 substantive pieces of assessment (e.g., essay, group work, written examination, journal, workbook, oral presentation, multiple-choice examination, practical performance) Course-specific assessment requirements In some courses, students may be required to complete and submit all assessment pieces to pass the course; they may be required to submit and pass a particular assessment item (also known as a hurdle requirement ) to pass the course; or there may be other specific requirements necessary to earn a passing grade. In all such circumstances, these specific passing requirements will be made clear in the ECP, discussed with the students, and accurate records will be kept throughout the semester. Length Guidelines For Undergraduate 1 st year courses, any single written piece of assessment (e.g., essay) should generally have an upper limit of 2000 words and not be weighted more than 50% of course grade. Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 3 of 17
For Undergraduate advanced courses (i.e., 2 nd, 3 rd, and 4 th year), the upper limit will be around 3500 words with no more than a 50% weighting. Course coordinators are reminded to be cognizant of total word count requirements within a course. Postgraduate coursework students will generally have an upper word limit of 6000 words across all assessment pieces of the course for the semester (with the exception of research reports, which are 10,000-12,000 words in length. Penalties for excessive length Students can gain an unfair advantage through submitting written pieces that are significantly longer than specified and through having longer than other students to work on assessment pieces. For these reasons, it is necessary to include deterrents to these practices to ensure fairness and equity. These deterrents must be clearly stated in Electronic Course Profiles and all students must be made aware of them. The school policies will be: Length: A word count that is within ±10% of the set length is acceptable. A word count that is over this 10% will be penalized at 10% of the total mark available for the assessment. Examples: Set length Acceptable Submitted length length Weighting Penalty* 1000 words 900-1100 1200 words 20% 2 marks 1500 words 1350-1650 2000 words 30% 3 marks 2500 words 2250-2750 2700 words 35% No penalty 3500 words 3150-3850 5000 words 50% 5 marks *The penalty is deducted from the student s mark. The word length must be set down in the assessment criteria in the electronic course profile (e.g. it may come under a more generic grouping of Style and Presentation criteria). Unless otherwise stated in the electronic profile, the academic convention shall apply that the word count includes citations, tables and figures and appendices. The bibliography/reference list is not included in the word count. Due dates The due dates should be spread across the semester (be mindful that students often have peak assessment deadlines in the week following mid-semester break and the final week of semester). Assessment is not to be due during the University s official revision week (the week immediately after the final teaching week) nor can in-class exams be set for the final two teaching weeks of semester. For undergraduate students, it is possible to have short non-graded (i.e., pass/fail) assessment in the first weeks of semester. Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 4 of 17
Submission Electronic submission From semester 1, 2013 all assessment other than non-text based assessment pieces must be lodged online through the course Blackboard site (e.g. via Turnitin, an online plagiarism checking program). Hard copy submission Only non-text based assessment pieces such as counseling aids, physical posters, and skills DVDs may be submitted, at the school front office, as directed by the course coordinator and electronic course profile. These items need to be accompanied by a cover sheet (http://www.uq.edu.au/swahs/assignment%20coversheet.pdf) and are to be submitted in the relevant assignment boxes on level 3 of the Chamberlain Building by 4pm on the due date. Text based assessment will not be accepted via this method. Penalties for late submission Penalties shall apply for work that is submitted late when an extension has not been granted. Assessment must be submitted by the due date and time, as specified in the relevant Electronic Course Profiles and on Blackboard. Non-text based assessment such as Counselling aids, physical posters and skills DVDs must be submitted in the assignment boxes on level 3, Chamberlain Building by 4pm on the due date. Mailed non-text based assessment must be postmarked and mailed on or before the date that the assessment is due. Students will lose 2 marks per day of lateness. The rule of a day is a day should apply so that an assignment due on a Friday and submitted, without extension, on the following Monday, automatically loses 6 marks (3 days late). Submissions later than 7 days past the due date, without an approved extension, can score no better than a pass mark. As marked assessment is returned to students within 3 weeks of the due date, an extension beyond 3 weeks will result in a comparable topic being set for the assessment. Please note that in these situations, approved alternative pieces of assessment can score no higher than a pass mark. Example 1: Student submits an assignment 8 days late without an approved extension and is marked at 49/55. 16 marks are deducted (2 marks per day) bringing the mark down to 33. This then gets rounded down to 25 as the student cannot score better than 50%. Example 2: Student submits assignment 18 days late without an approved extension and is marked at 49/55. 36 marks are deducted (2 marks per day) bringing the mark to 13. The mark remains at 13, which is less than 50%. Resubmitting assessment pieces Except where a compulsory pass grade for a hurdle requirement is deemed necessary (see below) or where a formative piece of assessment has been submitted, students are Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 5 of 17
