Policy Number: AUS-PA0802
Sponsor: Office of Academic Affairs
Effective Date: September 3, 2021
I. POLICY PURPOSE
The American University of Science ("AUS," "University," or "university") acknowledges that providing consistent, high-quality assessment and internal quality assurance (IQA) underpins student progress and achievement. Standardizing all aspects of assessment practice informs quality assurance and helps all involved reflect upon and develop their practice.
The policy requires active commitment from all staff to deliver on all programs. Training linked to this policy and related procedures supports all teaching staff with the expertise to create fit-for-purpose assessments and make fair and consistent grading decisions for all students that meet national standards. The purpose of IQA is to provide a clear framework for monitoring assessment practice so that best practice can be shared and areas for improvement can be addressed in a timely way.
The aim of this policy is to ensure consistency, quality and fairness of marking, grading and the overall assessment of student work. The assessment and IQA policy is in place to guide assessment practice in order to ensure that, where applicable, all assessment decisions meet national standards and contribute to student achievement. This policy aims to:
Provide high quality and consistent assessment and IQA practice across all AUS programs and courses for all students within an auditable framework of assessment and moderation/IQA, as appropriate
Meet the requirements placed upon the accreditation centers of AUS by all awarding partner organizations and institutions, and the expectations linked to relevant quality frameworks
Promote a framework for fair, accurate and timely assessment that enables AUS students, including those with learning needs and/or disabilities, to complete and submit work for assessment in ways that reflect good academic practice and the University’s Diversity, Inclusion, Equality of Education and Employment Opportunity Policy.
Promote standards of feedback that aid student progress and achievement.
II. POLICY APPLICABILITY
This policy applies to all staff involved in assessment and IQA activity including writing assessments, marking, giving feedback to students on their work and verifying colleague’s assessment design.
III. POLICY STATEMENT
Assessed work constitutes any task, activity, essay or project that contributes to the student achievement in a subject area.
All assessments must be appropriate, valid and reliable, and based on current awarding body criteria as specified in the current syllabus and guidance document for the program, if applicable. It is the responsibility of each member of staff involved in assessment and IQA to be aware of the syllabus and any associate guidance.
Assessment and IQA processes must be communicated clearly to students through induction, progress mentors, tutorials and relevant sessions. This includes program handbooks on the program website.
IQA is a process of monitoring assessment practice in order to ensure that assessments are appropriately aligned to relevant assessment criteria and that assessment decisions meet national standards. It provides a continuous check on the consistency, quality and fairness of assessment design, marking, grading, and the overall assessment of student work. This ensures that University, national, and international standards are appropriately reflected within university assessment practice.
For the purpose of this policy, the term IQA encompasses all forms of activity that check and validate assessment. This will incorporate the systems of quality assurance as required by examining or awarding bodies, which include:
The agreement amongst assessors of the marking
Standardization: standard of students’ work.
Moderation: The process by which the consistency of grading/marking by assessors is ensured and confirmed.
Verification: The process by which assessments and evidence meet the requirements of awarding body specifications and ratify standardization processes.
Each process can lead to mark/grade changes.
All students, teachers, assessors, trainers and internal quality assurers (IQAs) will be made aware of their responsibilities within the Student Appeals Procedure.
A. Requrements
All students on full time study programs will be able to view an assignment/task schedule via the course or program website. The schedule will include issue dates, hand-in dates, and feedback dates for all assignments/tasks for the duration of the course. The schedule will ensure that assessment is planned coherently across the whole program so as not to overburden students or staff at particular times.
To ensure academic integrity, it's crucial that students are well-informed about the guidelines and regulations for coursework assessments. This includes understanding how to properly complete and submit coursework, the severe consequences of plagiarism, and the penalties associated with violating these rules.
Assessment will, where appropriate, be carried out continuously throughout the course in order that students can benefit from both formative and summative feedback.
The appropriate approved assessment proforma must be used for all assessment activity.
All assignment briefs and assessment tasks will be internally quality assured prior to being given to students. The IQA is required to ensure that each brief/assessment task is fit-for-purpose. Students will be issued with assignment briefs and assessment tasks only after approval by the IQA.
Assessments clearly signpost the assessment criteria to be achieved and the content of tasks should clearly match the criteria with relevant scenario based tasks. Where appropriate, assessments can be modified to meet the needs of individual students to enable them to be successful; such modifications must still meet the relevant expectations.
The management of submission and any subsequent resubmissions must comply with the relevant expectations.
As an example, the following stages would be expected:
A clear submission deadline.
