Code of Practice on Assessment
Article 1 General
1. The City University of Macau Code of Practice on Assessment (hereinafter referred to as “The Code”) has been formulated as regulatory principles exemplifying the University’s commitment to teaching and learning excellence as well as empowering high standard and quality assured assessment strategies and approaches for all credit bearing modules of a degree programme
2. The Code is envisioned to apprise staff members, students, and important stakeholders from outside the University such as external examiners and external reviewers
3. Assessment is a set of measures designed to evaluate students’ learning outcomes, in terms of knowledge and understanding, intellectual abilities, transferable/key skills, practical skills as well as experience and graduate attributes acquired during the programme of study
4. Learning outcomes are defined as the knowledge, skills, competencies and attributes for which a student is expected to have achieved on successful completion of a (or part of a) degree programme
5. The assessment methods adopted should be fit for purpose, engaging, rigorous and equitable and should facilitate differentiation between achievement standard at the threshold and exemplary levels. There may be a diverse form of assessments that provide marks or grades that enable a student’s performance to be established and to evidence an appropriate level of academic achievement is attained
6. Assessment is generally categorised into two main types:
6.1 Formal examination (or class test) – Assessments that are normally centrally scheduled and monitored by the University and take place during or at the end of a teaching block
6.1 Coursework assignment (or continuously assessed work) – Assessments that take place over a period in a semester or academic year which is designed to evaluate students’ academic performance though active attendance/participation/interaction can also be considered when student’s learning process is being measured. The assessments should be associated with a deadline set by the academic staff responsible
7. The assessment must be set according to the module specification and the questions must be of appropriate level of quality and difficulty
Article 2 Formal Examination or Class Test
1. The formal examination or class test (as opposed to coursework or continuously assessed work undertaken throughout the academic year) must be conducted under examination conditions with formal invigilation by the staff members responsible (The procedures can be referred to “Notifications on Invigilation of City University of Macau”). The expected length of assessment is normally 2 hours
2. Formal examination must follow University’s unified arrangements according to the University’s academic calendar while class test is often scheduled assessment activity organized at the faculty level
3. The online examination may be adopted in case of force majeure provided that the provisions given in the “Guidelines for Online Examination” are complied
4. When a student is found to have committed academic misconduct (cheating) in examination, the “Regulations for Handling Violations of Disciplines in Examinations” must be followed
Article 3 Coursework Assignment
1. Criteria for assessment and grading rules must be made available to the students when the coursework assignment is distributed
2. The University is committed to support academic integrity and avoids plagiarism, collusion and/or fabrication of data. The conclusion as to whether academic integrity has been offended will be decided as a matter for academic judgement and the penalties will be applied according to the nature and seriousness of the offence on a case-by-case basis. The University’s “Academic Integrity Policy” sets out the definitions of the offences, and the provisions for investigation and penalties
Article 4 Late Submission
1. The University requires all students to submit coursework assignment by the deadline set by the academic staff responsible. 10% of the maximum marks allocated for the assessment shall be deducted from the assessment mark for submission at any time within the first 24 hours following the published deadline. For example, for a piece of coursework marked out of a maximum of 100, the penalty for late submission within the first 24 hours would be 10 marks deduction
2. For a coursework submitted more than 24 hours but within five calendar days (including weekends) after the deadline, the mark will be capped at a pass mark (i.e. 50 out of 100 marks)
3. Coursework received more than five calendar days after the submission deadline will be marked zero. In such circumstances, where a student is required to retake the assessment, the content must be different from the original assessment except in the case of final year project, dissertation or equivalent
Article 5 Reassessment
1. Students who fail a module (49 marks or below) must retake the module at the next available opportunity in order to gain the credits
2. Only graduating students of a degree programme or students on pre-university studies programme are allowed for making a summer retake application within the same academic year with reasonable justifications to the relevant academic unit after the marks of the final semester are released. The application for retaking more than 2 failed modules will not be permitted for Bachelor’s and pre-university studies programmes while only 1 failed module is allowed for Master’s programme. Details should be referred to “Regulations Governing Summer Retake for Potential Graduates of Bachelor Programs or Pre-University Studies Program” and “Summer Retake Regulations for Fresh Master’s Graduates”
