Policy Directory

CODE OF PRACTICE – TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT

Date approved

10 October 1997

Date Policy will take effect

On approval

Date of Next Review

December 2013

Approved by

University Council

Custodian title & e-mail address

Director, Academic Quality and Standards
quality@uow.edu.au

Responsible Faculty/
Division & Unit

Academic Quality and Standards Unit, DVCE Portfolio
quality@uow.edu.au

Supporting documents, procedures & forms of this policy

Schedule 1 : Subject Outline Checklist
Schedule 2 : Retention of Assessment Records
Schedule 3 : Subject Quota Guidelines

References & Legislation

State Records Act 1998 (General Disposal Authority – University Records GDA23 and Committees GDA 2)
Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW)

Academic Advice to Students Policy

Academic Grievance Policy (Coursework and Honours Students)

Academic Review Policy

Code of Practice – Honours

Code of Practice - Research

Code of Practice – Student Professional Experience

Course Approval Guidelines

Course Progress Policy

Delegations of Authority Policy

Disability Policy – Students

General Course Rules

Good Practice Assessment Guidelines

Graduate Qualities Policy

IP Student Assignment of Intellectual Property Policy

Records Management Policy

Research Misconduct Policy

Respect for Diversity Policy

Standards for the Finalisation of Academic Results

Standard on Courses

Student Academic Consideration Policy

Student Charter

Student Conduct Rules

Subject Approval Guidelines

University Examination Rules

University Privacy Policy

UOW Academic Review Policy

Audience

Public : accessible to anyone

Expiry Date of Policy

Not applicable

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

Contents

1 Purpose

  • 1. This Code sets out:
          • a. the University of Wollongong’s approach to effective learning, teaching and assessment and the principles underlying teaching and assessment practice; and
          • b. specific responsibilities in relation to learning, teaching and assessment, as well as procedures for teaching staff.

2 Definitions

Word/Term

Definition

Academic unit

Faculty, School, Unit, Program or Discipline.

Assessment task

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).

Casual teaching employee

A person engaged as such by the hour and paid on an hourly basis (UOW – Academic Staff Enterprise Agreement 2005).

Course

A course is a program of study consisting of a subject or combination of subjects and other requirements as specified in the relevant course structure that leads to a higher education award.

Delegated authority

A person given delegated authority under the Delegations of Authority Policy.

Honours Examiner

An appropriately qualified person with relevant expertise and with responsibility for the assessment of an Honours Project undertaken as a required component of an Honours Degree

Faculty examination

Test, examination, quiz or in-class review conducted by an academic unit.

Fractional teaching staff

Employment less than full-time employment, for which all entitlements are paid on a pro-rata basis calculated by reference to full-time employment. Fractional employment may be either on a continuing or fixed-term basis (UOW - Academic Staff Enterprise Agreement 2005)

Group work

An assessment task which involves two or more students contributing to an assessment task.

Head

A member of academic staff who is ultimately responsible for the matters set out in 5.2 of this Code.

Honours Degree

An undergraduate qualification that qualifies individuals who apply a body of knowledge in a specific context to undertake professional work and as a pathway for research and further learning, and that otherwise meets the requirements of Level 8 of the Australian Qualifications Framework.

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

In writing

Written information delivered in hard copy or electronically.

Reasonable adjustment

An adjustment is reasonable in relation to a student with a disability if it balances the interests of all parties affected.

Student

A person registered for a course.

Subject Coordinator

Academic staff member with nominated responsibility for the subject.

Subject Outline

The document in hard copy or electronic format governing content, delivery and assessment of material for a subject.

Supervisor

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

Teaching staff

Any person who carries out teaching responsibilities under the authority of the Head of an academic unit.

University examination

A formal examination including a supplementary examination conducted by the Academic Registrar’s Division.

3 Application & Scope

    • 1. This Code applies to teaching, learning and assessment of all undergraduate and postgraduate coursework subjects at the University of Wollongong that are taught onshore and offshore, including coursework subjects where the primary or only assessment task is a research or creative project or an Honours Project. This Code should be read in conjunction with other, related policies.
    • 2. The Code does not apply to the University of Wollongong in Dubai.
  • 3. In conjunction with this Code, coursework subjects worth 24cp or more where the primary or only assessment task is an Honours Project should apply the Code of Practice – Honours for aspects such as the orientation, management and supervision of students. This does not preclude the application of the Code of Practice – Honours to subjects within an Honours Degree where the Honours Project is worth less than 24cp.

4 Policy Principles

  • 1. The University has a responsibility to provide a quality learning environment for students in accordance with its Strategic Plan.
  • 2. The University values good teaching and assessment practice and is committed to providing an effective learning environment for its students. To this end, the University has in place quality assurance processes and procedures to support effective teaching and fair assessment practices. Underlying these processes and procedures are the principles of equity, consistency, transparency and collegiality.

5 Responsibilities

Faculty

  • 1. The Faculty is responsible for monitoring and ensuring the quality of its educational policy, practice and procedure, primarily through the Faculty Education Committee. These specific responsibilities include:
      • a. ensuring that University procedures for the approval of new courses and new subjects are followed (see the Course Management policy documents);
      • b. applying appropriate documented quality control mechanisms to approve new and amended courses and subjects with clear delegation for approval and appropriate record management;
      • c. ensuring that courses or subjects promote the development of the Faculty/discipline Graduate Qualities prepared in accordance with the Graduate Qualities Policy;
      • d. ensuring that courses and subjects are systematically reviewed in accordance with the University’s Academic Review Policy, and improvements to individual subjects are communicated to students through Subject Outlines;
      • e. facilitating the sharing of information on best practice in teaching and assessment among colleagues;
      • f. ensuring that students are given adequate notice (through the subject database) of the imposition of subject quotas prior to the completion of the previous session so that students can arrange their course plans to fulfil the requirements for majors, core subjects and/or electives (see Schedule 3 of this Code – Subject Quota Guidelines);
      • g. identifying subjects where the primary or only assessment task is a research or creative project, and ensuring that these are offered in accordance with clause 5.4;
      • h. ensuring that all examinations and tests conducted by the Faculty or the Academic Registrar’s Division support the attainment of the stated learning outcomes of the subject, are appropriate to the level of the subject, and have been reviewed and approved within the Faculty to ensure they are clearly set out, free from error and are of a duration appropriate to the demands of the examination paper’s content.
      • i. establishing documented procedures for conducting in-session tests;
      • j. ensuring that all requirements of the University’s Standards for the Finalisation of Student Results are met;
      • k. ensuring the establishment of criteria for the assessment of class participation, where appropriate;
      • l. drawing students’ attention to their procedural and substantive rights and responsibilities contained in this Code and in the Student Charter;
      • m. ensuring that a copy of each current Subject Outline for the session in which the subject is on offer is held in a central location within the Faculty and is available to students, academic staff and professional services staff;
      • n. ensuring that a copy of each Subject Outline is provided to the Faculty Librarian no later than the first week of the session in which the subject is on offer;
      • o. ensuring reasonable adjustment within the teaching environment for students with a disability in accordance with the Disability Policy - Students;
      • p. responding to any grievances or complaints initiated by students in accordance with the Academic Grievance Policy (Coursework and Honours Students);
      • q. ensuring that allegations of academic or research misconduct by students undertaking coursework are investigated in accordance with the Student Conduct Rules and associated procedures or the Research Misconduct Policy; and
      • r. appointing a Course Progress Advisor to provide academic advice in accordance with the Course Progress Policy, and making this information available to students on the Faculty’s website.