not permitted to revise and resubmit a piece of assessment for a better mark on that piece. Furthermore, the university does not accept requests for special consideration (e.g., ill health, life events) once an assessment piece has been submitted. Any and all submitted work is taken as the final copy for marking and grading. Extensions Applications for extensions must be made on the University of Queensland s Application for Extension of Progressive Assessment form which is available from myadvisor, Forms Online. In line with the Guidelines for Late Submission of Progressive Assessment (available on http://www.uq.edu.au/myadvisor/extension-progressive-assessment), applications may be approved for medical reasons or exceptional circumstances. Either a medical certificate or documentation to support the exceptional circumstances must be attached to the application. A student s declaration on the application form or a statutory declaration are not sufficient corroboration (proof) of exceptional circumstances. The application must be submitted BEFORE the assessment is due, or if for medical reasons as soon as possible. All applications must be submitted through the front office for processing, or electronically to swahs@social.uq.edu.au. Applications are not to be submitted to the course coordinator directly. The course coordinator can approve or deny extensions. The outcome of the application will generally be emailed to the student within 2 business days of the extension application being made. Where an extension is not approved penalties will apply for late submission of the work. Course Coordinators may ask to see a student s work to date on an assessment piece while considering the extension application. It is the student s responsibility to provide this progress immediately upon request. Extensions granted beyond 3 weeks of the original due date, or after the release of results for that assessment item will result in an alternate assessment piece / topic being set. This alternate assessment piece can score no higher than a pass mark. Students on Disability Access Plans with a clause on extension requests being accepted by the Course Coordinator must still adhere to the extensions request policy outlined. If medical certificates / supporting documentation have already been supplied centrally to Student Services, students may outline their current situation in a note attached to the application, with reference to the access plan. Returning Marked Assessment Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 6 of 17
Assessment will be marked within 3 weeks of the due date. Marks and feedback will be provided online, or alternatively by way of hard copy during class contact time. However, marking and feedback on final pieces of assessment are retained by course coordinators until the official UQ Grade release date (usually 1.5 weeks after the central examination period ends). On grade release day, students will be able to access their marks and feedback online, or if instructed to do so by course coordinators, may collect final assessment pieces from the school front office. Please note that end of semester examination scripts are not returned to students. However students may make an appointment with their course coordinator to go through the examination script together to obtain feedback. Re-marking The University has clear guidelines in relation to the re-marking of assessment pieces (PPL 3.10.02 at section 8 https://ppl.app.uq.edu.au/content/3.10.02-assessment). Applications must be made on the Request for assessment remark form available from myadvisor, Forms Online. In accordance with the application form all applications for remark of assessment must be submitted to the Student Centre by the due dates on the form. Requests for re-marks should not be submitted directly to course coordinators or tutors. Re-marking requests are only considered if feedback on the assessment item has been sought and received. The application needs to address how the mark awarded does not reflect a student s performance with respect to the published assessment criteria for that piece of assessment. Applications which do not provide a sound academic case will not be approved. If a re-mark is approved by the Head of School or Associate Dean (Academic), an independent marker will be sought for the assessment piece. It is the mark of the independent marker that will be recorded against the student s assessment piece, whether it be higher or lower than the original mark. Compulsory Pass Grades for individual pieces of assessment As a general rule, SWAHS based courses do not require students to receive a pass grade on an individual piece of assessment in order to pass the course. The practice of requiring students to pass an individual piece of summative assessment should only be considered as an option for skill based courses in the Bachelor of Social Work, Bachelor of Human Services, Master of Social Work Studies and the Master of Counselling. In any skills based course where a pass grade is required for an individual piece of assessment (e.g. counseling DVD) the student must be provided with the opportunity to resubmit the failed piece of assessment, after receiving appropriate and timely feedback from the Course Coordinator. The student is only able to resubmit the failed piece of Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 7 of 17
