Assessment lifecycle

Individual assignment tasks are described in unit specifications. Unit leaders are free to choose whatever type and size of assignment task they think will best allow students to demonstrate achievement of the unit learning outcomes. Assessment tasks should be selected to enable students to demonstrate their achievement of the unit learning outcomes. The University does not prescribe what kinds of tasks should be used and you have a very wide choice of possibilities.

What your assessment task should include

• Show that students have achieved the unit learning outcomes.
• Be straightforward to mark.
• Be understandable to students.
• Involve a consideration of ‘Active Learning’ approaches.

It is also a reasonable aspiration to design something that students will find challenging, rewarding, and interesting, and that you would actually enjoy marking: student submissions are where you can see what your students have achieved.

You have a lot of flexibility over the assignment type when you are writing a new unit, or updating an existing one. Your first choice is whether to make the task time-constrained (usually called an examination), or completed over a period of time (usually called coursework). They test different types of learning outcomes; an examination tests recall and ability to work under pressure of time; coursework allows submissions to be developed over time, discussed, and refined. There is often a balance of types across a programme.

The specification of assignments is done in unit documentation, which is usually written during Programme Approval or Review. These details may only be amended outside these processes as part of a programme amendment.

It is important to give a sense of the size of the submission which will be expected. At Manchester Met this decision is up to the unit leader, although you may choose as a programme team to have a standard approach.

You need to agree an approach to penalties which is consistent across a programme team, which will avoid confusion for students and colleagues.

All elements of summative assessment within a course unit shall be marked out of 100. The weighted average mark for the course unit shall then be calculated from the marks for the individual elements of summative assessment. The weighted average mark for the course unit shall also be expressed as a mark out of 100.

Penalties for overlong assignments are a matter of choice for the unit leader, and could help you to manage your time effectively as well as to ensure that students are not advantaged by writing a great deal more than you had intended and therefore able to cover more. You can either only mark up to a specified point (3000 words, or 20 minutes presentation, for instance) or you can apply a marks penalty for an overlong submission. This is an indicative example, but there isn’t a regulation about it at Manchester Met. You need to agree an approach to penalties which is consistent across a programme team, which will avoid confusion for students and colleagues.

The table below offers an indicative example of a marks penalty, but there isn’t a regulation about it at Manchester Met.

We encourage students at Man Met to have opportunities to check how well they are doing using ‘formative’ assessments. These can be, e.g. short tests, quick tasks, quizzes, group or pair work exercises (see assessment examples). You can check what students have learnt so far and find out which areas of work need more consideration.  In addition, students may receive feedback comments from tutors (or other students) on specific things they have done well and how they can improve in other areas. Reflecting on formative work and feedback is a good way for students to identify strengths and weaknesses and take appropriate action (e.g. look for support). Formative assessments do not contribute to an overall award yet still provide a meaningful opportunity for constructive feedforward. Because formative assessment does not directly contribute to an overall grade, it is therefore considered a low-stakes assessment.  

Summative assessments aim to evaluate student learning in relation to unit learning outcomes. Final grades contribute to the overall credits awarded and are sometimes referred to as high-stakes assessments.  

The undergraduate pass mark is 40%, and the post-graduate pass mark is 50%. The numerical grade given to students shows how well they generally did in the assessment. When assessed in this ‘summative’ way, students will also be given comments on specific things they did well and some areas they can improve, and how to make this improvement (feedback on what you have done this time and feedforward to help you do better next time). Careful consideration of tutor feedback and feedforward will help students plan future work effectively.  

Credit is awarded by summative assessment of work and is determined with respect to unit learning outcomes.  The learning outcomes represent threshold statements that must be met for a student to be awarded credit at a given academic level, with the fine-graded mark (0-100) arrived at through the application of assessment criteria.  The approach of Constructive Alignment requires students to have a taught experience that will enable them to be successful when assessed using assessment criteria aligned to learning outcomes (AQQ, UK Quality Code).  

Manchester Met Assessment Regulations are built on the UK Quality Code and require us to award credit for what students will know and be able to do that is level appropriate. Despite some professional bodies requiring a minimum attendance for particular activities, it wouldn’t be appropriate to include this as it is not a meaningfully accessible behaviour as there is no learning required to attend. Therefore, if you were to include attendance in a learning outcome, you are reducing the marks available for other, more relevant learning. It is also problematic to award marks for attendance as it can not be graded, the learner simply attends, or they don’t and, therefore, could only conceivably receive a pass or a fail.  

