A University award is offered upon defined curriculum documents that specify the attributes, skills and knowledge of the graduate. Attainment of the requisite attributes, skills and knowledge is most often measured through assessment conducted within courses that contribute to the award. Measurement through assessment is therefore critical to the student, the staff conducting the courses and the University in the awarding of a degree. Therefore the application of assessment in any award programs must meet educational needs, professional requirements and quality standards.
Educational needs
As an educational tool, the primary focus of assessment is to encourage, direct and reinforce learning.
Professional requirements
A number of programs of the University are subject to meeting the accreditation standards of external bodies. Therefore assessment processes must meet external requirements.
Quality standards
To meet the quality processes and standards of the University, assessments must be conducted on shared principles of transparency, equity and fairness, using shared standards and processes.
To this end, this policy defines the specific shared directions and standards of Assessment in Award programs that are supported by associated Procedural Statements.
Assessment tasks and their relative weightings for each course, together with any relevant details regarding the assessment such as assignment due dates, project topics, or assessment criteria, shall be included on the Course Profile.
The Course Profile shall be provided to each student (or mailed to distance students) enrolled in the course no later than the first week of term. Where assessment is subject to negotiation with students, this should be clearly stated on the Course Profile, and the outcomes of such negotiation completed in writing (both Course Coordinator and student retaining a copy) by third week of term.
Refer to the Procedure for the Type and Amount of Assessment at http://www.cqu.edu.au/ppmanual/academic/assess/typeamount.pdf.
Each Faculty Assessment Committee shall establish procedures for the approval of assessment tasks and their relative weightings for each course, subject to the availability of resources as advised by the Dean or Head of School.
The assessment tasks and relative weightings, once distributed or negotiated, cannot subsequently be altered without the express approval of the Dean or Head of School, and the agreement of all the affected students enrolled in the course.
However, not withstanding the above, the Course Coordinator, with approval of the Dean or Head of School, may set further assessment tasks for a particular student or group of students in order to resolve any doubt about the students’ performance in the course.
Refer to the Process for the Type and Amount of Assessment at http://www.cqu.edu.au/ppmanual/academic/assess/typeamount.pdf.
The University policy is to use Criterion-Based Assessment.
However there may be some instances where Norm-Based grading is appropriate. Approval for this is made when courses are approved and/or amended using the University processes.
Refer to the Procedure for Criterion-Based Marking at http://www.cqu.edu.au/ppmanual/academic/assess/cribased.pdf.
Feedback shall be provided for every assessment task completed by students.
Feedback must include information that provides the student with direct, useable insights into their performance in the task or course.
Feedback shall occur in a timely manner, be specific, needs-related, clear, informative, and include suggestions about how performance can be improved.
Feedback on all items of assessment work will be provided prior to the submission deadline for subsequent assessment tasks. This will occur within 10 working days of the due date (or date of extension submission date)*.
* This date may be extended a further five working days if the scripts/papers must be delivered to another campus or person external to the University for marking.
Refer to the Procedure for Grade Assignment and Feedback on Assessment at http://www.cqu.edu.au/ppmanual/academic/assess/gradefeed.pdf.
There is convincing evidence in the literature that assessment is generally the single biggest determinant of student learning behaviour. Students plan their study with the goal of succeeding in assessment. What is assessed and how it is assessed gives clear messages to students about what is considered important. Assessment should therefore be seen as an integral part of the teaching and learning process, which makes a significant contribution to learning outcomes.
Given the importance of assessment, the University has an obligation to ensure that its policies and practices are designed as far as possible to maximise learning. It must do this within certain constraints. Resources are not unlimited: the time and effort devoted to assessment must compete with the demands of other core activities of the University.
It is recognised that assessment is ultimately an exercise of professional judgement by academic staff. However, these judgements must be defensible.
As an educational tool, the primary focus of assessment is to encourage, direct and reinforce learning. As an evaluative process, assessment should also indicate achievement, maintain standards and provide certification.
These purposes incorporate the following sub-purposes:
Students plan their study with the goal of succeeding in assessment, the consequence of which should be the attainment of a deep understanding of the course. Assessment should therefore be seen as an integral part of the teaching and learning process, not something which is tacked on purely to grade or certify students. The issue is a matter of balance. An emphasis on the functional purposes of assessment engenders a culture of learning and cooperation. While recognising the neccessity of certifying achievement, the primary focus of assessment should be educational - to encourage, direct and reinforce learning.