assessment once, and receive no higher than a pass mark. The mark given to the resubmitted assignment will stand as the final mark. Student Integrity and Misconduct (including plagiarism and collusion) Students are advised that the school demands the highest levels of academic integrity and conduct. In short, we expect and require that students submitted assessable work be their own except where otherwise (and properly) acknowledged. To this end, the university has introduced (i) an online interactive tutorial which is to be completed by all students and (ii) new procedures for the identifying and dealing with alleged cases of student academic misconduct. (i) The online tutorial is located at https://uq.edu.au/integrity. At this site, there are a number of resources for students as well as (after logging in with student username and password), four interactive modules to be completed. These modules cover when to reference, working together, misconduct and consequences, and good writing habits. All UQ students are required to complete all four modules. (ii) The new procedures for identifying and handling alleged cases of misconduct are described within PPL 3.60.04 (https://ppl.app.uq.edu.au/content/3.60.04-student-integrityand-isconduct). At this site, terms such as academic misconduct, plagiarism, collusion, and cheating are clearly defined as are the procedures for reporting and referring allegations of misconduct. It is expected that all students become familiar with these definitions and the consequences of any actions that may be considered academic misconduct. The school has appointed an Academic Integrity Officer (Dr Di Hafner) whose role is to provide guidance and support to staff and school decision-makers in relation to matters concerning student misconduct. Group Work Group work is considered an essential element of the learning process and all students should have the opportunity within their programs of study to participate in, contribute to, and learn from group work. Furthermore, the skills involved in group work are readily transferable to work situations and are therefore seen to be a necessary attribute of all SWAHS graduates. However, difficulties appear in the fair and reliable assessment of group work. Students contribute to group products with varying amounts of time, quality, involvement, and resources most students play a significant role in assisting the group to achieve its goals but some, for various reasons (personal, social, motivation), do not. The guiding principle behind the assessment of the group product is that all students within each group must be accountable for their contributions. This may be achieved through the group setting specific individual tasks. It may be achieved through signed individual student contracts that detail their involvement and contribution. It may be achieved through the course coordinator adopting different marking strategies (e.g., one group = one mark; self and peer assessments) that are identified through the marking criteria. Given that not all members within a group will always contribute, it is advisable to include a statement in the criteria that states (for example) that the course coordinator reserves the right to Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 8 of 17
deduct marks from an individual student s group mark should that student not have demonstrated a contribution to the group product. Take Home Exams A Take Home Exam allows students time to reflect and develop their thoughts on a particular topic. The additional time provides students with an opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of the course drawing on appropriate resources. A Take Home Exam can be set by the course coordinator and the duration can vary from a minimum of 2 days to a maximum of 7 days. The course coordinator will provide details of the collection and submission requirements and dates in the electronic course profile. The course coordinator may or may not require students to include both in text referencing and a reference list. The course coordinator will provide details around these expectations in the e-course profile Submission of Take Home Exam Papers Students must submit their Take Home Exam Papers via Turnitin by the due date and time. Failure to submit a Take Home Exam If a student is unable to complete the Take Home Exam due to ill health the onus is on the student to notify the course coordinator prior to the submission date. Failure to submit a Take Home Exam Paper by the due date and time will result in a mark of 0 for that piece of assessment and the student can apply for a deferred take home exam if they are eligible to do so. Applications must be submitted directly to the school within 5 calendar days of the original due date of the take home exam. Collection of Take Home Exam Papers The student is responsible for accessing the Take Home Exam Paper on the day it is published and distributed. No additional work time will be given for late access of Take Home Exam Papers. Examinations If setting examinations for a course, Course Coordinators may elect to conduct schoolbased in-class examinations during the semester, rather than schedule end of semester examinations that are conducted centrally during the University s examination period. In doing so, Course Coordinators are reminded that the same policies and guidelines apply to school based examinations as they do to central examinations: 1. ID in the form of the UQ student card is to be checked at the commencement of the inclass examination. Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 9 of 17
