Policy Directory

STANDARDS FOR THE FINALISATION OF STUDENT RESULTS

Date first approved:

11 April 2014

Date of effect:

11 April 2014

Date last amended:
(refer Version Control Table)

Date of Next Review:

April 2017

First Approved by:

University Council

Custodian title & e-mail address:

Director, Academic Quality & Standards

quality@uow.edu.au

Author:

Academic Quality & Policy Specialist, Academic Quality & Standards Unit

Responsible Division & Unit:

Academic Quality & Standards Unit

Supporting documents, procedures & forms of this policy:

Faculty Assessment Committee Terms of Reference (Schedule 2)

Relevant Legislation &

External Documents:

Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 2002 (NSW)
Standard on Full and Accurate Records (NSW - issued 2004)

State Records Act 1998
(NSW)

General Course Rules

Privacy Policy

Records Management Policy

Student Academic Consideration Policy

Teaching and Assessment: Code of Practice – Teaching

Teaching and Assessment: Assessment and Feedback Policy

Teaching and Assessment: Subject Delivery Policy

ARD Results Administration Procedure
Collaborative Delivery – Subject Quality Assurance Procedures

Student Academic Consideration Guidelines

Supplementary Assessment Procedure

School of Medicine Board of Examiners Terms of Reference
UOW Records Disposal Register

Audience:

Public – available to anyone

Submit your feedback on this policy document using the Policy Feedback Facility.

Contents

1 Introduction

    • 1. The Standards for the Finalisation of Student Results set out the principles underpinning and the minimum standards required for the determination, finalisation and declaration of subject results. Compliance with these standards, together with quality assessment practices, should ensure that students’ subject results are a true reflection of their learning and performance.
    • 2. These Standards are part of the University’s quality assessment framework for the finalisation of results for undergraduate and postgraduate coursework subjects, which also includes:
          • a. the terms of reference for Faculty and Academic Unit assessment committees;
          • b. the General Course Rules; and
          • c. the Teaching and Assessment: Assessment and Feedback Policy.
    • 3. As far as possible, results will be finalised and released to all students at the end of every session.

2 Definitions

Word/Term

Definition

Academic Registrar’s Division (ARD)

The Unit responsible for policy, governance and the management of core student functions.

Academic Unit

School, Unit, Program or Discipline

Academic Unit results meeting

A meeting at which the actions that are the responsibility of the Academic Unit in finalising student results are undertaken

Assessment

An activity which a student is required to complete to provide a basis for an official record of achievement or certification of competence in a subject (e.g. examination, test, take-home examination, quiz, assignment, essay, laboratory report, demonstration, folio of creative work, performance, written or oral presentation, participation).

Deferred Assessment

An assessment taken by an eligible student as a result of a Student Academic Consideration application, as approved by the relevant Subject Coordinator. Deferred assessment includes in-session or end-of-session assignments and examinations and can be administered by the faculty or centrally.

Faculty Assessment Committee (FAC)

The Faculty Assessment Committee is as described in the Faculty Assessment Committee Terms of Reference

Full and accurate record

A record that:

• correctly reflects what was done, communicated or decided, and can be trusted as a true representation of the transactions or events which it documents;

• is authentic, for example the record can be proven to be what it claims to be, to have been created or sent by the person claimed to have created or sent it, and to have been created or sent at the time claimed;

• has integrity by virtue of being complete and protected against unauthorised access, alteration, deletion or loss; and

• is usable by virtue of being understandable, complete, retrievable and available through time.

Honours Coordinator

A member of academic staff who is responsible for the operation of an Honours degree

Honours Project

A component of study within the Honours Degree that involves project work and/or a piece of research and scholarship with some independence and that is discipline specific, inter-disciplinary or joint

Honours Supervisor

A member of academic staff who is appropriately qualified, has relevant expertise and appropriate experience to oversee the progress of the Honours Project

Offshore location

A location that is outside of Australia at which a University of Wollongong course is offered

Record

Records are a part of and result from business activities and provide evidence of those activities. Any document or other source of information compiled, recorded or stored in written form or on film, or by electronic process, or in any other manner or by any other means (State Records Act 1998 (NSW). Records may include, but are not limited to, any staff member’s paper based records, emails, or electronic documents stored at UOW or on UOW equipment. A record does not include personal and/or private documents that are not part of official UOW business records.

