Academic Regulations: Welcome To Ravensbourne

Welcome to
Ravensbourne
Academic
Regulations
for the Awards of
Foundation Degree
(FdA/FdSc)
2007/08
Approved by the University of Sussex
January 2007
Ravensbourne College of Design and Communication
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONTENTS
Page No.
1. Scope 3
2. Definitions 3
3. Registration 4
4. Methods of assessment 4
5. Submission deadlines 4
6. Extensions to submission deadlines 5
7. Deferral of assessment 5
8. Mitigating circumstances 5
9. Marking and moderation 5
10. Examination Boards 5
11. Results and feedback 6
12. Publication of marks 6
13. Progression 6
14. Retrieval 6
15. Repeating units 6
16. Compensation 7
17. Grading 8
18. Award 8
19. Academic offences: cheating, collusion and plagiarism 9
20. Academic appeals 9
Annex A: College Undergraduate Grade Classification Descriptors 10

Annex B: Marking & Moderation of Undergraduate & Postgraduate Courses 12
Annex C: Reasonable Adjustments to Assessment and Examination Policy & Procedure 14
Annex D: Mitigating Circumstances Policy and Procedure 16
Annex E: Written Examinations Procedure 18
Annex F: Academic Misconduct: Cheating, Collusion & Plagiarism Policy & Procedure 22
Annex G: Student Appeals Policy and Procedure 25
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc) 2007/08

-2-
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. SCOPE
1.1 The College seeks to ensure that its assessment practices are fair, explicit and
transparent and that each student shall be assessed in accordance with the
published schedule given in the project brief for his or her course.
1.2 Assessment is a matter of judgement, not simply of computation. Marks, grades

and percentages should not be treated as absolute values but as indicators to be
used by examiners to communicate their judgement of different aspects of a
student's work, in order to provide information on which the final decision on a
student's fulfilment of a programme of study's objectives may be based.
1.3 The regulations govern the conduct of assessment. Unless otherwise specified the
regulations apply to all forms of assessment.
2. DEFINITIONS
Course The named programme of study onto which students enrol,

leading to a qualification.
Programme The syllabus of the course: how a course is structured and

the units are related to each other.
Unit A discrete formally structured learning experience with a

coherent and explicit set of learning outcomes.
Credit Credit is a quantified means of expressing equivalence of

learning. Credit is awarded to a learner in recognition of the
verified achievement of the learning outcomes of a unit.
Level Credit level or course level, an indicator of the relative

demand, complexity and depth of learning of a unit.
Assessment Assessment requirements are those specified tasks which

requirements enable students to demonstrate that they have fulfilled the
learning outcomes of the unit
Submission deadline This is the published point by which assessment

requirements must be submitted in order for a student to
pass a unit.
Retrieval The process by which a student who has failed a unit is

permitted a further attempt to retake the assessment
without repeating the unit.
Compensation The decision of the Examination Board in specific

circumstances to allow a candidate’s overall performance to
compensate for a failure in a unit so that retrieval is not
required. A student’s transcript will indicate if a unit has
been compensated.
Examination Groups of internal markers and, where awards are being

Boards considered, external examiners formally established by the
Academic Board to be responsible for the assessment of
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

-3-
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
each stage of programme of study. The constitution and

Terms of Reference of each Board are subject to the
approval of the Academic Board. The Examination Board
deals with student progression from Level to Level and with
awards and outcomes at the end of the course.
3. REGISTRATION
3.1 A student must be fully enrolled on the course according to College procedures and
her/his registration active before submitting assessment.
3.2 The maximum registration period for a foundation degree is normally six years.
Any extension to a registration period must be approved by the relevant
Examination Board.
4. METHODS OF ASSESSMENT
4.1 Each unit has at least one assessment requirement. In order to pass a unit a
student must normally satisfy all the assessment requirements for that unit.
4.2 The assessment requirements and the criteria by which assessed work will be
judged are specified in unit specifications and published to students in project
briefs.
4.3 Reasonable Adjustments to Assessment and Examination may be made for a

student with a disability or specific illness/medical condition in accordance with the
College’s Policy and Procedure for Reasonable Adjustments to Assessment and
Examination (see Annex C).
5. SUBMISSION DEADLINES
5.1 Deadlines for the submission of assessed work will be published in project briefs.
5.2 Deadlines are absolute and extensions to deadlines will only be granted subject to
the conditions set out below in paragraph 6.
5.3 A student who fails to submit an assessment or an element of assessment by the

required deadline will automatically be deemed to have failed that assessment and
their retrieval will be capped at an E grade. The only exception to this shall be
where an extension has been agreed in advance, in accordance with section 6
below or where the student submits mitigating circumstances which account for the
delay in submission and are accepted by the Examination Board (see section 7).
6. EXTENSIONS TO SUBMISSION DEADLINES
6.1 Extensions to submission deadlines may in exceptional circumstances be granted

by the Course Leader. Students who wish to apply for an extension should
complete an assessment extension form, available from the Registry, and submit
this to the Course Leader together with third party corroborative evidence.
Deadlines may only be extended up to a maximum of ten working days (other than
in cases of Reasonable Adjustments to Assessment and Examination referred to in
paragraph 4.3 above).
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