Head of Academic Unit

  • 2. The Head of Academic Unit is responsible for:
      • a. ensuring that academic staff are familiar and comply with procedures relevant to Teaching and Assessment as set out in Section 5.1 of this Code.
      • b. ensuring that a Subject Outline is prepared by Subject Coordinators for each subject offered by the academic unit, that it meets the requirements of Schedule 1 of this Code (‘Subject Outline Checklist and General Advice’) and is signed off as satisfying Faculty procedures;
      • c. ensuring that a copy of each current Subject Outline, for the session in which the subject is on offer, and any amendments, is forwarded to a central location within the Faculty or academic unit and is available to students, academic staff and professional services staff;
      • d. ensuring that examinations and tests conducted by the Faculty or the Academic Registrar’s Division have been reviewed and approved so that they are clearly set out, free from error and are of a duration appropriate to the demands of the examination paper’s content;
      • e. ensuring that quality assured assessment methods and practices are applied throughout the academic unit and that assessment is carried out fairly, objectively and consistently;
      • f. ensuring that full-time and fractional or casual teaching staff are available to students for consultation in accordance with 5.5 of this Code;
      • g. ensuring every subject has an assigned Subject Coordinator specified in the subject database;
      • h. where a quota is applied to a subject, determining which students will be offered a place in the subject based on the criteria in section 15 of the Subject Quota Guidelines (Schedule 3 to this Code);
      • i. ensuring that all applications for academic consideration are dealt with according to the provisions of the Student Academic Consideration Policy;
      • j. ensuring that the academic unit complies with the requirements of the Standards for the Finalisation of Student Results;
      • k. participating, where required, in investigations of alleged academic or research misconduct by a student undertaking coursework in accordance with the Student Conduct Rues and associated procedures or the Research Misconduct Policy;
      • l. attending each meeting of the Faculty Assessment Committee or appointing a nominee from the academic staff to attend in their absence; and

Subject Coordinator

  • 3. The Subject Coordinator is responsible for the academic integrity of subjects taught. Specific responsibilities include:
      • a. the preparation and distribution of a Subject Outline for each subject taught in accordance with the requirements of the Code as set out in 5.2(b) and 5.2(c) and Schedule 1 of this Code;
      • b. ensuring that subject material is at an appropriate standard for both its level and the course in which it is offered;
      • c. providing opportunities for students to develop the Faculty/Discipline Graduate Qualities relevant to the subject (contributing to the UOW Graduate Qualities);
      • d. where content has been changed, or a new subject is being offered, ensuring that the Faculty Librarian receives notification of new reading materials in a timely manner;
      • e. where more than one member of staff is teaching a subject, ensuring good processes and communication with other teaching staff so that there is consistency in terms of subject learning outcomes, delivery of subject, assessment and other quality assurance matters;
      • f. obtaining formal approval from the Faculty Executive Dean for the imposition of a quota on a subject, in accordance with the timeframes and procedures in Schedule 3 of this Code - Subject Quota Guidelines;
      • g. ensuring appropriate variation in assessment tasks in successive subject instances to avoid the potential for academic misconduct by students;
      • h. submitting all examinations and in-session tests to the Head of Unit or delegated authority for review and approval;
      • i. examining allegations of, and if appropriate, undertaking investigations of alleged academic or research misconduct by a student undertaking coursework in accordance with the Student Conduct Rules and associated procedures or the Research Misconduct Policy;
      • j. ensuring marks for individual assessment tasks, or composite marks up to 10% for equivalent tasks worth 3% or less, are entered into SMP at or before the time the mark is provided to the student so that a central record is maintained, in accordance with Schedule 2 of this Code.
      • k. Where it is not practical to maintain individual assessment task marks in SMP, ensuring result spreadsheets are kept in the University’s network drive so that they are included in periodic IT back up exercises, in accordance with Schedule 2 of this Code;
      • l. submitting subject marks to, and attending, the relevant Assessment Committee according to Faculty procedures;
      • m. archiving exam papers and answer sheets in a central Faculty repository within 21 days of the release of results, in accordance with Schedule 2 of this Code.
      • n. responding to student academic consideration applications in accordance with the Student Academic Consideration Policy.
      • o. ensuring recommended reasonable adjustments (consistent with UOW’s responsibility to apply the Disability Standards for Education 2005) are implemented for students registered with UOW Disability Services (note: Student Support Advisers provide advice and assistance and can facilitate reasonable adjustment provisions at the faculty level for each student registered with Disability Services); and
      • p. ensuring that students at risk of failure, consistent with the Course Progress Policy, are reminded of the learning support services available; and
      • q. ensuring students enrolling late in a subject have access to an approved Subject Outline and any other relevant subject or academic unit information.

Supervisor (Research or Creative Projects)

    • 4. For subjects where the primary or only assessment task is a research or creative project, a supervisor must be identified for each student undertaking the subject. This role may be undertaken by the Subject Coordinator, or where necessary, other members of the teaching staff may be allocated as supervisor. The overriding responsibility of a supervisor is to provide continuing support to students under their supervision in researching and/or producing a research or creative project to the best of the student’s ability. Specific responsibilities include:
      • a. assisting students to develop a plan for completing the research or creative project within an appropriate timeframe;
      • b. maintaining regular contact with students in order to monitor their progress;
      • c. providing timely and helpful written feedback to students on any submissions and to assist them to develop solutions as problems are identified;
      • d. advising students and the subject coordinator of inadequate progress or work below the standard generally required and to suggest appropriate action (including referral to learning development where required); and
      • e. ensuring that responsible research practices are maintained as per the Code of Practice – Research.
    • 5. The above provisions do not apply to Honours Projects. Supervision responsibilities for such Honours Projects are outlined in the Code of Practice – Honours.