The Curriculum and Assessment Framework for Taught Programmes states that an assignment brief should be provided for each task, and should include at least the following information:

• How marks for individual pieces of work will be apportioned.
• The assessment criteria.
• Submission date.
• Method of submission.
• The date and method for the return of grades and feedback to students.

Programme teams are free to develop their own assignment brief templates and it makes sense to have a standard format across the programme so that students can quickly find the information they need. The information can be presented as part of the unit handbook, or as a separate Moodle section or downloadable document, or however you think will work best for your students. Many unit leaders also provide a video version of the assignment brief.

Video Assignment Briefs

Using video assignment briefs is a good way of making sure there is a single definitive explanation of the assignment which both students and tutors can refer to. A good video assignment brief is concise, but aims to answer frequently asked questions about the assignment.

The simplest way to write criteria is to start with one of the learning outcomes, think about what you would like to see in the assignment to demonstrate a bare pass, and then formulate it into a sentence. Then try to imagine the characteristics of a perfect piece of work, and write a sentence to capture this. Next, fill in the bands in between, and finally the fail band(s). In general, try to keep the same basic sentence structure but use descriptive adjectives to show the differences between bands. Try to avoid ‘excellent’ and ‘good’, as these can be difficult to explain. You can find a list of adjectives in this example standards descriptors resource, they are a useful starting point when considering the development of marking criteria at each level. The use of common standard descriptors across a level or a complete programme will make it easier for students to judge their progress between different units and should facilitate moderation discussions about assignments. See Policies and Procedures for the Management of Assessment for more regulatory information.

A feedback plan should be provided in the assignment brief for each assignment task. This plan will describe the nature and extent of the feedback which will be provided, and show how feedback is used during the unit both formatively and summatively to support learning for this task and for future learning. The feedback plan should take into account what the student is likely to be doing as a next step and how the timing, quantity and type of feedback will help to support this.

The Learner Development team provide a wide array of support for students with their assignments, both prior to starting an assignment, during and after. We have a large number of independent study provision consisting of videos and screencasts which all contain activities to help their learning. These resources can be directed to students, either within their feedback or during their course. We are also able to support assignment preparedness within their unit, so if there is a common development need for your students we can run bespoke live online sessions to meet their needs.

We actively encourage students to engage with all forms of our provision from our self-access materials to our 1:1 appointments in a timely manner. For example, our writing feedback can be useful at any stage of the writing process, as the feedback is designed to be developmental, rather than in the final stages or checking a completed draft. Similarly, a student might wish to book a 1:1 appointment upon receiving their assignment feedback to help them understand any developmental comments ready for their next assignment. Please note, there becomes high demand for some of our provision the closer to assignment deadlines, and so students are encouraged to seek support as early as they can, so as not to be disappointed. 

If you would like to discuss how we can support your students in-curriculum please don’t hesitate to get in contact either by emailing us at [email protected] or by making contact with your academic and study skills link tutor. Please note all students should email [email protected] as this means we will always be able to respond!

Study Skills website

Access support through virtual one-to-one appointments, live webinars or online resources.

Academic and Study Skills Moodle page

Here you will find screen-casts and slides for all Academic and Study Skills workshops, course materials, routes to access feedback on drafts of work, and much more!

Academic and Study Skills intranet page

Learn more about the Learner Development team. 

Understanding university grades

This short introductory video guides you through what the different levels of study mean, and helps you to understand the different marks you’ll receive when at University. 

Marking student work is probably one of the most challenging things you do as an academic. It is a high-stakes activity and one that can unify staff and students, as we are all equally concerned about fairness in the awarding of grades and student progression. There are things for the programme team to think about before, during and after marking to manage this process, which is summarised below. Before, during and after marking to manage this process, see the Assessment Management Toolkit for more information.

Writing useful feedback for students should help them to recognise their strengths and how they have performed against the unit’s learning outcomes. However, it should also signpost them to things they can work on to improve and develop in future assessments, in other words feedforward. This recording provides a useful reminder of this and other feedback principles.