-4-
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
6.2 Extensions are normally not permitted for group work.
7. DEFERRAL OF ASSESSMENT
7.1 A student may only defer her/his assessment in exceptional circumstances. Such
a deferral is subject to agreement by the Head of Faculty in accordance with
College procedures.
8. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
8.1 A mitigating circumstance is defined as a serious or significant adverse event or

illness which was unexpected and has impacted upon a student’s academic
performance. A student who believes that due to illness or other valid cause (such
as bereavement):
a) his/her performance has been adversely affected; OR
b) he/she was unable to submit assessed or reassessed work by the scheduled

deadline
may submit a claim for consideration of mitigating circumstances.
8.2 Technical failure of IT or any other equipment will not normally be accepted as
mitigating circumstances.
8.3 A student who wishes to submit a claim for mitigation should do so in accordance
with the College’s procedure (see Annex D).
8.4 The deadline for submission of a claim is normally the deadline for the assessment
to which the mitigating circumstances relate. Where circumstances prevent a
student from submitting a mitigating circumstances form at that particular point,
s/he should submit it at the earliest opportunity but normally no later than seven
days before the meeting of the Examination Board.
9. MARKING AND MODERATION
9.1 Student work is marked in accordance with the College’s policy and procedure on
marking and moderation (see Annex B).
10. EXAMINATION BOARD
10.1 The Examination Board will meet at the end of the course year to confirm unit
marks, student progression and achievement.
10.2 All marks issued during the year are provisional and subject to change until
ratification by the Examination Board at the end of the course level.
11. RESULTS AND FEEDBACK
11.1 Students will normally receive written feedback on any summatively assessed work
during the course of the year. The student will also receive a provisional result,
normally within three to four weeks of the assessment deadline, but no later than
six weeks.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

-5-
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
12. PUBLICATION OF MARKS
12.1 The Registry will issue the pass list on the appropriate student noticeboards
between 36 and no later than 48 hours of the Examination Board meeting.
Candidate numbers will be used for the pass list.
12.2 Results letters will normally be sent to students within ten working days of the
Examination Board meeting.
12.3 Results letters will not be issued to students who owe monies to the College.
13. PROGRESSION
13.1 In order to progress, students are normally required to have successfully completed
the units, totalling 120 credits, specified for the level in the Course Handbook.
13.2 Students may be permitted to proceed to the next level carrying up to 20 failed
credits but these may not be carried forward to successive levels and may not
progress to Level 3 carrying any failed units from Level 1. A student who achieves
fewer than 100 credits in Level 1 or 2 will normally be required to register as an
Associate Student and repeat the year with the next group of students, as specified
in paragraphs 15.2 and 15.3 below.
13.3 Students may not carry failed credit between qualifications (for example, a
Foundation Degree to a top-up BA/BSc).
14. RETRIEVAL
14.1 Students are normally permitted one opportunity to retrieve a failed unit or unit
component, capped at an E grade. A student who fails to pass at the second
attempt will normally be required to repeat the unit(s) for one final attempt the
following year. Exceptionally the Examination Board may permit the student a
second opportunity to retrieve a marginal fail without repeating the unit. This
exceptional attempt will be capped at an E grade.
14.2 Students will normally be permitted to retrieve a maximum of 40 credits in any one
level. A student who has failed more than 20 credits will not normally be permitted
to progress to the next level and will be required to intermit his/her studies to repeat
the failed unit(s) and assessment.
15. REPEATING UNITS
15.1 A student who has been required to repeat units in the following year must register
for the course at the appropriate entry point.
15.2 A student who has already achieved a pass mark in a unit may not repeat that unit
to improve her/his mark, except at the discretion of the Examination Board.
However students must repeat all components of the unit assessment regardless of
whether they passed individual components previously.
15.3 Students who are required by the Examination Board to repeat units are eligible to
receive the full mark awarded for the units repeated.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

-6-
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
15.4 If a student subsequently fails a unit that has been repeated, s/he will have one
final attempt to retrieve the assessment for that unit, up to a maximum of 40
credits. There will be no further opportunity to redeem failed units and a student
who has not successfully completed all credits for that level will be recorded as a
fail and be required to withdraw from the course.
16. COMPENSATION
16.1 A student must normally satisfy all the assessment requirements specified for each
unit of study. In certain circumstances, the Examination Board may at its discretion
choose to permit performance in one area to compensate for underachievement in
another. The application of compensation is a matter of academic judgement by
the Board. There is no right to compensation.
16.2 Compensation of a failure of a unit
16.2.1 Where a student has marginally failed a unit the Examination Board may at
its discretion permit the student’s overall performance for that level to
compensate for the failure, provided the student achieves an overall pass
for the level, subject to the conditions below.
16.2.2 When reviewing a student’s performance, the Board will take account of all
relevant information, including:
a) the student’s overall performance for that stage (which should aggregate by
average to an overall pass);
b) the achievement of required learning outcomes for the programme;
c) any mitigating circumstances.
16.2.3 No more than 20 credits per level may be compensated for failure of a unit.
16.2.4 A student’s transcript will indicate where a unit has been compensated.
16.3 Compensation of a failure of an assessment requirement within a unit
16.3.1 Where a student has failed an assessment requirement within a unit the
Examination Board may at its discretion permit the student’s overall
performance for that unit to compensate for the failure, provided that:
a) the learning outcomes for the unit overall are achieved;

b) the weighted overall average result for all the assessment requirements
aggregates to an overall unit pass.
16.3.2 Students must submit assessment for all components of a unit and
compensation for non submission of a component is not permitted.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

-7-
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
17. GRADING
17.1 The College currently expresses its final unit outcomes as grades (A to E and fail).
The College’s minimum grade for a pass at Levels 1, 2 and 3 is E. Grades are
expressed according to the following scale:
Categorical Marking Scheme

Grade Mark Predetermined Marking intervals
Bands Bands marks
(Percentage
Grade Points)
A First 70 -100 100
Outstanding 90 High A+ 90 - 100
80 Medium A 80 - 89
74 Low A- 70 - 79
B Upper Second 60 – 69 68 High B+ 67 - 69

Excellent 65 Medium B 64 - 66
62 Low B- 60 - 63
C Lower Second 50 – 59 58 High C+ 57- 59