Assessment serves to certify achievement: such certification ultimately leads to qualifications which have a public currency and which must therefore be legally defensible.
Students are entitled to understand all steps and requirements involved in their achieving a mark or result.
Each Course Profile must clearly define the assessment tasks and outcomes to be achieved by students in the course.
Feedback on assessment must clearly relate to the assessment criteria, and Course Coordinators must be prepared in Informal and Formal Reviews of Grade, to explain to students, how they have either achieved or failed to achieve, required standards of performance.
The assessment environment should be as open as possible, students should be provided with as much information as possible and should be free to ask questions. Fairness should be a major consideration in the administration of assessment. Fairness would be facilitated by:
Students with special needs (disability, ESL etc) are entitled to make special arrangements to undertake their assessment, particularly with regard to central examinations. Students should contact the CQU Equity Office to obtain advice.
Assessment of students must follow the principles of equity. Any opportunities for bias in marking assessment pieces must be reduced.
An equity matter requiring attention is the potentially arbitrary handling of instances of nonconformity with assessment requirements, including late submission, granting of extensions, possibility of resubmission, violation of assignment specifications (eg number of words), plagiarism and class participation (where it contributes to assessment).
University-wide policies would be difficult to formulate because accepted practice varies enormously across faculties, schools and disciplines. Therefore faculty or school policies should be developed, communicated to students and conscientiously applied in an effort to eliminate case-by-case arbitrariness. Course Profiles presented at the start of each course are an ideal means of setting out these policies and the details of all assessment: nature, timing, standards and weightings. Each faculty shall develop a template of the required content of a Course Profile.
University policy requires the compulsory provision (at the beginning of each term) or a written statement on the purposes or goals of the course and the nature of assessment. These shall be included in the Course Profile.
The application of ‘special consideration’ in relation to assessment is a useful tool in terms of promoting equity. Please refer to the CQU Guidelines on Special Consideration.
First year students have particular assessment needs and often suffer when they are not subjected to progressive assessment because they have no real idea of what university-level expectations are. It is unsatisfactory to rely on a single piece of summative assessment at the end of term because this gives no direction to learning and provides no opportunity for feedback during the term.
Early feedback is especially valuable to first year students who may lack self-confidence or self-discipline. Peer-assisted schemes such as the Mentoring Program are a valuable way to acclimatise first year students to university assessment requirements.
Large first year classes bring the resource implications of assessment into sharp relief. On the one hand, the vunerability of first year students heightens the need for formative assessment with adequate feedback; on the other hand, the time and effort required can be daunting. There is no easy resolution to the issue. However, to accept a continuing erosion of the formative aspects of first year assessment would be an act of defeatism serving neither the interests of students nor the interests of the University.
The transition of first year students to the University can be assisted by providing:
CQU derives many benefits and strengths from the cultural and experience diversity of its staff and student community. We should maximise our advantage from this diversity wherever possible. At the same time, we should seek to minimise the disadvantage to students whose cultural and experience background is different from the typical student in a cohort.
Practices which shall be adopted to recognise cultural differences include:
Results are used to show the outcome of a student’s attempt at a course of study.
The result may be a grade based on academic achievement or an outcome determined on other grounds (eg. course withdrawal with or without academic penalty).