Teaching Staff

  • 6. Specific responsibilities of teaching staff include:
      • a. Assessing students’ work fairly, objectively and consistently;
      • b. providing students with adequate and timely feedback on performance taking into account the Good Practice Assessment Guidelines (refer to Section 7 of this Code);
      • c. offering fair access to consultation with students by appropriate means during session. Appropriate means may include face to face, online, email, videoconference or telephone conference, and should include provision for students to meet with teaching staff if required. “Fair access” means that:
          • i. full-time staff will make available an average of four hours consultation time per week during session, although the distribution of this may vary over the session;
            • ii. fractional and casual staff will be available for a proportion of this time as determined by the Head of Academic Unit.
        • The times and means of staff availability for consultation must be approved by the Head of Academic Unit, and must be displayed publicly in the academic unit and clearly explained in each subject outline.
      • d. implementing learning, teaching and assessment strategies that foster the development of the Faculty/discipline Graduate Qualities relevant to the subject (contributing to the UOW Graduate Qualities);
      • e. communicating with the Subject Coordinator about matters concerned with students’ academic progress, including Student Academic Consideration;
      • f. granting extensions to students only in accordance with the Student Academic Consideration Policy;
      • g. identifying and acting upon possible cases of academic or research misconduct by a student undertaking coursework in accordance with the Student Conduct Rules and associated procedures or the Research Misconduct Policy;
      • h. recognising and accommodating diversity within student learning, where appropriate;
      • i. maintaining the principles set out in the University’s Privacy Policy regarding the confidentiality of personal information, including marks;
      • j. referring students, where appropriate, to the relevant support services within the University;
      • k. before departing on any granted leave, ensure that all assessment work and other commitments have been completed, marks have been forwarded to the relevant Assessment Committees and arrangements have been made for another member of the teaching staff to answer any enquiries about subject results, exam results and supplementary assessments; and
      • l. notifying the Head of Unit, or the Dean, as appropriate, of potential or actual conflicts of interest which could unduly advantage, or disadvantage, a student in accordance with the Conflict of Interest Policy.

Casual Teaching Employees and Fractional Teaching Staff Coordinating Subjects

  • 7. Casual teaching employees and fractional staff appointed as Subject Coordinators are expected to meet the general requirements and responsibilities set out in sections 5.3to 5.6 of this Code as determined by the Head of Academic Unit.
  • 8. If a casual teaching employee or fractional staff member is unable to carry out the responsibilities set out in sections 5.3 to 5.6 of this Code, it is the responsibility of the Head of Academic Unit to delegate these responsibilities to another member of the teaching staff.

6 Subject Outlines

  • 1. Subject Outlines must be developed for each undergraduate and postgraduate coursework subject offered by the University.
  • 2. Subject Outlines must reflect the intended learning outcomes of the subject..
  • 3. Subject Outlines must include the information prescribed in Schedule 1 of this Code and any other special requirements demanded by the subject.
  • 4. Subject Outlines may vary in order to accommodate local differences, for example to lists of prescribed reading or key references, where a subject is taught offshore.
  • 5. Subject Outlines must outline which Faculty or discipline graduate qualities are addressed in the subject, and direct students to where they can find further information about these qualities and their link to the UOW Graduate Qualities.
  • 6. Subject Outlines must be distributed to students by the end of the first week of session or, where assessment methods and practices are finalised after consultation with students enrolled in the subject, no later than the second week of formal session.
  • 7. Subject Outlines may be distributed to students in either hard copy or electronically. Where a Subject Outline is distributed electronically, a hard copy must be provided to students on request.
  • 8. Content and assessment in the subject must be as specified in the Subject Outline.
  • 9. After distribution of the Subject Outlines to students (refer to 6.6 of this Code), any changes to the Subject Outlines which might adversely affect students’ engagement of the subject must only be made in exceptional circumstances. The following procedures must be undertaken prior to making the changes:
      • a. affected teaching staff must be notified of the intended change;
      • b. all students enrolled in the subject must be consulted and have the opportunity to provide feedback; and
      • c. approval in writing must be obtained from the Head of Unit and counter-signed by the Dean of the Faculty.

7 Assessment Practice

Assessment Methods and Tasks

  • 1. Assessment methods must be appropriate for the intended learning outcomes for a subject and/or course.
  • 2. Assessment methods may require reasonable adjustment for students with a disability.
  • 3. Clear criteria must be developed for marking all assessment tasks in a subject and details of the criteria must be communicated to students in the Subject Outline.
  • 4. No single assessment task will count for more than 70% of the final mark for the subject, except in subjects designated as research or creative projects.
  • 5. At least one assessment task for each subject must require students to produce written work (e.g. essay, problem solving exercise, short answer exercise).
  • 6. Group work must be assessed by means which allow the real contribution of each member of the group to be determined, taking into account the Good Practice – Assessment Guidelines. Group work must not constitute more than 50% of assessment for a subject unless approved by the Faculty.
  • 7. Where attendance requirements are set for a subject, attendance records must be kept. Marks cannot be awarded for attendance per se.
  • 8. Where class participation is used for assessment a record must be kept by the academic staff member conducting the class, taking into account the Good Practice – Assessment Guidelines, and retained in accordance with Schedule 2 of this Code.
  • 9. Where scaling is used in a subject, the method of scaling must be clearly stated in the Subject Outline and it must preserve the rank order within a cohort (refer to Schedule 1 of the Standards for the Finalisation of Student Results). No mark can be scaled down after the Release of Results by the Academic Registrar’s Division.
  • 10. Whether supplementary assessment will be offered to eligible students by the Faculty in accordance with the Supplementary Assessment Guidelines must be stated in the Subject Outline.
  • 11. Due dates for assessment tasks cannot be set during the study recess period, except with the prior approval of the Head of Academic Unit.