2. Students require adequate perusal and working time please ensure that adequate time is allowed in class for ID checking, perusal and working time. 3. In-class examinations must occur within the timeframes of your timetabled lecture class, unless prior approval to hold a school-based examination outside scheduled classes has been provided by the President of the Academic Board. 4. In-class examinations cannot be scheduled during tutorial time nor held in the final two weeks of lectures (i.e., during Weeks 12 and 13). 5. Students absent from the in-class examination are not permitted to complete the examination at a later date, unless an application for a deferred examination is approved. From semester 2, 2014 applications for deferred examinations must be submitted online via mysi-net > myrequests. Hard copy application forms or requests received via email will not be considered. Applications must be submitted within 5 calendar days and late applications will not be considered. The procedure for applying and guidelines for the approval of applications can be found at myadvisor > How to apply for a deferred examinations. Deferred Examinations If a student has missed or will miss an examination the student may apply for a deferred examination. Applications may be approved for medical reasons or exceptional circumstances as per the guidelines in myadvisor. Applications for deferred examinations apply to mid-semester examinations or examinations in class time, or end of semester examinations. Unlike the central deferred examinations, which are held in the Deferred and Supplementary Examination period each year (July for semester 1 and December for semester 2), the school based deferred examination for in-class exams will need to occur within 1-2 weeks of the original examination, and at the School. The deferred examination needs to be at least 25% different to the original examination. From 2014 Semester 2 all applications for deferred examinations, both for mid-semester examinations and end of semester examinations, must be submitted online via mysi-net > myrequests. Hard copy application forms or requests received via email will not be considered. The process for applying for and assessing applications for deferred examinations is explained in myadvisor > How to apply for a deferred examination, and in section 5.3. of each SWAHS electronic course profile. Applications must be made within 5 calendar days and they must be accompanied by a medical certificate if for medical reasons (dated no later than 2 business days after the examination), or corroborating evidence of exceptional circumstances. Attendance and Participation Attendance and active participation at lectures, tutorials, workshops, and demonstrations is considered to be vital to students completing course requirements and achieving course learning objectives. Although there is recognition that there is no university policy that states that attendance and participation is compulsory, there is an expectation that Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 10 of 17
students will attend classes. Whilst students are adults who must take responsibility for their own learning, staff need to emphasize the benefits to be gained from attending and encourage the students participation in their own learning. However, students also face many competing demands in their lives (most notably, part-time work and family commitments) and these can lead to attendance at classes being given a low priority. Without attendance, it is difficult to justify the attainment of learning objectives and, for this reason, the importance of attending needs to be stated in the strongest way. If attendance standards are to be applied in a course, then staff will keep exact records of attendance and explicitly alert students to the consequences of sustained non-attendance. Please note that in some courses, such as skills based courses, course coordinators may require 100% attendance. Therefore any absence will need to be explained with appropriate documentation, such as a Doctor s Certificate or a Statutory Declaration. As per PPL policy 3.10.02 (paragraph 4.5.5), marks cannot be deducted from summative pieces of assessment in relation to attendance. Participation in class activities is considered essential to student active learning. Course coordinators may decide to include participation as an assessable summative item and by so doing reinforce its importance. If it is to be assessed, then the marking scheme needs to be made explicit and have clear criteria associated. As an assessable item, it needs to be shown that the participation meets the learning objectives of the course and that it maps on to the university graduate attributes. School policy places an upper limit of 10% of the course weighting that can be assigned to participation unless it can be shown and justified that a higher percentage is warranted. This justification is to be made in writing to the School Teaching and Learning Committee at least 4 weeks before the commencement of classes. Moderation It is the responsibility of all course coordinators to ensure that fair and reliable moderation of assessment pieces occurs in their courses. Moderation assists in establishing consistency in marking as well as confirming the standards and norms for levels of grading within a piece of work. It is advisable to have a planning meeting with course teaching staff (lecturers, tutors) early in semester to discuss the assessment criteria and marking standards expected. Past exemplars of student work can be used at this meeting to locate and discuss standards. It is expected that there will be at least one, and preferably two, rounds of moderation for each assessment task. The first would follow a preliminary reading of the submissions to discuss and establish standards while the second would allow for crossreading of borderline pieces and the finalization of grades. The course coordinator is to take responsibility for ensuring that those pieces marked as failing are given close scrutiny. In courses where the coordinator is the sole contributor to the course (i.e., both lecturer and tutor), then it is expected that they will consult with colleagues on, at least, any failing pieces. Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 11 of 17