Session

A period in which subjects may be offered. Standard sessions are defined as Autumn and Spring. Non-standard sessions may be created in accordance with the Session Policy

Student

A person registered for a course

Student Management Package (SMP)

Consists of SOLS, SMP-Central and the Student administration software and web based systems.

Subject

A self-contained unit of study identified by a unique code

Subject Coordinator

Academic staff member with nominated responsibility for a subject

Supplementary Assessment

An assessment taken by an eligible student, as approved by the relevant Faculty Assessment Committee, who has been granted an opportunity to take an additional assessment in accordance with the Supplementary Assessment Procedures. Supplementary assessment includes in-session or end-of-session examinations and can be administered by the faculty or centrally.

Weighted average mark / WAM

The average of marks gained by a candidate in a course and weighted by credit point value and by level using the designated method as specified in the General Course Rules.

3 Application and Scope

    • 1. These Standards apply to the determination, finalisation and declaration of students’ results in all undergraduate and postgraduate coursework subjects offered by the University of Wollongong, with the exception of subjects within the Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS)/ Doctor of Medicine (MD) offered by the School of Medicine.
    • 2. The process for the determination of final results for subjects within the Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS)/ Doctor of Medicine (MD)offered by the School of Medicine is undertaken by Graduate Medicine Board of Examiners in accordance with the Graduate Medicine Board of Examiners Terms of Reference.
    • 3. The process for the determination of final results for Higher Degree Research (HDR) students is set out in the General Course Rules.
    • 4. The process for the determination of final results for subjects offered at offshore locations models the quality assurance processes documented within these Standards. The Faculty Assessment Committee meeting may be held at the offshore location, or onshore with input from the offshore location via videoconference or other means. The Collaborative Delivery – Subject Quality Assurance Procedures provides further information regarding the offshore process.

4 Principles Guiding the Determination, Finalisation and Declaration of Results

    • 1. Collegiality: ensuring appropriate consultation is undertaken regarding decisions and representation in meetings so that authority and responsibility are vested appropriately among colleagues
    • 2. Transparency: keeping written records of all decisions, including any variations to students’ marks
    • 3. Equity: applying assessment processes consistently and equitably
    • 4. Sound Academic Judgement: Using sound academic judgement, taking into account relevant learning outcomes and academic considerations, when making decisions about assessment matters
    • 5. Timeliness: ensuring results are published to students in line with the key dates for the relevant session

5 Responsibility for Managing Student Results

    • 1. Staff who have access to student results are responsible for ensuring those results are treated with appropriate confidentiality at all times.
    • 2. The Subject Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that individual assessment marks are recorded and maintained in accordance with the provisions in the Teaching and Assessment: Assessment and Feedback Policy in preparation for the finalisation of subject results.
    • 3. The Honours Supervisor, Honours Coordinator, and Academic Unit are responsible for following the process set out within the Teaching and Assessment: Assessment and Feedback Policy and relevant Honours Guide, in relation to the assessment and declaration of marks for Honours Projects.
    • 4. The Academic Unit is responsible for having in place a process, underpinned by the Principles Guiding the Determination, Finalisation and Declaration of Results, for reviewing the results of students enrolled in each subject delivered by that Academic Unit or administered by that Academic Unit on behalf of a Faculty, as set out in the Actions Table at Section 6 of this Standard.
    • 5. The Faculty Assessment Committee is responsible for declaring the results of all students enrolled in a course offered by the Faculty in accordance with the Faculty Assessment Committee Terms of Reference, the Principles Guiding the Determination, Finalisation and Declaration of Results and the Actions table at Section 6 of this Standard.

Variation of Results

    • 6. A Faculty Assessment Committee may vary the subject results of a student or a group of students after considering information provided by relevant staff of the Academic Unit that delivered the subject. To avoid delaying the finalisation of results, relevant staff of these Academic Units must be available in person or by electronic means, or provide adequate written information, should a query arise at the Faculty Assessment Committee, in order to enable the Committee to finalise the results. The Faculty Assessment Committee will make a decision at the meeting based on the information available to it.
    • 7. Where there is an issue regarding the results of a group or cohort of students and the matter is not resolved to the agreement of both the Faculty and Academic Unit involved, the matter may be referred to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education) or their nominee for determination.
    • 8. Where the Faculty Assessment Committee varies a result in a subject owned by another faculty, the Faculty Assessment Committee Chair must advise the subject-owning Faculty Assessment Committee Chair of the variation and the reason for the variation.
    • 9. Full and accurate records must be kept of each variation to results, and include:
          • a. details of the variation and reasons for it, and
          • b. details of the Delegated Authority responsible for the ratification of those variations.