Good 55 Medium C 54 - 56
52 Low C- 50 - 53
D Third 40 – 49 48 High D+ 47- 49

Competent 45 Medium D 44 - 46
42 Low D- 40 - 43
Marginal
E Pass (notional) 35 – 39 38 Pass E 35 - 39
Marginal
F Fail 1-34 30 Fail F+
20 Fail F
10 Poor F-
NS No submission 0 No submission
18. AWARD
18.1 To be awarded a Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc), a student must normally have

completed units specified in the Course Handbook for a course leading to that
award amounting to 240 credits, of which 120 must be at Level 1 and 120 credits at
Level 2.
18.2 The Foundation Degree is an unclassified awards, although student achievement is

recognised in the transcript.
19. ACADEMIC OFFENCES: CHEATING, COLLUSION AND PLAGIARISM
19.1 Cheating may be defined as an attempt to gain an unfair advantage by breaching

regulations, by bribery or inducement, or by deception.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

-8-
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
19.2 Collusion is taken to mean unauthorised collaboration to produce individually

assessed work, without acknowledgement to those who have contributed to the
work. It is distinct from authorised collaboration on projects which is strongly
encouraged.
19.3 Plagiarism is the passing off by one person of another person’s work, without
acknowledgement to the original author. Any material used in a piece of work which
is not original MUST be acknowledged to the original author in the approved
format, or it will be treated as plagiarism, which is regarded as an extremely serious
academic offence amounting to theft of ideas. Such material may be text or image,
and may be derived from published or unpublished work, from any source (e.g.
books, journals, newspapers, the internet, fellow students’ notes etc.).
19.4 Suspected cases of cheating, collusion and plagiarism will be dealt with under the
College’s procedure (See Annex F).
20. ACADEMIC APPEALS
20.1 A student may make an appeal if:

[a] the student can establish that their performance in assessment was
adversely affected by illness or other mitigating circumstances which they
were unable, or for valid reasons unwilling, to divulge prior to the
Examination board reaching a decision. The student’s request for
reconsideration must be supported by documentary evidence as to why it
could not have been presented at the correct time.
[b] satisfactory evidence can be produced that there has been a material
administrative error, or that assessment was not conducted in accordance
with the College’s regulations or the current regulations for the course, or
that some other procedural defect has occurred.
20.2 A student should lodge an academic appeal in accordance with the College’s
Academic Appeals procedure (See Annex G).
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

-9-
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX A
COLLEGE UNDERGRADUATE GRADE CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTORS
Grade descriptors define the standards of performance at each grade and degree
classification, by describing the characteristics typical of work at that grade.
A Band
OUTSTANDING Degree class: First
A+ Consistently outstanding, exceptionally high standard, trivial omissions only.

Fulfils the grade A criteria but at a quite exceptional standard.
A Outstanding in most respects, very few minor omissions. Based on

substantial preparation (reading, research, planning) and effective
self/group management, demonstrating an authoritative grasp of concepts,
methodology and content. Evidence of originality, insight and learning
beyond the curriculum. A sense of what is contextually appropriate and an
ability to sustain an argument or idea, to think analytically/critically and to
synthesise material effectively. Able consistently to produce
comprehensive and appropriate ranges of original and creative solutions to
problems presented by professional projects.
A- Generally outstanding work, a few minor defects. Work of high quality

which displays the majority of the A grade attributes.
B Band
EXCELLENT Degree class: Upper second
B+ Excellent work, some minor defects. Clearly demonstrates B grade

qualities but reveals greater insight and more originality
B Very high standard of work, but with some relatively minor defects.
Demonstrates a sound, consistent and above average level of
understanding of concepts, methodology and content appropriate to the
subject, drawing on a wide range of appropriate sources. Evidence of
critical judgement, ability to synthesize material, leading to insight, some
originality and an awareness of what is contextually appropriate. Able on
occasion to produce original, creative and appropriate solutions to problems
presented by professional projects.
B- High standard of work, but with one or two significant deficiencies.

Contains most of the B Grade qualities but with somewhat less insight and
originality
C Band
PROFICIENT Degree class: Lower second
C+ Good, creditable work, but with a few significant defects. C Grade qualities
but with greater critical analysis and originality.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 10 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
C Generally sound, but a number of notable defects. Based on a sound basis

of preparation (e.g. reading, research), self/team management and
understanding of key concepts, a grasp of relevant material and an ability to
structure and organize arguments. Outcome may be rather routine but the
work will demonstrate a degree of accuracy, clarity and critical analysis and
occasional originality. Able to produce a range of appropriate solutions to a
professional brief, some of which will be creative.
There will be few serious omissions or irrelevancies.
C- Some shortcomings indicating insufficiently sound grasp of the material.

Demonstrates C Grade qualities but less critical analysis and little
originality, and evidence of less thorough research and preparation.
D Band
COMPETANT Degree class: Third
D+ Fair standard, but with a number of serious shortcomings. Lacks sufficient

analysis and interpretation to warrant a C Grade.
D Standard of work above threshold for honours, but demonstrates some

serious shortcomings. Covers subject matter adequately but with little
evidence of analysis, creativity and critical evaluation. The student is
capable of producing a viable solution to a problem. Evidence of some
misunderstanding of certain key concepts and/or of the requirements of the
assignment, leading to limitations in the student’s ability to select relevant
material, resulting in irrelevancies and omissions.
D- At the bare threshold standard for award of Honours but with a number of
serious and/or recurring shortcomings which preclude award of D.
E Band
BASIC Degree class: Pass without honours
E Does not meet criteria for award of Honours. Serious and recurring
shortcomings. Little evidence of engagement with concepts, reading,
research, arguments unclear and poorly structured.
F Band
UNSATISFACTORY Fail
F The work does not meet even the most basic requirements.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 11 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX B
DRAFT
MARKING AND MODERATION OF ASSESSMENT
UNDERGRADUATE AND POSTGRADUATE COURSES
POLICY AND PROCEDURE
1. Policy Statement
1.1 The College’s Assessment Policy states that assessment shall be:
• designed, approved, monitored and reviewed;