Feedback to Students

  • 12. Appropriate and useful feedback on performance in each assessment task (with the exception of a final examination) must be provided to students, taking into account the Good Practice – Assessment Guidelines.
  • 13. Feedback on at least one assessment task must be provided prior to the deadline for students to withdraw from a subject without academic penalty.
  • 14. Feedback on assessment tasks must be provided in time to enable students to improve their performance in areas of knowledge or skill development before further assessment.
  • 15. Assessment tasks, with the exception of a final examination, must be marked and made available for collection within 21 days of the submission date unless otherwise specified in the Subject Outline.
  • 16. Assessment tasks that are relevant for a final examination in a subject must be marked and made available for collection prior to the start of the examination period.
  • 17. Except in subjects which use pass/fail or satisfactory/unsatisfactory as part of their grading system, assessment tasks must be awarded a numerical mark.
  • 18. Following the Release of Results by the Academic Registrar’s Division, students have the right to obtain their final examination marks from the Subject Coordinator and to view and discuss the paper with the Subject Coordinator or, if not available, the Head of Academic Unit or nominee.

Procedures for Managing Submission and Return of Written Assessment Tasks

  • 19. Each academic unit must have written procedures, as specified in Schedule 1 of this Code, for the submission and return of written assessment tasks that provide safeguards against claims of non-receipt and non-return.
  • 20. Where assessment tasks are submitted electronically, an appropriate system for receipting must be used.
  • 21. Dates and times for submission of assessment tasks must be specified in the Subject Outline for each subject.
  • 22. Students who do not meet the specified deadline for an assessment task will be penalised as set out in the Subject Outline.
  • 23. Extensions may be given to students only in accordance with the Student Academic Consideration Policy.

Faculty Examinations

  • 24. The Faculty is responsible for setting the procedures and supervising in-session tests, taking into account the requirements set out in this Code, and the following University policies:
      • a. Workplace Health and Safety Policy,
      • b. Disability Policy – Students, and
      • c. Respect for Diversity Policy.

    Refer to the Good Practice Assessment Guidelines – In-session Tests.

  • 25. The dates and times for in-session tests must be set out in the Subject Outline in accordance with Schedule 1 of this Code. Alternative arrangements for students who are unable to attend in-session tests must be made in accordance with the Student Academic Consideration Policy.

Determination of Final Results

  • 26. The Faculty must follow the processes for determining and declaring students’ marks and grades as stipulated in the Standards for the Finalisation of Student Results.
  • 27. The responsibilities of the Faculty Assessment Committee and the Academic Unit Assessment Committee are set out in the Standards for the Finalisation of Academic Results.
  • 28. In accordance with the General Course Rules:
      • a. an approved grade of performance and an overall mark (except where a subject is marked on a pass/fail or satisfactory/unsatisfactory basis) will be determined, declared and released for each subject in which a student is enrolled; and,
      • b. a Withheld result may be granted in a subject and must be declared ten weeks after the release of results date, or later only if an extension has been approved by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education).
  • 29. Unless otherwise approved, the final assessment mark for each student in a subject shall be determined on the scale of 0 to 100% by the methods set out in the Subject Outline.
  • 30. Where an incorrect grade or mark has been declared as a result of an administrative error, the amended result(s) must be approved as per the Standards for the Finalisation of Student Results for late or amended results.
  • 31. The approved grades of performance for undergraduate subjects, honours programs and postgraduate subjects are set out in the General Course Rules.

8 Assessment of Honours Projects

Assessment of Honours Projects with a weighting of 24 credit points or more

  • 1. The requirements set out in this section apply to the assessment of an Honours Project with a weighting of 24 credit points or more. Honours Degree courses that include a project with a lesser weighting may also choose to adopt the procedures set out in this section.
  • 2. Documented quality assurance processes must be in place in each academic unit to ensure the independent, transparent and impartial assessment of all Honours Projects.
  • 3. All procedures and processes concerning the assessment of Honours Projects must be approved by the relevant Faculty Education Committee and identified in the Honours Guide for that Faculty, Academic Unit or course.
  • 4. The assessment of an Honours Project is to be undertaken by two honours examiners. Where possible, at least one of the honours examiners should be external. An honours examiner is external when the honours examiner is external to the Academic Unit and may be external to the Faculty or to the University.
  • 5. Notwithstanding clause 8.4, each Academic Unit must externally benchmark the standard of honours projects in each Honours Degree course against comparable Australian universities at least once every three (3) years. External benchmarking may involve:
    • 5.1. the use honours examiners from another Australian university for the examination of a representative sample of Honours Projects; or
    • 5.2. review of a representative sample of Honours Projects by academics from at least one other Australian university as part of quality assurance of the standard of Honours Projects.

Choice of Honours Examiners

  • 6. Honours examiners shall be chosen by the Supervisor in consultation with the head of the Academic Unit (who may delegate this function to the Honours Coordinator).
  • 7. A Supervisor cannot examine an Honours Project with a weighting of 24cp or more that they have supervised.
  • 8. To be suitable for the role, an honours examiner must be familiar with the expectations and requirements of an Honours Degree course. They must also:
          • a. hold an AQF Level 9 qualification or higher, or equivalent; and
          • b. be an active researcher or have a proven research record; or
          • c. have previous successful experience in supervision or examination of Honours Degree students; or
          • d. have some research experience and have substantial specialised knowledge in the subject matter of the Honours Project.

Examination Process

  • 9. Honours examiners are to be given up to three weeks to provide a report to the relevant Assessment Committee, to enable the Faculty to meet University deadlines for the declaration of marks and for students to be considered for scholarships and/or graduation.
  • 10. Honours examiners shall be provided with a clear written brief which covers the following:
          • a. the essential requirements of the course;
          • b. marking procedures, including the method of (and deadline for) reporting their assessment the relevant Academic Unit;
          • c. clear marking criteria for use in assessing the Honours Project;
          • d. the relative weighting of the Honours Project compared with other assessment components;
          • e. the requirement that honours examiners submit independent results;
          • f. any other matters that the Academic Unit considers appropriate.
  • 11. Until the assessment of an Honours Project is complete and a report is submitted by an honours examiner, all communication between the honours examiner and the University regarding the Honours Project shall be directed through the Honours Coordinator, or the head of the relevant Academic Unit or, if the head of the Academic Unit is the Honours Degree student’s Supervisor, another nominated academic.
  • 12. Honours Degree students and Supervisors shall not contact any honours examiner concerning the assessment of the Honours Project until the reports of all honours examiners are returned to and acted on by the Assessment Committee of the Academic Unit.
  • 13. Supervisors should be permitted to view the assessment reports and raise issues or points of clarification prior to the Academic Unit or Faculty Assessment Committee meeting.
  • 14. The assessment reports from the honours examiners and the marks recorded for both the Honours Project and any coursework components are to be forwarded to the relevant Assessment Committee for final declaration of mark.
  • 15. The names of the honours examiners and copies of the honours examiners’ reports will be made available to the student after the final mark has been declared.
  • 16. Each Faculty shall have written procedures for dealing with discrepancies between honours examiners’ marks for an Honours Project, approved by the Faculty Education Committee. These procedures shall be communicated to students in the Honours Guide.
  • 17. Where there is a discrepancy of more than ten percentage points between the marks determined by any two honours examiners, and the discrepancy cannot be resolved by discussion between the honours examiners, an additional marker shall be appointed by the head of the Academic Unit to assess the Honours Project. When this delays the assessment process, the Honours Degree student should be notified that further advice has been sought.
  • 18. Each Faculty must have written procedures that specify:
          • a. the role of additional honours examiners (for example, whether they are ‘blind’ honours examiners who are not provided with previous honours examiners’ reports or adjudicators who have access to those reports);
          • b. how a final mark is to be determined following a report by an additional honours examiner and;
          • c. where the additional honours examiner is an adjudicator, the criteria for selecting that honours examiner.
  • 19. The Academic Unit Assessment Committee (where appropriate) is responsible for recommending the overall Honours mark to the Faculty Assessment Committee but, in all cases, the Faculty Assessment Committee declares the final mark.