3. Students who are unable to take the formal examination can apply for deferred examination only under mitigating circumstances. Please refer to Article 7
4. Application for deferred examination should be made within one week after the date of the examination. Late applications will not be accepted and the module will be noted as absence from examination (“AF”). The decision on whether application will be granted rests with the University
5. “Summary of Charge and Refund for Undergraduates and Students of Pre-University Studies Program” and “Summary of Charge and Refund for Postgraduates” should be referred with regards to reassessment fees
Article 6 Assessment Moderation
1. Moderation is an essential quality assurance process to ensure the assessment setting and outcome are fair, reliable, and consistent. Moderation of the assessment must be performed by internal moderators at the University and external examiner. Moderation is monitored by the Faculty Academic Committee and must be undertaken according to the following rules:
1.1 All modules of a degree programme must be moderated during assessment preparation and after the marking is completed
1.2 Moderation must be applied to all assessment components of a module
1.3 For the same module delivered by multiple academic staff members, all the assessments must be in line with the module specification
1.4 Where moderation is carried out, 10% of all scripts and a minimum of 10 scripts should be moderated. Scripts covering the range of achievement should be considered. The moderator should check both standards and consistency of marking, particularly at the borderlines
1.5 If the moderation indicates that the marking was inconsistent, all scripts must be re-marked. If the moderation indicates that the level of marks awarded for the assessment task was incorrect or inappropriate, the marks may be scaled by the Faculty Academic Committee, with full approval of the relevant external examiner
2. External examiners are nominated by faculties for approval by the Vice Rector responsible for teaching and learning affairs. External Examiners will have the following responsibilities and should not normally serve for more than 4 consecutive academic years:
2.1 to support the University in monitoring the quality and standards of its degree programmes and awards
2.2 to verify and examine the quality of the degree programmes are of equivalent standard for similar subject areas in other universities internationally
2.3 to ensure that the assessments are high standard and consistent as well as its operations are fair and in line with both institutional regulations
2.4 where appropriate, to safeguard that the requirements for professional accreditation are met
3. Assessment outcome of all modules must be approved by the Faculty Academic Committee with endorsement by the external examiners before the marks can be finalised and released to students
Article 7 Mitigating Circumstances
1. The academic performance of a student in assessments could sometimes be negatively impacted due to mitigating circumstances which can include serious illness or injury affecting the student or close family member, being the victim of a crime, bereavement, and unpreventable/unforeseeable events. However, long-term health conditions and/or disabilities are not considered a basis for mitigating circumstances.
2. Students could be supported in one of the following ways but only once for the same given reason.
2.1 An extension for coursework submission deadline of up to 5 calendar days without penalty
2.2 Undertake deferred assessment without penalty
2.3 Resumed eligibility to take the assessment as affected by insufficient attendance
2.4 Retake of the relevant assessment at the next available opportunity to improve mark. No mark is allowed to be updated without the retake
3. Mitigating circumstances claim with full documentary evidence should be submitted to the faculties. Faculties have the right to handle the application for 2.1 of article 7 directly while for 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 for article 7 would require final approval by the Registry
4. Students who have committed academic misconduct in formal examination and/or coursework assignment will not be qualified for making mitigating circumstances claim for the same module
5. All mitigating circumstances applications should be treated in the strictest confidence
6. The decision of the mitigating circumstances claim will not be subject to appeal unless there are material or information errors
Article 8 Assessment Feedback
1. Feedback should be given to students on the outcome of assessment tasks which they have undertaken to help them improving the academic performance. Such feedback should be timely, informative, and helpful and should be clearly related to the assessment criteria. Timescales for the return of work/feedback should be established and it should not normally be more 2 weeks but if there is to be an inevitably delay, it should be made clearly known to the students concerned
2. Examination scripts are not returned to students. However, Faculties could provide examination feedback in the form of group or individual review sessions, an “examination summary” that analyses and discusses general module performance
Article 9 Governance and Management
1. Registry will conduct randomised checking throughout the academic year if The Code has been strictly followed by the faculties as overseen by the Vice Rector responsible for teaching and learning affairs. Any violation will be reflected during the annual appraisal of the relevant academic staff members