Within 15 working days the submitted work is assessed and subject to IQA, if sampled. The assessment feedback will detail which criteria have been met and which have not. Feedback will highlight areas of strength (‘what went well’ - WWW) and detail areas for improvement (‘even better if’ - EBI), though these will not relate to specific assessment criteria.
There will then be one opportunity for the student to request a resubmission to attempt to improve their grade based only on criteria attempted in the first submission. Any resubmissions must be authorised by the relevant IQA. In order to be authorised a resubmission the work must be authentic and submitted on time and the IQA must believe the student is capable of improving the work without further teaching.
A second round of feedback will be provided, again confirming which criteria have and have not been fully met. Updated feedback will be provided at this point regarding WWW and EBI statements.
For some programs a final retake opportunity for Pass criteria only can be provided based on a new assessment task - the only criteria to be included in the retake are any pass criteria not yet achieved.
Retake assessments do NOT need to be taken within a set time frame, these can be completed at any time it is felt appropriate - however a unit is not complete until all resubmissions and retakes are finalized so leaving these too late could impact Standards Verification.
Feedback given to students will be written for the assessment and resubmission assessment decision. Feedback will relate to the assessment and criteria that have been achieved so far and the criteria that has not been achieved.
Feedback will be detailed, legible and constructive to enable the student to achieve their full potential. Where appropriate, feedback should incorporate the WWW/EBI- model to acknowledge ‘What Went Well’ within the assignment along with ‘Even Better If’ themes that outline relevant skills, knowledge or understanding that the student in question needs to target for development to support their future progress.
It is good practice to provide feedback on spelling, punctuation and grammar (SPAG). Where appropriate this should be done using a SPAG mark scheme, so that students can ‘self-correct’ their work.
All feedback will be recorded on the student work and accompanying assignment brief or assessment task sheet. This process can be completed electronically within systems such as Turnitin.
Where a student needs to do additional work to achieve all the criteria or opts to do additional work to achieve a higher grade, this work should be added to the original work as a supplement and then assessed in the normal way where awarding organization requirements allow for this.
Similarly, a student can only request a re-submission opportunity for criteria attempted within their original submission. For example, if a student submits work attempting pass and merit criteria but does not achieve all the merit criteria the resubmission cannot then include distinction criteria.
All student work handed in by the deadline will normally be marked, internally quality assured and returned to the student within 15 working days. For Prison Services short courses (3 weeks plus) and/or roll on/off, it should be returned to the student for understanding where they need to make improvements within 5 – 10 working days.
IQA must be carried out continuously throughout the year. A Lead Internal Quality Assurer will have the responsibility of planning the IQA strategy for each program. This strategy will cover observation of all assessors/tutors/trainers and the sampling of work. The strategy will be program-specific and reflect any circumstances to meet the particular needs of the team/program and those outlined by the awarding body.
The strategy will be informed by the University assessment decision sampling matrix to ‘risk rate’ each assessor and determine the required IQA sample size. Standardization meetings and activities will be incorporated within this strategy to support the development of assessment practice in the area.
All internal quality assurers must meet any requirements for occupational expertise as specified by the relevant standards-setting body before commencing their role. In addition, they must hold at least a Bachelor’s degree.
As a minimum requirement, IQA documentation will consist of the IQA strategy, (which will include a sampling strategy), roles and responsibilities, completed IQA recording forms, standardization meeting plan and associated minutes.
Any other documentary evidence of IQA processes must meet the requirements of an awarding body and the relevant Code of Practice.
IQA must take place before assessment decisions are finalized and notified to students. Students should normally receive assessment decisions no later than 15 working days after submission. Within this period relevant IQA sampling must have taken place as well.
Where assessment decisions are not agreed during the IQA process, the decision of the IQA will in most instances be final. The IQA should in such instances ensure that feedback to the assessor is thorough and explicitly details actions required to ensure students are supported to achieve. Should such a decision be disputed by the assessor involved an appeal process will be overseen by a member of the Academic Standards Committee.
Records of assessment and IQA must be auditable and kept in a secure, accessible location for three years following student achievement. Student work must be kept for three months post certification.
It is the responsibility of the program-specific area to hold an IQA File for assessors/tutors and verifiers/moderators to follow. The file should include the following documents (refer to awarding body guidance and templates as appropriate):
Program Handbook
Policies
Assessment and Internal Quality Assurance Process
Previous Visit Reports and updated Action Plan
Appeals Documentation
Staff CPD logs, CVs and certificates relating to their practice
Standardization meetings and meetings schedule
IQA strategy and sampling plan
IQA recording sheet and guidance notes
It is the responsibility of the program specific area to liaise with an awarding body, the Quality Manager/Regional Quality Lead, to resolve any issues surrounding assessment or IQA which may result in an imposed sanction preventing certification.