• an integral part of the curriculum;
• explicit and transparent;
• valid and reliable;
• fair, equitable and take account of the diversity of the student body;
• efficient and fit for purpose.
1.2 The Marking and Moderation Policy underpins the Assessment Policy by aiming to:
• develop and maintain academic standards;

• ensure fairness in the assessment process.
1.3 The aim of moderation specifically is to overcome variation between assessors

both within a unit and across the units of a course. Moderation is applied to both
the process of assessment and the outcome of assessment.
2. Internal moderation
2.1 Subject Leaders are responsible for ensuring that the internal and external
examiners are fully informed of the marking criteria and standards when marking or
moderating work.
2.2 All assessment contributing to a final award must be verified through internal
moderation. Course staff will choose those most appropriate. Amongst these are:
2.2.1 team assessment: the assessment team will assess simultaneously and
agree on a grade through discussion;
2.2.2 double marking: one assessor will blind mark the submission and another
assessor will verify that s/he agrees with that mark and when the assessor
disagrees with the first marker then confers with the first marker to agree a
mark.
2.2.3 double blind marking: may be appropriate for some assessments. In this
case both assessors mark without any knowledge of each other’s
judgement and then agree on a single mark.
2.2.4 group assessment: individual grades will normally be moderated by the

assessment team conducting the group assessment at the point when a
final grade is determined.
2.3 In cases where no agreement can be reached on a final moderated grade by the
internal assessment team the work should be subject to a third opinion. If,
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 12 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
subsequently, agreement is still not possible then the External Examiner will
moderate the final grade
2.4 All component mark sheets must be signed and dated by two markers or the team
of markers.
2.5 All other summative assessment may be single marked but a sample of 10% must
be internally moderated.
2.6 Written feedback should be provided to all students on any formatively and
summatively assessed work.
3. Moderation by External Examiners
3.1 External examiners will decide whether overall the grading for the unit is
appropriate (rather than remarking individual candidate’s work). A sample of work
will be sent for external moderation to include:
• at least 20% of work;

• one exemplar of each class of award;
• the work of all students proposed for the highest available category of the
award;
• all borderline candidates;
• all failed candidates;
• any work from candidates the internal assessors found significant difficulty in
marking.
3.2 The external examiner is responsible for moderating the assessment process and
the grades awarded to individual students. S/he normally reviews the process of
assessment as well as a range of work from all units contributing to the final award
across a range of grade bands.
3.3 The external examiner does not normally act as a third marker at Ravensbourne,
however s/he can recommend changes to the grading of a candidate’s work. If an
external examiner wishes to do this all the submissions in that unit of assessment
must be scrutinized to ensure that no candidate is disadvantaged by having their
work selected for scrutiny by the external examiner.
3.4 In exceptional circumstances, the external examiner may recommend the regrading
of the entire cohort. This must be reported to the appropriate meeting of the
examination board.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 13 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX C
REASONABLE ADJUSTMENTS TO ASSESSMENT AND EXAMINATION

ARRANGEMENTS POLICY AND PROCEDURE
1. Policy Statement
1.1 The College has a duty to ensure that assessment and decisions about
assessment are conducted in accordance with its equal opportunities policy and
current legislation.
1.2 It is the responsibility of the student to declare a disability and inform Student
Services of any difficulties they may have at the earliest opportunity, preferably at
the beginning of the course. Failure to do this may affect the effectiveness of
support arrangements or the ability for the College to implement reasonable
adjustments.
1.3 Reasonable adjustments to assessment arrangements may be made for

candidates who have a disability, either permanently or temporarily.
1.4 Each request for reasonable adjustments will be considered by the Course Leader,
in consultation with the student and the Student Services.
1.5 In exceptional circumstances, an alternative form of assessment may be agreed,

provided it can be demonstrated that s/he will achieve the learning outcomes.
Such requests must be approved by the exam board/external examiner/validating
body.
1.6 A candidate for whom reasonable adjustments have been made may not normally
use the same reason as a ‘mitigating circumstance’.
2. Procedure
2.1 Students should submit a request for consideration for reasonable adjustments to
the Students Services in the first instance.
2.2 A student who makes a request must submit appropriate evidence, or in the case
of dyslexia, the report of an education psychologist, confirming the condition.
2.3 The Student Services will refer the request to the Course Leader, who will then
determine in consultation with the student and the Student Services what
arrangements are deemed appropriate.
2.4 Examination arrangements may include:
[a] Allowing the candidate extra time at the end of an examination in

accordance with public examination practice;
[b] Providing suitable rooms for examinations to take place;
[c] Providing support services, such as a reader or amanuensis.
2.5 Where an alternative form of assessment is granted the alternative mode must test
the same learning outcomes as those tested by the ‘original’ mode of assessment.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 14 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
2.6 The Course Leader will report any reasonable adjustment or alternative forms of
assessment that have been granted at the next meeting of the Examination Board.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 15 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX D
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Policy Statement
1.1 The College has a duty to ensure that assessments are conducted fairly and in
accordance with its Equal Opportunities Policy and that each student has the
opportunity to demonstrate her/his true level of academic performance.
1.2 A mitigating circumstance is defined as a serious or significant adverse event or