Before marking, unit leaders should:

1. Apply the marking and feedback approaches set out by the programme in the assessment management (opens in a new tab) plan. If a plan is not available then discuss the approach with the programme leader. Communicate the approaches to the marking team.
2. Apply the verification, marking and moderation policy, and the Electronic Management of Assessment (EMA) as they relate to their units. 
3. Share with students and tutors working on the unit the assignment brief and any marking criteria (also called rubrics) or tools used in the marking process. 
4. Produce a video assessment briefing, or incorporate this into teaching, so there is one version of the instructions for students (and tutors) to follow. Unit tutors should refer students to this for consistency.  
5. Check that the assessment area(s) is set up in Moodle as you expect reporting any issues to assessment management (e.g. Turnitin, Moodle assignment etc.). There are some customisable options in the submission tool in Moodle (summative assessment).
6. Attach a rubric as needed (see attaching a rubric video guide(opens in a new tab) for steps).
7. Consider the marking process you will use for your team e.g. an early marking meeting to clear up any queries; marking some assignments in common to enable conversations about interpretations of rubrics or academic standard etc. 
8. Arrange mentorship for new markers as necessary.

 During marking, all markers should: 

1. Apply the verification, marking and moderation policy(opens in a new tab), including step marking. 
2. Engage with the units marking process as set out by the unit leader.
3. Follow the marking approaches agreed with the programme or unit team, aiming for consistency in approach for the amount and quality of feedback provided. 
4. Access support for using the marking tools if needed e.g. Using the TurnItIn enabled tools (grademark) to mark Using the Moodle Marking tools (when TurnItIn is disabled)(opens in a new tab).
5. Note concerns relating to possible academic misconduct, including plagiarism and essay mills and follow the necessary procedure.
6. Engage with internal moderation as set out in the verification, marking and moderation policy.

 After marking, all markers should: 

Discuss any issues that arose through the assessment process to identify possible enhancements to the assessment task, the tools used to support marking and the curriculum (e.g. to address common issues identified through the assessment process).

Moodle FAQs

Should I use the ‘save and finalise’ or the ‘save as draft’ option?

The ‘save and finalise’ option is the best one to choose. You can still change the mark or feedback and they will not be visible to students until after the feedback date has passed. If you use the ‘save as draft’ option, you will need to manually change each one to ‘save and finalise’ for the students to be able to see their feedback. If you are marking students work after the feedback release date has passed, you can still use the ‘save and finalise’ option, as the students will not see their feedback until the ‘release all grades’ button is pressed.

How do I transfer my marks?

Guidance about how to transfer the marks can be found on the marks transfer intranet page.

My assessment is a portfolio, how do I add the students’ final combined, weighted grade to the Combined Grades area?

The easiest way to do this is by uploading the grades to the Combined Grades submission point using the offline grading workbook, the video guide below shows you how to do this. Or watch the same video on MMUTube: Bulk uploading grades to Moodle using the Grading Worksheet.

My assessment does not require the students to submit anything, how can I add their grades to the Coursework submission point?

Your assessment will have been set up as an event by assessment management and you will need to log whether or not the student has attended before you are able to add in their grade and feedback. The video guide below shows you the steps. Or watch the same video on MMUTube: Inputting Grades and feedback for assessments that do not require a submission from the student.

Are there any reports I can access to look at coursework submissions?

Yes! There are two new reports you can access which are linked to the Coursework tool and are designed to make it easier for you to track and manage submissions on your unit. The video guide below provides an overview of the reports. Or watch on MMUTube: Coursework Statistics Report and Coursework Submission report video guide.

The work was submitted late. What mark do I enter in Moodle?

You should mark all assignments (including those submitted within the late submission period, and later than this) to the true grade, and input this true grade into Moodle. Any cap for late submission will be applied by Programmes Management teams.

Anonymous marking allows for the removal of identifying information (for example, name, gender, ethnicity) in the marking process. In the higher education sector, anonymous marking has become a common feature; this is largely due to the assumption that it will promote a more objective approach to marking and reduce the potential for preconceived ideas, stereotypes and other attitudes that markers may hold towards individuals and groups. This is sometimes referred to as unconscious bias. Removing unconscious bias in assessment practices allows for a more fair and equitable experience for our learners.  

A review of literature by AdvanceHE (2020) found little evidence that anonymous marking has significant impact on reducing bias. Despite this, the research does suggest that students perceive that anonymous marking affords a more equitable and transparent approach which in turn promotes student satisfaction.  It makes sense, therefore, to take steps to adopt anonymous marking as feature of the marking process, where possible. 