Assessment of Honours Projects with a weighting of less than 24 credit points

  • 20. The owning Faculty of an Honours Degree course that includes an Honours Project with a weighting of less than 24 credit points may choose to adopt the assessment procedures set out in section 8.1 - 8.18.
  • 21. Where the procedures set out in section 8.1 - 8.18 are not adopted, section 7 of the Code of Practice - Teaching and Assessment applies to the assessment of the Honours Project.
  • 22. In addition, the Academic Unit must have written procedures, approved by the Faculty Education Committee, that state:
          • a. how honours examiners are chosen;
          • b. where any of the honours examiners are external to the university, how their qualifications are assessed and how they are briefed;
          • c. the role of the Supervisor in the assessment of the Honours Project;
          • d. the relationship that should exist between Supervisor(s) and honours examiner(s) during the assessment process (e.g. what contact can take place);
          • e. where there is more than one honours examiner, how discrepancies between the marks allocated by honours examiners should be resolved.
  • 23. Where the Supervisor also acts as an honours examiner of an Honours Project with a weighting of less than 24cp they have supervised, there must be at one additional honours examiner appointed to assess the Honours Project.
  • 24. All assessment procedures concerning Honours Projects shall be set out in the Honours Guide.

9 Retention of Assessment Records

  • 1. Schedule 2 to this Code – the Retention of Assessment Records sets out the procedures by which academic staff, academic units and Faculties and the Academic Registrar’s Division are required to retain assessment documents in order to meet the University’s obligations under the State Records Act 1998.
  • 2. It is the academic or business unit’s responsibility to ensure physical retention and disposal of documents (any format, including electronic) is consistent with the State Records Act 1998 and the University’s Records Management Policy.
  • 3. Assessment records must be retained as prescribed by Schedule 2 of this Code.

10 Student Grievances

  • 1. A student who has a complaint regarding adherence to any of the requirements in this Code should be referred to the grievance resolution procedures contained in the Academic Grievance Policy (Coursework and Honours Students) and the procedures of the Faculty responsible for the subject.
  • 2. Student academic consideration is available to students whose work is affected by serious documented illness or misadventure. (Refer to Student Academic Consideration Policy.)

Grievances concerning Assessment Outcomes – Honours Projects

  • 3. Where the assessment of an Honours Projects is subject to moderation processes involving the use of two honours examiners to examine the Honours Project, there is no provision for an academic review of the mark or grade awarded for an Honours Project.
  • 4. Any student with a complaint regarding any other aspect of the outcome of the Honours Project should pursue their concerns by making a complaint using the Academic Grievance Policy (Coursework and Honours Students).
  • 5. Inadequate supervision or other arrangements during the period of study will not be taken into consideration in reviewing the assessment of an Honours Project, unless documented efforts have been made by the Honours Degree student to report these issues which have not been adequately addressed.

11 Version Control and Change History

Version Control

Date Effective

Approved By

Amendment

1

10 October 1997

University Council

Amendments to code to provide for students to have at least a 7 day study break before exams.

2

24 November 1999

Academic Senate

Amendments to provide for email submission of assignments

3

18 August 2000

University Council

Amendments to obligations relating to periods for retention of assessment items.

4

18 October 2000

Academic Senate

Amendments to Section 1.2

5

1 January 2004

Academic Senate

Amendments to sections 5.4.1, 5.4.2 and 8.4

6

11 February 2005

University Council

Amendments to Schedule 2

7

9 November 2005

Academic Senate

Amendments to Schedule 2 relating to retention of records

8

8 March 2006

Academic Senate

Amendments to Schedule 3 in order to comply with records management legislation.

9

1 January 2008

University Council

Consequential amendments on the approval of the Graduate Qualities Policy

10

1 November 2007 (Schedule 1) and Autumn Session 2008

University Council

Major review and revision triggered by changes to Student Conduct Rules and Assessment Committee Standards. New Schedule 1 Subject Outline Checklist.

11

December 2007

Vice Principal (Administration)

Minor amendments:

References to Student Academic Consideration Policy replacing Special Consideration Policy; references to Rules for Student Conduct & Discipline replaced by Student Conduct Rules and accompanying procedures.

12

5 February 2009

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic)

Migrated to UOW Policy Template as per Policy Directory Refresh

13

19 June 2009

University Council

Minor amendments to clauses 3.1, 3.2, 5.1, and 5.4 to clarify requirements when offering subjects where the primary or only assessment task is a research or creative project.

14

13 August 2009

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic)

Minor amendment to replace reference to SEDLOs with reference to Student Support Advisers.

15

9 March 2010

Vice-Principal (Administration)

Future review date identified in accordance with Standard on UOW Policy

16

Autumn Session 2011

University Council – 3 Dec 2010

Major Review.

17

16 January 2013

Vice-Principal (Administration)

Updated to reflect changes from DVC(A) to DVC(E) and OHS to WHS.

18

8 February 2013

University Council

Amendments to Schedule 1, Clause 12 regarding information to be provided to students in subject outlines regarding academic integrity and plagiarism.

19

13 February 2014

Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education)

Updated to reflect changes from Dean of Students to Student Ombudsman.

20

11 April 2014

University Council

Amendments to reflect the implementation of the new Standards for the Finalisation of Student Results, which replace the previous Assessment Committee Standards and Assessment Guidelines – Scaling.