illness which was unexpected and has impacted upon a student’s academic
performance. A student who believes that due to illness or other valid cause (such
as bereavement):
[a] his/her performance has been adversely affected; OR
[b] he/she was unable to submit assessed or reassessed work by the scheduled
deadline
may submit a claim for consideration of mitigating circumstances.
1.3 It is expected that students will take reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable
problems and technical failure of IT or any other equipment will not normally be
accepted as mitigating circumstances, neither will pressure of work, transport or
financial problems.
2. Procedure for submitting a claim for mitigating circumstances
2.1 A student who believes he/she has mitigating circumstances should obtain a
Mitigating Circumstances form, available from the Registry.
2.2 When completing the form the student should state clearly the grounds for
mitigation and the date(s) when the circumstances occurred.
2.3 The claim must be corroborated by independent (third party) evidence such as a
medical certificate, a solicitor’s letter, or any other official document. A claim will
not normally be considered without independent evidence. Original documents
must be submitted but these will be copied and returned to the claimant.
2.4 The claim must be countersigned by a Course Tutor to confirm that s/he supports
the claim.
2.5 The deadline for submission of a claim is normally the deadline for the assessment
to which the mitigating circumstances relate. Where circumstances prevent a
student from submitting a mitigating circumstances form at that particular point,
s/he should submit it at the earliest opportunity but normally no later than seven
days before the meeting of the Examination Board.
2.6 Mitigating circumstances will not be taken into consideration if the procedure has
not been followed.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 16 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. Confidential information
3.1 All claims for mitigating circumstances are confidential to the Mitigating
Circumstances Panel and will not be disclosed outside the meeting.
3.2 If the student feels the circumstances are of a particularly sensitive or personal
nature, s/he may submit the claim and corroborating evidence in a sealed envelope
marked confidential with the student’s name, ID number and the unit(s) against
which a claim is being made.
4. Consideration of evidence
4.1 The claim will be considered by a Mitigating Circumstances Panel which shall
normally comprise:
[a] The Head of Student Services

[b] The Head of Registry
[c] An academic member of staff
4.2 The Panel will consider each claim and decide upon an outcome which it will
recommend to the relevant Examination Board. In making its recommendation, the
panel will take into account:
[a] the supporting evidence;

[b] the timing of the circumstances, namely do they correspond with the date of
the affected assessment;
[c] the nature and severity of the circumstances.
4.3 The Panel will only take into account claims of mitigation which have been
submitted formally. It will not consider claims which have not been submitted
according to the College’s procedure.
4.4 If the Panel accepts the student’s claim for mitigation the student may be required
to submit/sit the assessment for a first attempt or in the case of a
resubmission/resit the student may be required to resubmit the assessment under
the original conditions.
4.5 Mitigating circumstances do not permit the examiners to raise marks, however
where the Panel may recommend to the Board that it may use its discretion in
borderline cases to raise a student’s overall degree classification, subject to
meeting any other criteria to raise the classification.
4.6 The Panel reserves the right to reject a claim that does not adequately account for
mitigation of a non submission or failure.
4.7 The Head of Registry will report the Panel’s recommendations to the relevant
Examination Board. The Panel however will not disclose the nature of the
circumstances.
5. Data Protection
5.1 Following the decision of the Panel, a copy of the mitigating circumstances will be
stored in a sealed envelope in the student’s central file marked ‘confidential’.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 17 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX E
DRAFT
WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS
PROCEDURE
1. Examination timetable
1.1 Examination may only be used as a method of assessment if it has been explicitly
identified in the approved course validation document.
1.2 The examination timetable will be drawn up at the start of each term and
candidates must be given at least six weeks notice of any scheduled examination.
2. Examination Papers
2.1 The Unit Leader is responsible for drafting examination questions which will include
weightings for each question, sample answers and resit questions and answers.
2.2 Draft papers must be signed off by the relevant Subject Leader except where that
Subject Leader is also the Unit Leader. In this circumstance, another senior
academic member of the Faculty should sign off the papers.
2.3 The Subject Leader is responsible for ensuring that examination questions are
moderated by the appropriate external examiner.
2.4 Moderated papers must be submitted to the Registry for formatting at least two
weeks in advance of the scheduled examination.
2.5 The Unit Leader or Subject Leader must authorise the formatted document for
publication.
3. Examination hall conduct - invigilators
3.1 Examinations should normally be invigilated by a minimum of two staff: one

administrative [senior invigilator] and one academic [support invigilator].
3.2 The invigilation team will complete a register of attendance. Where a candidate
leaves the examination before the official finish time, the invigilators should note the
departure time on the register.
3.3 Throughout the examination at least one invigilator shall be present who has power
to:
3.3.1 permit candidates to leave the room for short periods of time, subject to
adequate supervision.
3.3.2 require a candidate to leave the room and surrender their script if, in the
invigilator’s opinion, they have been guilty of misconduct.
3.4 In the event of any irregularity, the Senior Invigilator will produce a report for the
Head of Registry for investigation. The Head of Registry will inform the unit leader
concerned, who will be responsible for informing markers and moderators. Where
cheating is suspected, the Head of Registry will refer this to the Quality Office for
further investigation.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 18 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
3.5 Examination scripts will be counted at the end of the examination and signed for by
the Senior Invigilator. The Registry staff present will also sign for the papers and
take responsibility thereafter. Where the academic invigilator is the marker, s/he
may sign out the scripts. Otherwise all scripts will be returned to the Registry for
collection.
4. Examination hall conduct - candidates
4.1 Candidates must present themselves at the appropriate examination venue fifteen
minutes before each exam is due to begin.
4.2 Students may be admitted to the examination after it has commenced up to a

proportion of one third of the overall duration of the examination (and conversely no
student may leave during this period). For example if the examination is one hour
long, students may enter up to 20 minutes after the commencement time. Students
who enter late must finish according to the scheduled finish time and will not be
permitted to sit for the time s/he was late.
4.3 Identification of candidates
4.3.1 Candidates must bring their student identification card to each exam. The
member of staff invigilating the examination may require candidates to
place the ID card on the desk at the start of an examination.
4.3.2 Candidates unable to produce a valid student identification card if asked for
by a member of staff invigilating the exam will be reported to the Subject
Leader and investigated as potential misconduct. The misconduct
investigation will normally be based on comparisons of handwriting on
examination scripts and other documents.
4.3.3 Candidates must use their student identification number and not their name
to identify themselves on their script.
4.4 Examination aids
4.4.1 For certain papers, specific aids or handouts will be provided by the
invigilators where questions necessitate their use. Information about
handouts and other aids will be provided in advance of the examination. No
other aids (e.g. dictionaries) will be permitted.
4.4.2 Candidates are permitted to use a calculator where necessary but it must
be non-graphical, non-programmable and capable of numerical display
only.
4.4.3 Where a paper has been classified as an ‘open-note unseen exam’,

