Meeting the QAA code of practice for assessment

This guidance note was produced by Alison Bone (University of Brighton), with assistance from Karen Hinett (UKCLE) in 2003. It outlines the 18 precepts for assessment from the Quality Assurance Agency’s
code of practice and provides recommendations as to how to meet them.

---

Below are prefaced versions of the 18 precepts, identified under various headings. Ideas and examples of the kinds of action that can be taken to accommodate each precept are suggested. You are recommended to take stock of existing practice and to identify the most appropriate ways in which these areas can be addressed. We also suggest that you meet your centre for academic practice or equivalent to work through each of the points, suggest how they may be met and agree the documentation which needs to be produced to show evidence that the precept is being addressed.

Note: institutions should be concerned with meeting all the precepts. Individual law schools may wish to consider those areas identified by an asterisk*.

General principles

Precepts 1-3: this is the concern of institutions as a whole and should not be the particular concern of the individual law school. The precepts relate to design, rigours, making sure that assessment processes are explicit, valid and reliable, and that mechanisms for policing plagiarism and any breach of assessment regulations are in place.

Recommendations:

• when new courses are validated or existing courses revised, the course team should ensure that module specifications are updated to reflect clearly where (use of learning matrices)
• ensure that assessment regulations are clearly set out and course handbooks are made available to external examiners
• agree benchmark criteria for the programme against which each module can be calibrated
• have a clear system for academic appeals stating where appeals can be made

Assessment panels and boards

Precept 4: implement clear, effective and consistent policies in respect to the membership, procedures, powers and accountability of assessment panels and examiners. Where there is more than one body the relative powers of each should be defined.

Recommendations:

• make the distinction between boards of examiners and assessment panels clear
• ensure that attendance at such boards is a requirement
• declare any personal involvement or interest with a student being assessed

*Conduct of assessment

Precept 5: institutions should ensure that assessment is conducted with rigour and fairness and with due regard for security.

Recommendations:

• ensure there are clear guidelines on the conduct of assessment for coursework and examinations, including penalties and treatment of plagiarism

• be clear about the types of ‘cheating’ (collusion, plagiarism) and provide training sessions, negotiated criteria and sanctions with students

• ensure that any work assessed as part of work placement is dealt with as rigorously as that conducted in contact time

*Scheduling and amount of assessment

Precept 6: ensure that assessment is consistent with effective and appropriate measurement of the student’s achievement of the learning outcomes and that assessment adequately supports learning.

Recommendations:

• regular course review and reflection on how assessment serves learning. Prevent a segmented approach to learning and ensure that benchmarks are addressed in some modules such that the course outcomes are met.
• consider double or multiple modules to avoid over-assessing. Consider what is an appropriate amount of assessment for a module and how consistency can be maintained (is assessment time taken out of the allocated hours per module? If so teaching time is reduced at the expense of over-assessment).

*Marking and grading

Precepts 7-11: publish and implement consistently clear criteria for the marking and grading of assessments. Ensure that robust mechanisms for marking exist. Evaluate periodically the maintenance and development of academic standards. Publish clear criteria for the aggregation of marks and grades and the rules and regulations for progression and final degree classifications.

Recommendations:

• grading scale – providing feedback on classifications
• ensure anonymity in submission and marking of work
• some element of internal scrutiny (not necessarily second marking but a scrutiny of a range of work)
• retain a sample of scripts to demonstrate a consistent standard of assessment tasks
• produce statistical information about the relation between entry qualifications and outcomes, trends, correlations between gender, ethnicity, age and performance against outcomes
• produce guidelines on the use of condonement and special case procedures

*Feedback on performance

Precept 12: ensure that appropriate feedback is provided to students on assessed work in a way that promotes learning and facilitates improvement.

Recommendations:

• issue students with guidelines on how long they can expect to wait for feedback on assignments and inform them where possible if there is likely to be a delay
• engage students in peer and self-assessment and/or grading. This can be used in preliminary stages of assessment and used scoring mechanism.
• the Data Protection Act means that students have a right to see any additions or comments to their work, which means that they could demand to have scripts returned. Consider giving examination scripts back to students on the understanding that they can be called back on request for further validation purposes. Aids the formative dimension of learning and teaching.
• consider oral and written feedback against assessment criteria or degree classifications

*Staff development and training

Precept 13: ensure that all staff involved in the assessment of students are competent to undertake their roles and responsibilities.

Recommendations:

• engage staff in workshops and seminars, encourage staff to share practice in areas of learning, teaching and assessment and to attend UKCLE events, giving papers and promoting discussion where relevant

*The language of assessment

Precept 14: try to maintain coherence between the language used for assessment and teaching and ensure that academic standards are not put at risk.

Recommendations

• refers to the language spoken, ie English, and not to the discourse used to describe learning, teaching and assessment activities. Ensure that language problems are addressed and that a common language is used for all activities.

• involve students in discussion and the negotiation of assessment criteria. Try to ensure some common understanding about the language and phrases used in criteria and to inculcate a sense of pride and responsibility in work. Avoid ‘final’ phrases in feedback, which suggest that outcomes have been met, and try to use phrases that indicate value-added, and an opportunity for development.

*Professional and accreditation body requirements

Precept 15: ensure that professional requirements (Bar Council, Law Society) are made clearly available to staff and students.

Recommendations:

• emphasise the difference between key requirements of the professional body and the stated outcomes of the course team for a particular module/course

Review of regulations

Precept 16: ensure effective mechanisms for the review and development of assessment regulations.

Recommendations:

• ensure that the academic board and committees for assessment and modularity review assessment regulations periodically
• consider involving external examiners/professional boards or external consultants to review assessment regulations

Recording, documentation and the publication of assessment decisions

Precepts 17-18: ensure that assessment decisions are recorded and documented systematically. Ensure decisions are published as quickly as possible.

Recommendations:

• ensure effective data collection procedures. Consider a strategy for the effective communication of grades and timely collection of data.
• ensure that students know when to expect published results in advance of submission
• investigate electronic (password-protected in the same way as Internet banking) options of informing students of grades. Comments and grades could be accessed by inputting personal information.

Last Modified: 30 June 2010