21

Spring Session

University Council

Addition of the provisions now in section 8 regarding the assessment of Honours projects and section 10.3-10.4 regarding the grievances processes specific to Honours students.

Schedule 1 – Subject Outline Checklist and General Advice

  • 1. It is University policy that a Subject Outline must be developed for every undergraduate and postgraduate coursework subject (refer to 6.1 of this Code). All commitments and requirements of staff and students stipulated in a Subject Outline must be adhered to.
  • 2. Subject Outlines must be approved in accordance with this Code.
  • 3. The information in the Checklist below must be included in the Subject Outline as a minimum requirement (refer to 6.3).
  • 4. The information under General Advice must be provided to every student at least once each session. General Advice can be provided as part of the Subject Outline, or in an Academic Unit-produced handbook, guide or information package. General Advice must be distributed in the same way as Subject Outlines (see sections 6.6 and 6.7 of the Code of Practice – Teaching & Assessment).

Subject Outline Checklist

Section A - Subject Information

The following information must be included in each Subject Outline.

  • 1. Name of Faculty and academic unit
  • 2. Subject code and title in full and the number of credit points allocated to the subject
  • 3. Modes of delivery
  • 4. Locations of delivery
  • 5. The following details:
      • a. subject coordinator including name, office location, telephone number, and consultation modes and times (where possible);
      • b. where possible, identification of lecturer/s and tutor/s, telephone numbers, and consultation modes and times.
  • 6. Intended learning outcomes of the subject
  • 7. The Faculty or Discipline Qualities addressed in the subject, and advice on where students can find further information about these Qualities and how they link with the University’s Graduate Qualities
  • 8. Mandatory minimum attendance requirements, where relevant (in accordance with General Course Rule 8.8).
  • 9. Tutorial/laboratory times, where possible
  • 10. List of prescribed reading
  • 11. List of key references, including the statement (where relevant) that recommended readings are not intended as an exhaustive list and that students should use the Library catalogue and databases to locate additional resources.
  • 12. Any materials that should be purchased
  • 13. Any recent changes made to the subject, and the reason(s), for example in response to feedback from student surveys or external reviews
  • 14. Clear advice on where students will find other relevant Faculty or University information, such as in a Faculty handbook or guide, as set out in the General Advice section below.

Section B - Assessment Information

The following information must be included in the Subject Outline.

  • 1. Details of the assessment tasks to be used to assess the subject.
  • 2. Weight to be given to each assessment task in determining the final result.
  • 3. Details of criteria used to assess each assessment task or details of where the criteria can be found.
  • 4. Where a student is required to perform to a specified level in an assessment task in order to gain a pass for the subject, a statement that students who do not meet the minimum performance level requirements as set out in the Subject Outline will be given a Fail grade or TF (Technical Fail) grade on their Academic Transcript, in accordance with the General Course Rules.
  • 5. Requirements on student contributions to tutorials and/or seminars and details of criteria for assessing such contributions.
  • 6. Where marks in a subject are routinely scaled, the method of scaling used.
  • 7. Dates for submission or presentation of any assessment task and times, where relevant.
  • 8. Clearly stated penalties for late submission of assessment tasks.
  • 9. Whether supplementary assessments are offered by the Faculty to eligible students under the Supplementary Assessments Guidelines.
  • 10. The details of the type of referencing system to be used for written work.
      • a. the Author-Date (Harvard) referencing system is the University’s default referencing system to be used in the absence of a documented faculty/school preferred referencing styles. Include a link (Refer to the Library Referencing and Citing link); or
      • b. if a faculty/school preferred referencing style is to be used include this link (Refer to UOW Referencing Style Guides).
  • 11. Use of internet resources and any restrictions placed on use of internet sources.
  • 12. A reference to the University’s Academic Integrity & Plagiarism Policy, along with the statement below:
    • “The University’s Academic Integrity and Plagiarism Policy, Faculty Handbooks and subject guides clearly set out the University’s expectation that students submit only their own original work for assessment and avoid plagiarising the work of others or cheating. Re-using any of your own work (either in part or in full) which you have submitted previously for assessment is not permitted without appropriate acknowledgement. Plagiarism can be detected and has led to students being expelled from the University.
    • The use by students of any website that provides access to essays or other assessment items (sometimes marketed as ‘resources’), is extremely unwise. Students who provide an assessment item (or provide access to an assessment item) to others, either directly or indirectly (for example by uploading an assessment item to a website) are considered by the university to be intentionally or recklessly helping other students to cheat. This is considered academic misconduct and students place themselves at risk of being expelled from the University.“
  • 13. If relevant, dates, time and location of in-session tests.
  • 14. The following procedures for assessed work must be included in the Subject Outline:
      • a. Method of submitting each assessment task (e.g. hard copy, online, email).
      • b. Arrangements for acknowledging submission of written work.
      • c. Procedures for the return of assessed work.
      • d. Procedures for the retention of written work.

General Advice

  • 1. The general advice in this section must be provided to students at least once every session in which the student is studying. The Subject Outline must direct students to where they can find this advice (such as in a Faculty handbook or guide).
  • 2. References to the following University policies and relevant faculty procedures must be included with web links:
      • a. Code of Practice – Teaching and Assessment
      • b. Code of Practice – Research, where relevant
      • c. Code of Practice – Honours, where relevant
      • d. Student Charter
      • e. Code of Practice – Student Professional Experience, where relevant
      • f. Academic Integrity and Plagiarism Policy
      • g. Student Academic Consideration Policy
      • h. Course Progress Policy
      • i. Graduate Qualities Policy
      • j. Academic Grievance Policy (Coursework and Honours Students)
      • k. Inclusive Language Guidelines
      • l. Workplace Health and Safety, where relevant
      • m. Intellectual Property Policy
      • n. IP Student Assignment of Intellectual Property Policy, where relevant
      • o. Policy on Ethical Objection by Students to the Use of Animal and Animal Products in Coursework Subjects, where relevant
      • p. Human Research Ethics Guidelines, where relevant
      • q. Animal Research Guidelines, where relevant
      • r. Student Conduct Rules and accompanying Procedures or Research Misconduct Policy for research students
  • 3. Reference to where students can access information on student support services and facilities.
  • 4. Where relevant, guidelines on the use of email to contact teaching staff, mobile phone use in class, and information on or a link to the University guide to eLearning ‘Netiquette’.( http://www.uow.edu.au/student/elearning/netiquette/index.html).