candidates are allowed to refer to notes during the examination but
textbooks may not be used. If a paper has been classified as ‘open-book’,
candidates are permitted to refer to any books or notes.
4.5 Personal belongings
4.5.1 Candidates may not bring into the examination any books or notes (unless
the exam specifically allows it), dictionaries or reference works, briefcases,
large bags or other personal belongings. Small bags may be taken into the
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 19 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
examination, though the invigilators have the right and the authority to
inspect the contents should it be considered necessary.
4.5.2 Mobile telephones, pagers and other electronic devices must be turned off
and either left with the invigilators at the front of the room or left with other
personal belongings.
4.6 Behaviour during the examination
4.6.1 No candidate may smoke or drink alcohol in the examination room, or

behave in any way that might disturb other candidates during the
examination. Anyone leaving an examination room while other candidates
are still writing should do so as quietly as possible. Candidates will not be
permitted to leave the examination room in order to smoke.
4.6.2 No candidate may talk to another candidate while in the examination room.
4.7 Legibility of examination scripts
4.7.1 It is the individual candidate’s responsibility to produce a script that is

clearly legible. A candidate whose script is deemed illegible by its
examiners may be required to have the script typed, or rewritten, under
supervision, at the candidate’s expense, before it is marked.
4.7.2 In such cases the candidate would be issued with instructions for the copy
typist, or copyist. The typed script will be returned to the examiners with a
declaration, signed by the copy typist/copyist and the candidate, that the
instructions have been followed.
4.8 Absence from an unseen examination
4.8.1 If a candidate fails to attend, or arrive too late to be admitted to and exam,
s/he will have a fail grade recorded unless s/he has mitigating
circumstances that are approved by the Mitigating Circumstances Panel
and subsequently by the Examination Board.
4.8.2 To make a claim for mitigating circumstances candidates must complete the
form in accordance with the College’s procedure (Annex D).
5. Misconduct in examinations
5.1 A candidate may be disqualified or be liable to such other penalties as the

Examination Board may determine:
5.1.1 for having access to, or attempting to gain access to, any books
memoranda, notes, mobile telephones, pagers, electronic organisers,
unauthorised calculators, or any other unauthorised materials or devices;
5.1.2 for aiding or attempting to aid another candidate, for obtaining aid or
attempting to obtain aid from another candidate, or any other
communication within or beyond the examination room during the period of
the examination.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 20 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
5.2 Suspected cases of cheating, collusion and plagiarism will be dealt with under the
College’s procedure (see Appendix F).
6. Disabled candidates
6.1 Reasonable adjustments to examination arrangements may be made for

candidates who have a disability, either permanent or temporary.
6.2 Examination arrangements may include:
[a] Allowing the candidate extra time at the end of an examination in

accordance with public examination practice;
[b] Providing suitable rooms for examinations to take place;
[c] Providing support services, such as a reader or amanuensis.
6.3 Students should submit a request for consideration for reasonable adjustments to
the Students Services in the first instance (see Annex C).
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 21 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX F
DRAFT
ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT: CHEATING, COLLUSION AND PLAGIARISM
1. Policy Statement
1.1 The College treats academic misconduct extremely seriously and the penalty for
candidates found guilty of misconduct or deception may result in the student being
permanently excluded from the College.
1.2 Academic misconduct includes cheating, collusion, plagiarism, or any other attempt
to gain unfair advantage.
1.3 Cheating - may be defined as an attempt to gain an unfair advantage by breaching

regulations, by bribery or inducement, or by deception.
1.4 Collusion - is taken to mean unauthorised collaboration to produce individually

assessed work, without acknowledgement to those who have contributed to the
work. It is distinct from authorised collaboration on projects which is strongly
encouraged.
1.5 Plagiarism - is the passing off by one person of another person’s work, without
acknowledgement to the original author. Any material used in a piece of work which
is not original MUST be acknowledged to the original author in the approved
format, or it will be treated as plagiarism, which is regarded as an extremely serious
academic offence amounting to theft of ideas. Such material may be text or image,
and may be derived from published or unpublished work, from any source (e.g.
books, journals, newspapers, the internet, fellow students’ notes etc.).
2. Procedure for Investigating Suspected Irregularities
2.1 Examination offences
2.1.1 A candidate may be disqualified or be liable to such other penalties as the

Examination Board may determine:
[a] for having access to, or attempting to gain access to, any books
memoranda, notes, mobile telephones, pagers, electronic
organisers, unauthorised calculators, or any other unauthorised
materials or devices;
[b] for aiding or attempting to aid another candidate, for obtaining aid or
attempting to obtain aid from another candidate, or any other
communication within or beyond the examination room during the
period of the examination.
2.1.2 Where an irregularity is suspected, the invigilator should allow the

candidate[s] to continue with the examination, but, if appropriate, any
unauthorised material must be confiscated. At the end of the examination
s/he should inform the candidate[s] that a formal report of the incident will
be prepared and submitted to the relevant Head of Faculty. The report
must be countersigned by the second invigilator.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 22 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
2.1.3 The invigilator should mark on the relevant examination script[s] that a
suspected offence has taken place.
2.1.4 Following investigation and where there is explicit evidence of an offence,

the Head of Faculty will write to the student, informing them of the nature of
the allegation and inviting them to produce a written defence. The student
will be given ten working days to respond.
2.1.5 If no defence is received or if the student chooses not to refute the