6 Steps Leading to the Finalisation of Student Results

    • 1. The following table sets out the steps leading to the finalisation of results. Timing is determined based on the University’s standard sessions. For students enrolled in subjects offered during non-standard sessions, faculties and ARD are responsible for scheduling all necessary equivalent administrative and quality assurance activities and meetings to determine and finalise student results.

Action

Responsibility

Timing

1

Set Faculty Assessment Committee meeting dates and times and advise faculties accordingly.

ARD

At the start of each standard session

2

Send reminder notice to faculties of all Faculty Assessment Committee meeting dates and times, FAC responsibilities and attendance requirements.

ARD

2 weeks before scheduled FAC meetings

3

Ensure all marks for completed assessments are entered into SMP for each student enrolled in the subject.

Subject Coordinator

As required by Teaching and Assessment: Assessment and Feedback Policy

4

Calculate provisional composite marks and enter a provisional grade into SMP. Consult the UOW Legend of Grades for an explanation of available grades.

Subject Coordinator

As required prior to Academic Unit Results Meeting

5

Consider all undergraduate students with composite marks of 48%-49% for supplementary assessment and:

    • allocate WS (ARD-administered supplementary exam) or WH (Faculty-administered supplementary exam or assignment) to each student recommended for a supplementary assessment; and

    • record reasons for not recommending students with composite marks of 48%/49% for supplementary assessment and allocate original mark and grade

    • Consult the Supplementary Assessment Procedures for the criteria against which these students should be considered for a supplementary assessment.

Subject Coordinator

As required prior to Academic Unit Results Meeting

6

Allocate a WS (ARD-administered supplementary exam) or WH (Faculty-administered supplementary exam or assignment) to any other student who received a TF or a composite mark of 47 or below and who is considered to merit an offer of a supplementary assessment, taking into account the criteria in the Supplementary Assessment Procedures, and record reasons why the student merits an offer.

Subject Coordinator

As required prior to Academic Unit Results Meeting

7

Make determinations on all active applications for academic consideration and:

      • for successful applications:

          o recommend a WD (ARD-administered deferred exam being offered), or

          o recommend a WH (faculty-administered deferred assessment or exam being offered), or

          o vary the student’s original mark and/or grade or

      • for unsuccessful applications: recommend the student’s original mark and grade

Subject Coordinator, in consultation with the Academic Unit as necessary

As required prior to Academic Unit Results Meeting

8

Submit to the Academic Unit Results Meeting:

    • provisional results for each student,

    • a list of students whose results have been varied and the reasons for those variations,

    • a list of students recommended to be offered a deferred assessment,

    • a list of students recommended to be offered a supplementary assessment, including reasons for this decision for students who received a TF or a composite mark of 47 or below, and

    • a list of students with composite marks of 48%/49% who are not recommended for an offer of a supplementary assessment and the reasons for this

Subject Coordinator or appropriate substitute nominated by the Chair of the Academic Unit Results Meeting

As required prior to Academic Unit Results Meeting

9

Review the performance of students in subjects delivered by the Academic Unit, including:

    • Review distribution of marks in each subject

    • Compare distributions with historical data and across locations (where the subject is offered at more than one location)

    • Identify and review subject anomalies

    • Review all provisional results in subjects delivered by the Academic Unit that are:

        o ND (not declared)

        o WH (withheld)

        o WS (withheld supplementary)

        o WD (withheld deferred)

        o F (fail)

        o TF (technical fail)

    • Review all provisional results for potential graduands

    • Review results at grade cusps

Academic Unit

At Academic Unit Results Meeting

10

If appropriate, apply scaling having regard to the Scaling Guidelines (see Schedule 1 of this Standard)

Academic Unit

At Academic Unit Results Meeting

11

Endorse or give reasons for not endorsing recommendations of Subject Coordinators in relation to offers of supplementary assessment and/or deferred assessment

Academic Unit

At Academic Unit Results Meeting

12

Calculate grades of Honours and WAMs and recommend to the Faculty Assessment Committee

Academic Unit

At Academic Unit Results Meeting

13

Record reasons for:

      • any variations made to results at meeting, including variations to Honours grades and WAMs

      • not endorsing offers of supplementary assessment to students with a composite mark of 48%-49%

Academic Unit

At Academic Unit Results Meeting

14

Publish provisional results to ARD

Academic Unit

2 working days before Faculty Assessment Committee meeting

15

Create consolidated results reports for each Faculty

ARD

2 working days before Faculty Assessment Committee meeting

16

Review consolidated results of individual students and consult with Chairs of Academic Unit Results Meetings as necessary

FAC Chair

2 working days before Faculty Assessment Committee meeting

17

Check variations to results in subjects delivered by other faculties with representatives from the Academic Unit delivering the subject, either in person or by technical device, or against written advice, prior to finalising these results

FAC Chair

2 working days before Faculty Assessment Committee meeting

18

Review and approve (as appropriate) Academic Unit endorsements of offers of supplementary assessment to students and record decisions and reasons for NOT approving offers

Faculty Assessment Committee

At Faculty Assessment Committee meeting

19

Make final decisions on all other provisional results

Faculty Assessment Committee

At Faculty Assessment Committee meeting

20

Declare final results

Faculty Assessment Committee

At Faculty Assessment Committee meeting

21

Submit grades of Honours and WAMs in hard-copy memo to ARD for entry into SMP Publisher

Faculty Assessment Committee

At Faculty Assessment Committee meeting

22

Enter grades of Honours and WAMs from Academic Unit memos into SMP

ARD

Before the date notified on the University website for release of session results

23

Release session results to students

ARD

By the date notified on the University website for release of session results

24

Determine eligibility of graduating students to receive their awards ‘with Distinction’

ARD

Following the date that session results are released.

25

Determine eligibility of students for Top Student Recognition in accordance with Student Awards and Prizes Policy

ARD

As stipulated in the Student Awards and Prizes Policy

26

Nominate to the Student Awards Committee students to receive University Medals

Executive Deans

As stipulated in the Student Awards and Prizes Policy

27

Approve and declare remaining Withheld results (WH, WS, WD, IPC, ND)

FAC Chair

As stipulated in the General Course Rules

28

Seek extension of up to 4 weeks from DVC(E) for undeclared Withheld results as required

FAC Chair

As stipulated in the General Course Rules

29

Grant extension of up to 4 weeks for undeclared Withheld results as required

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education)

As stipulated in the General Course Rules

30

Allocate fail to all undeclared results

ARD

As stipulated in the General Course Rules

31

Approve and declare variations to individual student marks

Associate Dean (Education)

As stipulated in the General Course Rules

32

Advise Faculty Assessment Committees of any changes to results since previous FAC meeting

ARD

At next Faculty Assessment Committee meeting

7 Record Keeping

  • 1. The University’s legal and administrative requirements for record keeping are set out in the Records Management Policy.
  • 2. To comply with those requirements:
      • a. Academic Units must keep full and accurate records of actions and decisions taken by Academic Units in the determination of student results, and
      • b. A representative from the Academic Registrar’s Division must keep minutes of Faculty Assessment Committee meetings that record decisions made, reasons for decisions (as required), actions taken by the Committee and attendance at the meeting.
  • 3. Faculties and Academic Units may from time to time be required to produce records of decisions and reasons for decisions for internal or external audit or review.
  • 4. Records of Academic Unit Results Meetings and Faculty Assessment Committee meetings should be kept for a minimum of five years from the date of the meeting.

8 Version Control Table

Version Control

Date Effective

Approved By

Amendment

1

11 April 2014

University Council

First Version. Replaces the Assessment Committee Standards and Assessment Guidelines - Scaling.

2

8 July 2014

Acting Vice-Chancellor

Minor amendment to Section 6, item 28 and addition of Section 6, item 29 to rectify discrepancy with General Course Rules.

3

7 October 2016

University Council

Consequential amendments following the approval of new Teaching and Assessment Policy Suite. Amendments to References & Legislation, Section 1(2), Sections 5(2) & 5(3) and Section 6(3), Schedule 1, Sections 12, 14 & 23.

4

2 December 2016

Vice-Chancellor

Amendments related to nomenclature changes related to the School of Medicine (previously Graduate School of Medicine) and the MD offering.