Schedule 2 – Retention of Assessment Records

Preamble

  • 1. The State Records Act 1998 and the University’s Records Management Policy place specific restrictions on the release, retention and return of students’ academic work (assessment and examinations) and the records and documents relating to the assessment of students’ work. The assessment of student work is a public activity, and processes for the retention of assessment records should be conducted within the constraints provided by the University Privacy Policy and the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998.
  • 2. This Schedule for Retention of Assessment Records sets out the procedures by which Academic staff, Academic Units and Faculties and the Academic Registrar’s Division are required to retain assessment records in order to meet the University’s obligations under the State Records Act 1998.
  • 3. It is the academic or business unit’s responsibility to ensure physical retention and disposal of documents (any format, including electronic) is consistent with the State Records Act 1998 and the University’s Records Management Policy. For information on the physical retention and disposal of records contact the Records System Administrator on 4221 4374.

Definitions

  • 4. The term ‘assessment’ used in this schedule is consistent with the definition in the State Records Act 1998 – “the process of testing knowledge and understanding of candidates for degrees, programs etc by examination and other techniques.”

Related Legislation and Policies

State Records Act 1998 (Refer to General Disposal Authority– University Records GDA23)

State Records Act 1998 (Refer to General Disposal Authority – Committees GDA2)

Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act, 1998 (NSW).

UOW Records Management Policy

University Privacy Policy

UOW Code of Practice – Teaching and Assessment

UOW Standards for the Finalisation of Student Results

Activity

Retention requirement

Disposal/

Custody/

Transfer

Responsibility

1 Assessment Policy and Procedures

1.1

Master set of policies

Retain 10 years after policy superseded.

Required as State Archives

ARD

1.2

Master set of procedures

Retain minimum 10 years after procedure superseded.

Then destroy

ARD

1.3

Records relating to the development and maintenance of policies and procedures.

Retain minimum 10 years after policy or procedure superseded.

Then destroy

ARD

2 Assessment Committees - records and minutes

2.1

Master set of minutes, agenda and related papers.

Retain for minimum of 5 years after action completed or decision made.

Then destroy

Faculties

3 Subject resources and material used in course delivery

3.1

Including subject outlines, assignment lists, study guides etc.

Retain at least until no longer required for teaching or other purposes e.g. historical records and later student requests for Advanced Standing (10 years is recommended).

Then destroy

Faculties

4 Student Academic Misconduct

All records and documents relating to student academic misconduct and particularly to misconduct which may affect academic grades or assessments such as plagiarism or cheating in exams. Includes investigations, appeals, reporting, notification, allegations, recommendations and disciplinary action taken.

NB: ARD will continue to maintain the database on student academic misconduct.

NB: See 4.5 for cases that involve abuse or neglect of children.

4.1

Records relating to disciplinary proceedings where a student is found to have committed a breach and serious disciplinary action is taken.

Retain for minimum of 6 years after date of graduation or discontinuation of course of study.

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

4.2

Records relating to disciplinary proceedings where a student is found to have committed a breach but minor or no disciplinary action is taken.

Retain for a minimum of 2 years after date of graduation or discontinuation of course or study.

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

4.3

Records relating to preliminary/fact finding investigations of misconduct that were not proceeded with and disciplinary matters where a student is found not to have committed a breach. This includes allegations found to be false, vexatious, unsubstantiated or misconceived or could not be proven.

Retain for minimum of 1 year after action completed.

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

4.4

Meeting papers, including master set of minutes and agenda of student discipline and conduct committees

Retain for minimum of 10 years and action completed.

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

4.5

Records of cases involving suspected or proven abuse or neglect of children.

Retain for minimum of 99 years after action completed.

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

5 Student Complaints & Appeals/Academic Consideration Requests

Appeals, grievances and complaints relating to examination/assessment results

Requests from students that student academic consideration be given due to circumstances which affected their performance in an examination or assessment activity.

5.1

Records and documents relating to appeals, reassessment, academic consideration, grievances and complaints.

Retain for minimum of 5 years after that date of graduation or discontinuation of course of study.

Then destroy

ARD

Faculties

Student Ombudsman

6 Student Assessment Tasks – assessment by written or oral examination, assignments, presentation, thesis, etc.

This relates to students’ assessment tasks which have been made available for collection but are unclaimed and remain in the custody of the Academic Unit or Faculty.

Thesis refers to Research Paper worth at least 24 credit points.

Minor Thesis refers to Research Paper worth less than 24 credit points.

NB: This does not relate to the Libraries requirements on the retention of theses.

6.1

Assessment work with the exception of theses.

Retain at least until the end of the appeal period, with the exemption of theses (appeal period is 21 days after distribution of mark or release of final grade – refer to Academic Grievance Policy-Coursework & Honours Students).

Then destroy

Faculties

6.2

Theses submitted or completed by students for the purposes of assessment or evaluation.

Retain for minimum of 3 years after date of submission unless the faculty has a policy to retain theses.

Then destroy

Faculties

6.3

Exam answer papers

Retain for 1 year after end of the examination period.

Then destroy

Faculties

6.4

Professional Experience – administrative records for arrangements and liaison with placement providers.

Retain for minimum of 1 year after action completed.

Then destroy

Faculties

6.5

Professional Experience – summary records for courses of study where the number of hours completed and proof of satisfactory performance may be required for accreditation purposes (e.g. nursing and teaching professional experience).

Retain for 50 years after completion of course of study.

Then destroy

Faculties

7 Results

Grading/marking of individual assessment components of a subject or course such as assignments, essays, theses.

All individual assessment task marks, or composite marks up to 10% for equivalent tasks worth 3% or less, must be entered into SMP at or before the time the mark is provided to the student so that a central record is maintained. Where it is not practical to maintain individual assessment task marks in SMP, result spreadsheets should be kept in the University’s network drive so that they are included in periodic IT back up exercises.

NB This does not include the final grade of a subject or course or the actual assessment items

7.1

Any records relating to the marking, or grading of individual assessment components of a subject or course e.g. class rolls, spreadsheet of results.

NB: These records need to be retained to allow students the opportunity to appeal.

Retain for minimum of 1 year after end of appeal period.

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

7.2

Records of determination of final results/grades

Retain for minimum of 1 year after end of appeal period.

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

7.3

Records relating to appeals of grades.

Retain for minimum of 1 year after action completed.

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

7.4

Records relating to changes to assessment results

Retain for minimum of 6 years after completion or discontinuation of course or program of study.

Then destroy

ARD

Faculties

8 Transcripts/final results

The official record of the marks/grades achieved by a student in the course of the degree or program undertaken.