Students are to be aware that their usual tutor may not necessarily be the person marking their assessment. The marker may be the course coordinator or another tutor for the course. Practicum Requirements Programs that are to provide professional standing may have a particular requirement for practicum. The assessment of Practicum requires a number of different elements compared to other forms of assessment. To ensure appropriate assessment for Practicum at a postgraduate level, there should be: 1. Clear objectives guidelines to ensure that students are suitable to undertake practicum. Students should be assessed prior to practicum and where found not sufficiently competent at the required level, should be offered clear written comments with respect to inadequacies and offered an agreed program of remediation to provide the opportunity to reach the required level of competence. If a required level of competence is not met then students may not necessarily be offered a placement. 2. Requirements for practicum should be clearly stated in written in material including the course profile. Students should also be offered a compulsory contact time with staff to ensure that requirements are discussed and fully understood. Supervisors of students should also be provided clear written materials with respect to assessment requirements. 3. There should be clear documentation of the manner in which the practicum requirements will be met such as in a Supervision Contract, and formal assessment reports. 4. Programs should offer clear guidelines to students with respect to fitness to practice. Where possible and appropriate, a Fitness to Practice Policy should be adopted by each program offering clear criteria for practice fitness and procedures for investigation of fitness that are consistent with, and expansive of, relevant PPL policies. Students should be made formally aware of the existence of such a policy prior to undertaking their program and agree to abide by its requirements. 5. Students should be allocated a University liaison staff member who will work with both the student and the field supervisor to determine competence at practicum and who will be made aware of any student inadequacies in the first half of student placement and be involved with any required remediation. 6. Students will be assessed formatively during their practicum and where a lack of competence exists, students will be informed and a program of remediation designed that is agreed by the student, supervisor and university liaison staff member. Formal documentation of the areas of a lack of competence and remediation must be held by the course coordinator. 7. Competent practicum performance will be assessed summatively at the conclusion of the practicum. Failure to provide evidence of competence in key designated skills criteria will constitute a failure in the practicum requirements and hence the practicum course. Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 12 of 17
8. In the event that the practicum course also requires other assessable work, a student will not be able to pass a practicum course on these requirements alone without a pass in the competence requirement of the practicum. Awarding Grades There are two systems currently being used to finalize student grades. The first is a standards-based approach and the second is a profile systems approach. The standards-based approach to assigning grades relies on a clear definition or criteria for each grade. Examples of generic descriptors can be found at PPL 3.10.07 and at the TEDI website at http://www.tedi.uq.edu.au/resources/writing-assessment-criteria-andstandards. As well as a set of criteria for each grade, coordinators can also choose to nominate percentage cut-offs for each grade. The school undergraduate cut-offs are 84.5% (7), 74.5% (6), 64.5% (5), 49.5% (4), 44.5% (3), 29.5% (2), 1% (1), and 0% (X). It should be noted that percentage cut-offs, by themselves, are not sufficient indicators of grades they must also include descriptors. Before final grades are uploaded each semester, there is a School Examiners Meeting to which all course coordinators are expected to attend (it will generally be held on the first Wednesday following the official UQ exam period). In preparation for this meeting, course coordinators are required to electronically submit three documents the class list from mysi-net with final grade and overall percentage, breakdown of results file, and the School Examiner s Report. Instructions on preparation and submission of these documents will be distributed each semester. Examples (using the new UQ generic grade descriptors from Electronic Course Profiles) are provided below: Example 1: Using % cut-offs AND descriptors to determine grades Grade Description Percentage range Descriptor 7 High distinction 84.5% and above As for 6, with consistent evidence of substantial originality and insight in identifying, generating and communicating competing arguments, perspectives or problem solving approaches; critically evaluates problems, their solutions and implications 6 Distinction 74.5% 84% As for 5, with frequent evidence of originality in defining and analysing issues or problems and in creating solutions; uses a level, style and means of communication appropriate to the discipline and the audience 5 Credit 64.5% 74% Demonstrates substantial understanding of Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 13 of 17