5

18 January 2017

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic)

Administrative amendment to replace references to superseded Quality Assurance of Transnational Education (Offshore) and UOWD Teaching and Learning Procedures

Schedule 1: Scaling Guidelines

1. Introduction

      1. These Guidelines are designed to assist academic staff in deciding whether it is appropriate to scale marks and, if so, what method of scaling should be used.

      2. Any decision to scale or otherwise adjust marks must be justifiable in terms of the Principles for the Determination, Finalisation and Declaration of Results.

2. Scope

    • 1. The University reserves the right to scale marks in any undergraduate and postgraduate coursework subjects taught by the University of Wollongong onshore and offshore.
    • 2. The Scaling Guidelines should be read in conjunction with the Standards for the Finalisation of Students’ Results, with particular reference to the Principles for the Principles for the Determination, Finalisation and Declaration of Results.

3. Using Scaling

      What is scaling?

    • 1. For the purposes of these guidelines, ‘scaling’ is used to mean the adjustment of a group of marks of an entire class or a subset of that class, for example, a tutorial group. The term is not used to cover the adjustment of marks for individuals or the variation of marking schemes, although these are discussed briefly below.
    • 2. Scaling may involve all of the marks for the subject or just the marks for a particular component of the assessment, for example, the final exam.
    • 3. Scaling cannot be used to adjust the marks of individual students.

      When may scaling be used?

    • 4. Scaling may be used when the marks of a group are affected (positively or adversely) by the assessment regime of the subject in an unplanned way. However, scaling should always be used with caution.
    • 5. Some examples of aberrations or unexpected outcomes, which may point to an underlying problem justifying scaling, are:
      • a. the average mark for the cohort is considerably higher or lower than the performance demonstrated by the cohort in other assessments for that subject (or other subjects) or compared to cohorts in previous years;
      • b. external forces unrelated to student performance have caused inappropriate variations between cohorts undertaking the same assessment (e.g. students from different campuses of the University or from different tutorial groups);
      • c. marks are highly concentrated in a narrow band around the median;
      • d. the shape of the distribution of marks is unusual (e.g. highly skewed or bimodal);
      • e. a single assessment or examination question proves to be problematic.
    • 6. Although it is sometimes assumed that a desirable outcome in any subject is for a uni-modal, bell-shaped distribution of marks, there is no universally correct shape. The nature and/or mixture of students doing a subject may validly result in a bi-modal or moderately (or even highly) skewed distribution.
    • 7. As part of their ultimate quality audit role, Faculty Education Committees are responsible for comparing distributions of grades and investigate any apparent problem areas.

      When should scaling not be used?

    • 8. Scaling is not an appropriate method to compensate for serious breakdowns in the learning and teaching process. Other strategies need to be used to address such situations.
    • 9. Judgement must be exercised about the cause of any aberration or unexpected outcome before adopting scaling to correct a perceived problem. For example, where variations between the performances of cohorts may be caused by differences in effectiveness of teaching and/or the quality of students. In such cases non-standard results should be accepted.
    • 10. Some universities require a proportion of specific grades to lie within defined bands (e.g. High Distinctions to be within a band of 5-12% of the cohort), except for small enrolment groups. Such quotas are not part of UOW practice, although academics marking assessments may use such reference points to inform their decision-making.
    • 11. Scaling to a normal distribution (or other preconceived model) is also not a preferred UOW practice.

      Can marks for assessments be scaled after they are provided to students?

    • 12. Once marks for individual assessments have been approved by the Subject Coordinator and released to students they cannot be scaled down, unless the subject outline explicitly states that this may occur (see Teaching and Assessment: Assessment and Feedback Policy).

      Who can make the decision to scale marks?

    • 13. The Academic Unit and/or the Faculty Assessment Committee can review the distribution of grades for any given subject and make a decision to scale final marks. The Faculty Assessment Committee must be informed where results are scaled by the Academic Unit.
    • 14. For assessment occurring throughout the session, routine scaling can be undertaken by the Subject Coordinator, provided this is done as stated in the subject outline, as required by the Teaching and Assessment: Assessment and Feedback Policy.

      How might marks be scaled?