8.1

Student academic transcript/final results

 

Required as State Archives

ARD

8.2

Final grades of non-award courses.

Retain for minimum of 75 years after action completed.

Then destroy

ARD

Faculties

8.3

Results of externally accredited courses (e.g. VETAB).

Retain for minimum of 30 years after action completed.

Then destroy

ARD

Faculties

8.4

Paper records of student academic transcript/final results which have been converted to electronic format and records relating to requests for academic transcripts.

Retain until no longer required for reference purposes.

Then destroy

ARD

8.5

Records relating to requests for verification of qualifications or graduation status.

Retain for minimum of 1 year after action completed.

Then destroy

ARD

9 Records and administrative arrangements for examinations and assessment activities e.g. classes, tutorials and laboratory sessions.

Includes supervision, timetabling, eligibility lists, provision of materials, objections to taking part, special accommodation arrangements

9.1

Records relating to attendance e.g., rolls, sick leave forms, medical certificates.

Retain for 1 year after end of the examination period

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

9.2

Records relating to attendance for professional experience where students are working with children e.g. nursing and education

Retain for minimum of 10 years after action completed.

Then destroy

Faculties

9.3

Records relating to administration of examinations and assessment activities

Retain until no longer required for reference use

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

9.4

Examinations – master set of question paper.

 

Required as State Archives

Faculties

10 Records relating to assessment of students in order to identify those whose progression may require intervention e.g. Minimum Rate of Progress.

Includes decisions, requests from students to ‘show cause’, notification of exclusion and conditional enrolment, documentation from students, monitoring of student progress and appeals

10.1

Records relating to assessment of students in relation to minimum rate of progress.

Retain for minimum of 6 years after student has completed or discontinued course of study

Then destroy

Faculties

ARD

10.2

Records of committees (including ad hoc committees) responsible for assessing student progression cases.

Retain for minimum of 6 years after action completed.

Then destroy

ARD

Faculties

11 Supervision of Higher Degree Research Students

Supervision of higher degree students (e.g. Masters & PHD level students).

11.1

Records, policies and procedures relating to the supervision of Higher Degree Research Students, including advice and liaison between a supervisor and student.

Retain for 7 years after Higher Degree awarded.

Then destroy

Research Office

11.2

Records relating to appointment of thesis examiner, assessors and supervisors.

Retain for 7 years after Higher Degree awarded.

Then destroy

Research Office

11.3

Thesis examiners/assessors’ reports and related records.

Retain for 7 years after Higher Degree awarded.

Then destroy

Research Office

11.4

Theses or other significant work.

Retain for 7 years after Higher Degree awarded.

Copy retained in Library

Research Office

Schedule 3 – Subject Quota Guidelines

1 Introduction/Background

  • 1. Subject quotas may be imposed in order to efficiently and equitably manage the University’s learning and teaching resources.

2 Scope/Purpose

  • 1. These guidelines are to be taken into account in imposing quotas for subject delivered onshore at the University and subjects comprising University of Wollongong award courses that are offered offshore and are maintained on the UOW Subject Database.

3 Definitions

Word/term

Definition (with examples if required)

Quota

A quota is a specified maximum number of students allowed to enrol in a subject instance.

Session

Has the same meaning as specified in the General Course Rules

Student

Has the same meaning as specified in the General Course Rules.

Subject

A self-contained unit of study identified by a unique code on the Subject Database

Subject instance

A unique code allocated to each location and timeframe in which a subject is offered (e.g. MARK101 is a subject, and each session and location specific offering of the subject will have a unique subject instance code)

4 Notice and Approval Provisions

  • 1. The introduction of quotas and changes to quotas must be approved by the Dean of the Faculty offering the subject, following consultation with the Head of School. If the quota is likely to have an adverse affect on students’ course progress, or on other schools within the faculty, the matter should also be referred to the Faculty Education Committee for comment.
  • 2. If quotas are to be imposed in respect of a subject instance, students must have adequate notice provided prior to the completion of the preceding session. The notice must be sufficient to enable students to arrange their course plans to fulfil requirements for majors, core and/or elective subjects.
  • 3. Notification should be by way of an appropriate entry on the Subject Database or by other appropriate means. Where other means are used, this should be notified no later than the preceding November for subjects offered in Autumn Session in the following academic year, or at the commencement of Autumn Session for subjects offered in Spring Session.
  • 4. A quota should only be imposed on the basis of acceptable reasons, such as:
      • a. availability of laboratory facilities is limited and not able to be increased;
      • b. availability of clinical training facilities is limited and unable to be increased;
      • c. availability of other teaching facilities is limited and unable to be increased;
      • d. availability of professional experience opportunities is limited and unable to be increased;
      • e. availability of supervision is limited and unable to be increased;
      • f. availability of staff to manage activities is limited and unable to be increased;
      • g. impact of proposed assessment tasks is significant and requires limits to be imposed on student numbers; and/or
      • h. availability of teaching resources is scarce and unable to be increased.
  • 5. In exceptional circumstances, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education) may approve an application for a subject quota to be imposed on a subject up to 2 weeks before the start of the session in which the subject being offered.

5 Criteria for Determining Student Selection

  • 1. Where a subject quota is applied, the Head of Unit must determine which students should be offered entry to the subject based upon the following criteria:
      • a. a student’s need to complete the subject to fulfil the requirements of a declared major and/or core requirements;
      • b. other subject enrolment options available to the student;
      • c. any special needs relating to a student with a registered disability; and
      • d. any special requirements arising from the needs of a student who is a member of another DEEWR defined equity category.
  • 2. The academic unit may adopt additional criteria in addition to those set out in section 15.11 above.

6 Roles & Responsibilities

  • 1. Subject Coordinators are responsible for:
      • a. Identifying and seeking approval for subject instances where a subject quota should be applied;
      • b. Ensuring the Subject Database is promptly updated to display subject quotas for each affected subject instance; and
      • c. In consultation with the Head of Unit, setting additional criteria for determining selection of students to be offered entry to subjects with a subject quota.
  • 2. Heads of Unit are responsible for determining which students will be offered a place in a subject to which a quota applied in accordance with the criteria in section 15 of these Guidelines.
  • 3. Faculty Deans are responsible for approving applications for the imposition of subject quotas on being satisfied of the existence of acceptable reasons for the imposition of a quota.
  • 4. The Academic Registrar’s Division is responsible for overall management of the Subject Database.
Last reviewed: 30 September, 2014

Here to Help

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