Before submitting marks to an awarding body, it is important to let students know that they have the option to request a review of their marks. This ensures fairness and transparency in the marking process.
B. IQA Matrix for Sampling Assessment Decisions/Record of Risk Assessment and Sampling Strategy adopted by IQA
Risk Assessment: The number of samples required from each assessor is highly dependent on the following considerations
Experience of the individual assessor
Teaching experience and qualification,
Familiarity with the awarding body processes
Subject specialism
Experience with the unit being assessed
Sample Guidance
IQA sampling plans must cover ALL Assessors, units, methods of assessment, a range of grades including all attempted criteria and should be distributed evenly across the duration of course. All students are not required to be sampled unless stipulated as a requirement by the awarding body.
Once a sample amount for an assessor has been confirmed, the full range of grades should be seen (i.e. a sample of 10% of assessment decisions should include a R/NYA, PASS, MERIT and DISTINCTION if available).
High Risk – Assessors meeting all or some of the following consideration:
Assessors that are new to teaching/assessing at AUS (1 – 2 years)
Assessors working outside their subject specialism or new to the program
Sample size required: 1st marking sample – 100% marked assessments sampled by IQA Subsequent samples - 40% or a minimum of 5.
Medium Risk
Assessors that are relatively new to teaching/assessing at AUS (2 – 3 years)
Assessors who are familiar with the program and within their subject specialism, but inexperienced with the unit being assessed
Sample size required: 1st marking sample – 50% marked assessments sampled by IQA Subsequent samples - 20% or a minimum of 4.
Low Risk
Teaching within their subject specialism and experience with the specific units they are assessing
Sample size required: Marking sample – 10% or a minimum of 4.
C. Roles and Responsibilities
Students: Must ensure that work they submit for assessment:
Complies with the guidelines given to them by assessors, which in turn must comply with examination board/awarding organisation/apprenticeship standards requirements
Is submitted within the timeframes given, including timeframes which apply to ‘resubmissions’, and is submitted in the format required, i.e. Paperbased, electronically (e.g. ‘turnitin’);
Is their own work. N.b. If students use any material which is not their own, then this must be clearly referenced, according to guidelines given to them by assessors and must comply with examination board/awarding body requirements.
Trainers/Assessors: Must comply with examination board/awarding body/Apprenticeship standards requirements, and:
Inform students that all work submitted for assessment must be the student’s own
Inform students about the University’s Assessment Appeals Procedure
Produce and share the Assessment Year Plan with the course team/HOS/Apprenticeship Manager/Lead IV, and make this available for internal/external verification/IQA when required
Produces assignments which must be internally moderated/approved before they are given to students
Ensure that students are informed of the assessment criteria for assignments
Ensure that students are informed of the format to be used to submit work. E.g. Paper-based, electronically (‘Turnitin’) etc.;
Ensure that assignment submission deadlines are communicated to the students and that these are complied with, including those which apply to referred/resubmitted work
Assess/mark students’ work in line with University/awarding body/examination board/apprenticeship standard requirements/regulations, giving constructive feedback to students, including SPAG;
Provide the sample of assessed work required for internal/external scrutiny by deadlines set and agreed annually
Ensure that there is up-to-date student tracking on pro-monitor/onefile, showing which units/assignments have been completed and graded, which is available for scrutiny on, for example, University systems/on the University Portal.
Internal Verifiers (IV)/Internal Quality Assurers (IQA) through thorough internal verification, must:
Ensure that assignment briefs, prior to distribution to students, are fit-forpurpose and comply with examination board/awarding body requirements.
Sample marked work to ensure that assessment has been accurately carried out.
Heads of School / Apprenticeship Managers/ Lead iqas/Quality Leads are responsible for:
The co-ordination and management of the internal standardization/moderation/verification of: Assessment Year Plans (ayps); assignment briefs; and assessed student work, submitted for internal/external moderation/verification
Ensuring internal/external regulations are adhered to
Ensuring that the quality of work, submitted for external moderation/verification/quality assurance, has undergone internal quality checks/verification/moderation before it is submitted for external scrutiny.
Cross-University Verification Group (CUVG) will comprise of cross-University representatives and the University’s Quality Compliance Coordinator, together with other University staff as required and is responsible for:
Sampling Assessment Year Plans (ayps); assignment briefs; and assessed student work, CUVG will ensure, as far as possible, that internal assessment, standardization, moderation and verification is in line with examination board/awarding body specifications;
Providing feedback to schools, following the verification of work to be submitted for external scrutiny in order to validate and improve standards.