allegation, the Head of Faculty shall prepare a written report, to include
factual supporting evidence, which will be submitted to the Chair of the
relevant Examination Board.
2.1.6 If the student refutes the allegation, the Head of Faculty shall convene a
Panel to hear the evidence formally. The Panel shall consist of an
academic tutor from the Faculty not associated with the student, the Head
of Faculty (chair) and a representative from Academic Services. The Panel
will normally meet within ten working days of receipt of the student's letter.
The student will be invited to attend and may be accompanied by a friend
who will attend as an observer. The subject leader will not normally attend,
unless invited by the Panel to appear as a witness.
2.1.7 Following the Panel meeting the Head of Faculty shall prepare a written
report, to include factual supporting evidence, and the Panel’s
recommendation which will be submitted to the Chair of the relevant
Examination Board.
2.2 Plagiarism
2.2.1 Where an irregularity is suspected, the subject leader shall report the matter
immediately to the Director of the Information Services for further
investigation.
2.2.2 Following investigation and where there is explicit evidence of an offence,

the Director of the Information Services will write to the student, informing
them of the nature of the allegation and inviting them to produce a written
defence. The student will be given ten working days to respond.
2.2.3 If no defence is received or if the student chooses not to refute the

allegation, the Director of the Information Services shall prepare a written
report, to include factual supporting evidence, which will be submitted to the
Chair of the relevant Examination Board.
2.2.4 If the student refutes the allegation, the Director of the Information Services
shall convene a Panel to hear the evidence formally. The Panel shall
consist of an academic tutor from the Faculty not associated with the
student, the Director of the Information Services (chair) and a
representative from Academic Services. The Panel will normally meet
within ten working days of receipt of the student's letter. The student will be
invited to attend and may be accompanied by a friend who will attend as an
observer. The subject leader will not normally attend, unless invited by the
Panel to appear as a witness.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 23 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
2.2.5 Following the Panel meeting the Director of the Information Services shall
prepare a written report, to include factual supporting evidence, and the
Panel’s recommendation which will be submitted to the Chair of the relevant
Examination Board.
3. Examination Board Hearing
3.1 The Examination Board will determine the appropriate course of action or outcome
which may be to:
3.1.1 dismiss the case as unproven and destroy all records of the allegation;
3.1.2 issue a formal warning (for a first offence only);
3.1.3 fail the student in the assessment, but allow the student to retrieve, but
capped at a minimum pass;
3.1.4 fail the student in the assessment, and exclude the student from the
College.
3.2 In the case of decisions 3.1.2 to 3.1.4, a record will be kept on the student's
personal file for the duration of their registration.
3.3 The student will normally notified of the decision of the Examination Board within
five working days of the meeting.
3.4 If the student has not provided a defence or refuted the allegation, there is no right
of appeal against the decision of the Examination Board,
3.5 A student who provided a defence or refuted the allegation has the right of appeal
against the decision of the Examination Board [see Student Appeals Policy &
Procedure, Annex G].
3.6 The outcome will be reported to the validating partner.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 24 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
ANNEX G
STUDENT APPEALS
1. Policy Statement
1.1 The College has a duty to ensure that assessment and decisions about
assessment are conducted fairly and in accordance with its equal opportunities
policy.
1.2 A student is entitled to make an appeal against the decision of the Examination
Board if s/he believes that the result of her/his assessment has been adversely
affected by a health or personal difficulty which for good reason s/he was unable to
disclose on time, or by an administrative or procedural error on the part of the
College.
1.3 An appeal will not be considered where it is made against academic judgement.
2. Grounds for an Appeal
2.1 A student may make an appeal if:

[a] the student can establish that their performance in assessment was
adversely affected by illness or other mitigating circumstances which they
were unable, or for valid reasons unwilling, to divulge prior to the
Examination board reaching a decision. The student’s request for
reconsideration must be supported by documentary evidence as to why it
could not have been presented at the correct time.
[b] satisfactory evidence can be produced that there has been a material
administrative error, or that assessment was not conducted in accordance
with the College’s regulations or the current regulations for the course, or
that some other procedural defect has occurred.
2.3 A student who requests an appeal is bound by the original grade awarded (and any
conditions associated with the resubmission of an assessment or retake of an
examination) until the result of the appeal process is known. However in certain
circumstances, to be determined by the Chair of the Appeals Panel, a student may
be permitted to progress to the next level, pending the Panel’s decision, so as not
to disadvantage the student academically. This will not prejudice the outcome of
the appeal and if the appeal is rejected the student will not be permitted to continue
at the next Level and the decision of the Examination Board will stand.
2.4 Appeals will not be considered where they are made against academic judgement.
2.5 The appeals procedure may not be used to pursue any complaint against services
provided by the College, including delivery of teaching, or a complaint about
misconduct by a member of staff or another student. A student who wishes to
make such a complaint must follow the College’s Complaints Procedure [See the
Student Contract Handbook].
2.6 The College reserves the right to terminate the appeals procedure at any time if it is
judged that the appeal is vexatious or frivolous. This decision will be made by the
Director of the College and will be communicated in writing to the appellant.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 25 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. Procedure for Appeal against a Result declared by the Examination Board
3.1 Errors in published marks or grades
3.1.1 If a student believes that a mistake has been made in the grade for an
individual assessment or overall result, the matter should be raised with the
Registry as soon as possible after the publication of the results
3.1.2 If an error has occurred, the Registry must notify the Chair of the
Examination Board immediately so that s/he can take chair’s action in
consultation with the external examiners to rectify the error as soon as
possible.
3.1.3 Written confirmation of the action taken will be provided to the student, and
the matter will be reported to the Examination Board at its next meeting.
3.1.4 If an error did not occur, the student must be notified in writing normally
within two weeks of the claim.
3.2 Other administrative or procedural errors or mitigating circumstances
3.2.1 The student should appeal to the Head of Quality normally within three
weeks of publication of the results, in writing, stating clearly the grounds for
appeal (i.e. under 2.1 [a] or 2.1. [b]) and attaching any relevant
documentation.
3.2.2 The Head of Quality will acknowledge receipt of the appeal normally within
five days, that either:
[a] the appellant has a case, and confirming the arrangements for an
Appeal Panel;
or
[b] the case does not fall within the grounds for appeal, and inviting the
appellant to a meeting to discuss the case.
3.2.3 An appeal is unlikely to succeed if a student cannot explain satisfactorily