Anonymous marking can be challenging in some circumstances, for example, when marking reflective work, which may contain identifying features. In addition, Winston and Boud (2020) suggest that anonymous marking can lead to less personable and meaningful feedback practices when marking becomes conflated with feedback.  

What steps do I need to take to adopt anonymous marking

• Explain to students why you will mark their work anonymously.

• Ask students to remove identifiers from their work, such as names on a submission. 

• Explain that feedback may feel less personable using an anonymous marking process with the caveat that a more personable approach will inform formative feedback. 

References

Winstone, N, Boud, D (2020) The need to disentangle assessment and feedback in higher education, Studies in Higher Education. DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2020.1779687 

Calibration activities are designed to build confidence in the consistency of marking and feedback across the team, as well as providing reference points for comparison of standards across disciplinary areas. In this resource, we are focusing on support for programme teams to calibrate their marking. We recommend this particularly if you have many markers grading the same assessment task, but it is equally effective for small teams marking many assessments between them. It is also very useful if many people are marking a similar-looking task such as a project or dissertation but where students have chosen very different topics to focus on.  

Many programme teams are already carrying out similar activities. In some departments it is known as standardisation, but we prefer the term calibration. In the assessment literature, standardisation refers to normalising grades across an agreed curve, whereas calibration refers to the process of developing and maintaining one’s ability to make assessment judgements.

The Verification, Marking and Moderation Policy was approved in spring 2020 for immediate implementation. The Policy seeks to bring consistency and clarity to arrangements around moderation. In particular, it has introduced the following sample sizes: 

• For internal moderation: two assignments per grade band (1st, 2:1, 2:2, 3, Fail), per marker.

• For external moderation: two students’ work per level.

You will find more information on the Moderation FAQs intranet page.

There isn’t a lot of literature about this, but basically, using step marking means using a restricted number of marks within the range of 0-100%. Most people who use it would choose marks which represent the upper, middle, and lower ranges of the standard classification bands:  eg 42%, 45%, and 48% for a pass band on UG programmes. The bands which are of odd size (fails and firsts) tend to be less uniform, but you could use a number to represent upper, middle and lower of those bands.  The use of three marks per band still lets you show the extent to which the piece of work meets a specific criterion.

This approach also avoids borderline marks which are difficult for students to interpret; instead, marks are always clearly within one of the chosen bands. Across the UTA team, we find that the use of step marking makes conversations with both students and moderators more straightforward as it’s generally easier to explain why something is top, middle or bottom of a band than to justify a particular mark between 0 and 9.

Step marking is simple to implement and requires no regulatory or documentary change, just a decision to mark only to the lower, middle and upper parts of the band. 2, 5 and 8 give the best spread of marks. It is important to note that it is only suitable for use with marking criteria, which could be based on these example standard descriptors . It is not suitable for use with marking schemes.  For details of the steps, see the Verification Marking and Moderation Policy (mmu.ac.uk) (password protected).

Frequently Asked Questions

How do we apply this to marking schemes (eg MCQs or maths problems)?
You don’t: there should be no change to existing approaches; the final answer should still be achieved by adding up the number of correct items, even if it turns out to end with a different digit from those in the scheme.

What if the unit mark comes out ending with a different digit?
It doesn’t matter - the system is intended to avoid borderline marks for elements of assessment, not units of assessment.

Does it apply to level 7?
Yes.

What should we tell students about stepped marking?
Do share any information you think appropriate from this page. The simplest approach may be just to say that the grade shows which marking band the work is in, and whether they are at the top, middle, or bottom of the band and that it has been done to simplify the marking process for staff and make it clearer to students in which band their work sits.

Writing useful feedback for students should help them to recognise their strengths and how they have performed against the unit’s learning outcomes. However, it should also signpost them to things they can work on to improve and develop in future assessments, in other words feedforward. Our students must know precisely what feedback means in their discipline or subject area. Feedback can take many forms and can be provided in both formal and informal ways. Programme and unit leaders should clarify what feedback is and when it is offered to students. This recording provides a useful reminder of this and other feedback principles.

• Encourage students to reflect on their previous assessment performance before beginning a similar assignment, even if in a different unit and at a different level.
• Encourage students to engage with feedback and seek clarity where needed.
• Encourage students to reflect on feedforward elements.