fundamental concepts of the field of study and ability to apply these concepts in a variety of contexts; develops or adapts convincing arguments and provides coherent justification; communicates information and ideas clearly and fluently in terms of the conventions of the discipline 4 Pass 49.5% 64% Demonstrates adequate understanding and application of the fundamental concepts of the field of study; develops routine arguments or decisions and provides acceptable justification; communicates information and ideas adequately in terms of the conventions of the discipline 3 Fail 44.5% 49% Demonstrates superficial or partial or faulty understanding of the fundamental concepts of the field of study and limited ability to apply these concepts; presents undeveloped or inappropriate or unsupported arguments; communicates information or ideas with lack of clarity and inconsistent adherence to the conventions of the discipline 2 Fail 29.5% 44% Demonstrates clear deficiencies in understanding and applying fundamental concepts; communicates information or ideas in ways that are frequently incomplete or confusing and give little attention to the conventions of the discipline: 1 Fail 1% - 29.% Fails to demonstrate most or all of the basic requirements of the course X Fail 0% No work submitted The profile systems approach involves establishing a profile that will guide the assignment of grades for your course. Each grade profile sets a minimum standard of performance that will lead to the award of a particular grade. Example 2: For a course where each assessment piece is considered of equal importance in the assigning of grades, the grade profile might look like: Course Grade Description 7 High distinction Minimum Profile (Grades for each piece of assessment) All 7s Descriptor As for 6, with consistent evidence of substantial originality and insight in Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 14 of 17
6 Distinction Mainly 6s and 7s (max. of one 5 allowed) 5 Credit Mainly 5s and 6s (max. of one 4 allowed) identifying, generating and communicating competing arguments, perspectives or problem solving approaches; critically evaluates problems, their solutions and implications As for 5, with frequent evidence of originality in defining and analysing issues or problems and in creating solutions; uses a level, style and means of communication appropriate to the discipline and the audience Demonstrates substantial understanding of fundamental concepts of the field of study and ability to apply these concepts in a variety of contexts; develops or adapts convincing arguments and provides coherent justification; communicates information and ideas clearly and fluently in terms of the conventions of the discipline 4 Pass Mainly 4s and 5s (no 3s allowed) 3 Fail Mainly 3s and 4s (max. of one 2 allowed) 2 Fail Mainly 2s and 3s (max. of one 1 allowed) Demonstrates adequate understanding and application of the fundamental concepts of the field of study; develops routine arguments or decisions and provides acceptable justification; communicates information and ideas adequately in terms of the conventions of the discipline Demonstrates superficial or partial or faulty understanding of the fundamental concepts of the field of study and limited ability to apply these concepts; presents undeveloped or inappropriate or unsupported arguments; communicates information or ideas with lack of clarity and inconsistent adherence to the conventions of the discipline Demonstrates clear deficiencies in understanding and applying fundamental concepts; communicates information or ideas Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 15 of 17
in ways that are frequently incomplete or confusing and give little attention to the conventions of the discipline: 1 Fail Mainly 1s and 2s Fails to demonstrate most or all of the basic requirements of the course X Fail No work submitted Example 3: For a course where one assessment piece (Assignment #1) is considered of greater importance than the other pieces in the assigning of grades, the grade profile might look like: Course Grade Description 7 High distinction Minimum Profile (Grades for each piece of assessment) All 7s Descriptor As for 6, with consistent evidence of substantial originality and insight in identifying, generating and communicating competing arguments, perspectives or problem solving approaches; critically evaluates problems, their solutions and implications 6 Distinction Mainly 6s and 7s Assignment #1: 6 grade Others: max. of one 5 allowed 5 Credit Mainly 5s and 6s Assignment #1: 5 grade Others: max. of one 4 allowed 4 Pass Mainly 4s and 5s Assignment #1: 4 grade Others: no 3s allowed As for 5, with frequent evidence of originality in defining and analysing issues or problems and in creating solutions; uses a level, style and means of communication appropriate to the discipline and the audience Demonstrates substantial understanding of fundamental concepts of the field of study and ability to apply these concepts in a variety of contexts; develops or adapts convincing arguments and provides coherent justification; communicates information and ideas clearly and fluently in terms of the conventions of the discipline Demonstrates adequate understanding and application of the fundamental concepts of the field of study; develops routine arguments or decisions and provides acceptable justification; Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 16 of 17
3 Fail Mainly 3s and 4s Assignment #1: 3 grade Others: max. of one 2 allowed communicates information and ideas adequately in terms of the conventions of the discipline Demonstrates superficial or partial or faulty understanding of the fundamental concepts of the field of study and limited ability to apply these concepts; presents undeveloped or inappropriate or unsupported arguments; communicates information or ideas with lack of clarity and inconsistent adherence to the conventions of the discipline 2 Fail Mainly 2s and 3s Assignment #1: 2 grade Others: max. of one 1 allowed Demonstrates clear deficiencies in understanding and applying fundamental concepts; communicates information or ideas in ways that are frequently incomplete or confusing and give little attention to the conventions of the discipline: 1 Fail Mainly 1s and 2s Fails to demonstrate most or all of the basic requirements of the course X Fail No work submitted Further Information For further information or clarification, please contact Dr Di Hafner, Chair School Teaching and Learning Committee (ph. 3365 2512, d.hafner@uq.edu.au). Last updated 28-July-2014 Page 17 of 17