why they were unable to provide the examiners in advance of the
examination board with information about any personal circumstances that
may have affected their performance in assessment.
3.2.4 If the appellant has a case, the Head of Quality will obtain written evidence
and opinion from all parties concerned, and convene an Appeals Panel.
4. The Appeals Panel
4.1 The Appeals Panel will normally consist of:
[a] the Head of the Faculty or other senior member of staff unconnected with
the course;
[b] one or more tutors who are not directly involved with the course on which
the student is registered;
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 26 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
[c] a student of the College, nominated by the Students’ Union, not connected
with the student or the course;
[d] a member of Quality staff (Secretary).
4.2 The student will be invited to attend to present his/her case to the Panel,
accompanied by a friend or other representative if desired. The student will be
notified in writing of the composition of the Appeals Panel and has the right to
challenge where [s]he feels there is a conflict of interest.
5. Decision of the Appeals Panel
5.1 After due consideration, the Panel may decide:
either: to reject the appeal;

or: to allow the student to re-enter the examination/ re-submit the assignment;
or: to overturn the original decision of the Examination Board and substitute a
different decision.
5.2 The Chair of the Appeals Panel will confirm the decision in writing to the student
normally within five working days of the meeting of the Appeals Panel.
5.3 The decision will be reported to the next meeting of the Examination Board and to
the College’s Academic Board.
5.4 If the appeal is not upheld the student has the right to appeal to the Vice Chancellor
of the University of Sussex who will ascertain whether the correct procedures were
followed. The decision of the University is final and indicates the completion of the
appeals procedure.
6. Final Redress
6.1 Where the student is not satisfied with the outcome of the procedure, s/he may
request a review by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA). The OIA
provides an independent scheme to enable the review of unresolved student
complaints, including appeals.
6.2 The student must submit an appeal to the OIA within three months of receiving the
notification of the decision of the University’s of Sussex.
6.3 An appeal to the OIA is made by completing a Scheme application form. Copies of
this form are available from:
• The Student Welfare Office;

• The Student Union Office;
• The Learning Resource Centre;
• The Quality Office.
Alternatively the form can be downloaded from the OIA website or requested by
telephone or letter:
www.oiahe.org.uk
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 27 -
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education

5th Floor, Thames Tower
Station Road
Reading, RG1 1LX
Tel 01189 599813 e-mail – enquiries@oiahe.org.uk
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

- 28 -

Academic Regulations: Welcome To Ravensbourne

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Academic Regulations: Welcome To Ravensbourne

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Welcome to

6. Extensions to submission deadlines 5

9. Marking and moderation 5

10. Examination Boards 5

11. Results and feedback 6

12. Publication of marks 6

15. Repeating units 6

19. Academic offences: cheating, collusion and plagiarism 9

20. Academic appeals 9

Annex A: College Undergraduate Grade Classification Descriptors 10

Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc) 2007/08

1.2 Assessment is a matter of judgement, not simply of computation. Marks, grades

Course The named programme of study onto which students enrol,

Programme The syllabus of the course: how a course is structured and

Unit A discrete formally structured learning experience with a

Credit Credit is a quantified means of expressing equivalence of

Level Credit level or course level, an indicator of the relative

Assessment Assessment requirements are those specified tasks which

Submission deadline This is the published point by which assessment

Retrieval The process by which a student who has failed a unit is

Compensation The decision of the Examination Board in specific

Examination Groups of internal markers and, where awards are being

Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc) 2007/08

each stage of programme of study. The constitution and

4.3 Reasonable Adjustments to Assessment and Examination may be made for a

5.3 A student who fails to submit an assessment or an element of assessment by the

6. EXTENSIONS TO SUBMISSION DEADLINES

6.1 Extensions to submission deadlines may in exceptional circumstances be granted

Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc) 2007/08

6.2 Extensions are normally not permitted for group work.

8.1 A mitigating circumstance is defined as a serious or significant adverse event or

a) his/her performance has been adversely affected; OR

b) he/she was unable to submit assessed or reassessed work by the scheduled

may submit a claim for consideration of mitigating circumstances.

9. MARKING AND MODERATION

10. EXAMINATION BOARD

11. RESULTS AND FEEDBACK

Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc) 2007/08

12. PUBLICATION OF MARKS

15. REPEATING UNITS

Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc) 2007/08

16.2 Compensation of a failure of a unit

16.3 Compensation of a failure of an assessment requirement within a unit

a) the learning outcomes for the unit overall are achieved;

Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc) 2007/08

Categorical Marking Scheme

B Upper Second 60 – 69 68 High B+ 67 - 69

C Lower Second 50 – 59 58 High C+ 57- 59

D Third 40 – 49 48 High D+ 47- 49

18.1 To be awarded a Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc), a student must normally have

18.2 The Foundation Degree is an unclassified awards, although student achievement is

19. ACADEMIC OFFENCES: CHEATING, COLLUSION AND PLAGIARISM

19.1 Cheating may be defined as an attempt to gain an unfair advantage by breaching

Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc) 2007/08

19.2 Collusion is taken to mean unauthorised collaboration to produce individually

20. ACADEMIC APPEALS

20.1 A student may make an appeal if:

Foundation Degree (FdA/FdSc) 2007/08

COLLEGE UNDERGRADUATE GRADE CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTORS

OUTSTANDING Degree class: First

A+ Consistently outstanding, exceptionally high standard, trivial omissions only.

A Outstanding in most respects, very few minor omissions. Based on