    • 15. Scaling might involve:
            • i. widening the range of marks about the mean, but not shifting the mean (used to correct for concentration in a narrow band);
            • ii. shifting the mean (used to adjust for an unreasonably low or high average);
            • iii. adjusting the shape of the distribution (for a clearly defined and valid reason, if one exists); or
            • iv. a combination of any of the above.
    • 16. The algorithm for doing this may be based on linear or non-linear transformations. Other methods, such as scaling to normality, or scaling to achieve specified percentages within bands are not recommended practice at the University of Wollongong.
    • 17. Unless there are clearly identified goals, the simpler and more transparent the scaling method the better. Advice on how to achieve particular scaling goals is available from the University’s Statistical Consulting Service.
    • 18. Any method of scaling of an individual assessment or a final mark must preserve rank order within the relevant cohort. However, the scaling of an individual assessment for a sub-cohort (such as a tutorial group) may result in changes to the rank order in the larger cohort of students studying a particular subject.

      Can marks be scaled up or down?

    • 19. It may be appropriate to scale marks either up or down, although particular caution is advised when scaling down.

      Other mark adjustment methods

    • 20. There are other methods of adjusting marks which are not strictly scaling, and which also need to be approached with caution or avoided altogether.

Adjusting marks or weightings in individual cases

    • 21. Where a student has demonstrated uneven performance over the session (e.g. strong performance in assignments and poor performance in exams), it is not appropriate to:
            • v. adjust the marks of the student, or
            • vi. give added weight to a particular type of assessment completed by the student.
    • 22. If the final exam is considered to be the most significant assessment it should be awarded a greater percentage of the overall marks for the subject.
    • 23. Students may also be required to perform to a satisfactory standard in the final exam or in some other significant assessment (e.g. to achieve 40% in the final exam or to satisfactorily complete a laboratory component) in order to achieve a pass in a subject overall. In accordance with the Teaching and Assessment: Subject Delivery Policy, this requirement must be clearly communicated to students in the subject outline.
    • 24. The consideration of students’ composite results in academic consideration cases is covered by the Student Academic Consideration Policy. It is inappropriate to regard such circumstances as a basis for scaling, but it may be appropriate to modify the weightings for the various assessments to reflect the circumstances of the academic consideration granted to the student.

Schedule 2: Faculty Assessment Committee Terms of Reference

The Faculty Assessment Committee shall operate in accordance with the following minimum standards with respect to its role and operations:

Terms of Reference

The Faculty Assessment Committee is a formally constituted committee of the Faculty with particular responsibility for finalisation of student results.

The Faculty Assessment Committee shall:

    1. Be responsible for oversight of the finalisation of student results for students enrolled in subjects offered by the faculty.

    2. Through the Chair, monitor processes and procedures of the Academic Unit Results Meeting.

    3. Receive results recommended by the Head of each relevant academic unit for subjects studied by students enrolled in courses offered by the faculty.

    4. Determine, within approved policy and following due process, the results for subjects studied by students enrolled in courses offered by the faculty and in so doing:

      a) may request the Head or nominee of an academic unit to reconsider any recommended mark;

      b) may, in the absence of the relevant Head or nominee of an academic unit, vary any recommended mark; and,

      c) may request the Head or nominee of an academic unit to provide reasons, in writing, for not submitting a mark for a particular student.

    5. Review and approve, in accordance with the General Course Rules and the Supplementary Assessment Procedures, academic unit endorsements of offers of supplementary assessment.

    6. Declare the final results and approve them for release to the Academic Registrar’s Division.

    7. Submit grades of Honours and weighted average marks (WAMs) to the Academic Registrar’s Division.

    8. Report on any matter referred to it by the Academic Senate or the Vice-Chancellor.

Membership

The Faculty Assessment Committee shall consist of:

    • The Associate Dean (Education) or nominee as Chair;

    • the Heads, or their nominees with delegated authority, of all academic units offering subjects for courses for which the Faculty has responsibility

    • other academic staff, as nominated by the Chair

The Faculty may, with the agreement of constituent academic units, by resolution, include additional representation from the Faculty academic staff as deemed appropriate.

Representatives of the Academic Registrar’s Division have right of attendance at Faculty Assessment Committee meetings for administrative purposes.

Quorum

The quorum for a Faculty Assessment Committee meeting shall be a majority of the members of the committee.

Meeting Frequency

The Faculty Assessment Committee will meet as a minimum three times per year at the conclusion of Autumn, Spring and Summer sessions. Additional meetings may be scheduled as necessary.

Committee Operations

The Committee will operate in accordance with the Standards for the Finalisation of Student Results.

Here to Help

Need a hand? Contact the Governance Unit for advice and assistance on policy issues.