Results used by Central Queensland University are:
| AF | Absent Fail. The student has completed none or insufficient of the various assessment items and further submission of work will not be accepted. This is a final outcome and for the purpose of calculation of progress counts as a Fail. |
| DA | Deferred Assessment. Assessment (other than a formal examination administered by the Vice-President and Registrar) given when a student, through illness or some other acceptable circumstances, has been prevented from taking one or more of the assessments, or has been disadvantaged during the assessment. |
| NS | Not Sat. An interim result which can be assigned by examiners and Assessment Committees to courses where completion of a formal examination is a requirement specified in the Course Profile for the successful passing of the course, but the student has not sat the examination or applied for a Deferred Examination. “Not Sats” will count as Fails for progress purposes and will appear as Fails on a student’s official academic record, but they will be retained in the Student Records System as a result in the result tabulation for the course as a whole so the Faculties are better able to judge actual class performance in the course. |
| I | Incomplete. Assigned if a student's result in a course is satisfactory but incomplete. The result of Incomplete is appropriate where work such as a project or an assignment has not been completed at the time of an examiners meeting but can be completed within a specified time. If the work is completed within the specified time, the full range of grades is available. If the work is not completed, the result of AF will be awarded. By awarding this interim result, there is an expectation that a passing grade will be achieved by the student. If no results are produced within 12 months, this should be followed up by the Faculty. |
| RO | Result Outstanding. Assigned when a student has submitted all assessable work, however at the time of the Assessment Committee meeting, a recommended grade has not been received from the Course Coordinator. The Assessment Committee meeting subsequently should allocate a grade or another result such as AF. |
| DE | Deferred Examination. A formal examination (administered by the Vice-President and Registrar) given when a student through illness or some other acceptable circumstances, has been prevented from sitting for a formal examination held in the official examination period. Students who apply to sit a Deferred Examination will usually be granted only one opportunity to complete this examination. Applications for deferred examinations are to be approved by the relevant Faculty. |
| DD | Deferred Deferred Examination. A formal examination administered and conducted at a time determined by the Vice-President and Registrar. This result applies in a situation whereby a student is unable to sit for a Deferred Examination (DE) due to ‘very’ exceptional/extenuating circumstances, for which documentary evidence is required. No student will be permitted more than one attempt at a Deferred Deferred Examination for a course. Applications for deferred deferred examinations are to be approved by the relevant Faculty. |
| SE | Supplementary Examination. A result given where, having attempted the formal examination in a course, the student is required to complete further assessable work, which is also in the form of a formal examination. This result will only be awarded to a student whose total mark is greater than or equal to 40%, where it is considered that completion of such an examination (SE) is likely to result in the award of a Supplementary Pass grade. This result may also be awarded where a student has previously been awarded the maximum allowed grades of PC or PT. This result cannot be subsequently converted to a grade higher than a Pass. |
| SA | Supplementary Assessment. A result given where, having attempted the formal examination in a course, or all required assessment in a course which does not have a formal examination, the student is required to complete further assessable work, other than a formal examination. This result will only be awarded to a student whose total mark is greater than or equal to 40%, where it is considered that completion of supplementary assessment (SA) is likely to result in the award of a Supplementary Pass grade. This result may also be awarded where a student has previously been awarded the maximum allowed grades of PC or PT. This result cannot be subsequently converted to a grade higher than a Pass. |
The term grade is a subset of the term result and reflects a judgement of academic achievement by a student enrolled in a course. No grade for a course can be awarded to a student who is not correctly enrolled in that course. Grades used by Central Queensland University may be criterion referenced or norm referenced. If grades are criterion referenced, the grades are determined by the extent to which the criteria have been met. If grades are norm referenced, and adjusted composite marks are used, the following ranges apply:
| HD | High Distinction. Used in lieu of a composite mark normally in the range 85 -100. Demonstrates imagination, originality or flair, based on proficiency in all the learning objectives of the course; work is interesting or surprisingly exciting, challenging, well read or scholarly. |
| D | Distinction. Used in lieu of a composite mark normally in the range of 75 - 84. Demonstrates awareness and understanding of deeper and less obvious aspects of the course, such as ability to identify and debate critical issues or problems, ability to solve non-routine problems, ability to adapt and apply ideas to new situations, and ability to invent and evaluate new ideas. |
| C | Credit. Used in lieu of a composite mark normally in the range of 65 - 74. Demonstrates ability to use and apply fundamental concepts and skills of the course, going beyond mere replication of content knowledge or skill to show understanding of key ideas, awareness of their relevance, some use of analytical skills, and some originality or insight. |
| P | Pass. Used in lieu of a composite mark normally in the range 50 - 64. Satisfies all of the basic learning requirements of the course, such as knowledge of fundamental concepts and performance of basic skills; demonstrates sufficient quality of performance to be considered satisfactory or adequate or competent or capable in relation to the objectives of the course. |
| PC | Pass Conceded. Used
in lieu of a composite mark normally in the range 40 - 49 and deemed
to satisfy prerequisites. The grade of PC is generally not awarded in
Level One courses or in any postgraduate course work or research
award programs, and is usually confined to undergraduate courses
of study. In situations where a student has equalled the allowable
number of PC grades, the Course Coordinator may recommend the student
be awarded a result of SA or SE.This grade is used when a student
falls short of satisfying all basic requirements for a Pass but
can be granted concession for the deficiencies through:
|
| PT | Pass
Terminating. Used in lieu of a composite mark normally in
the range 40 - 49. A PT is not deemed to satisfy prerequisites.
The grade of PT is generally not awarded in Level One courses or
in any postgraduate course work or research award programs, and
is usually confined to undergraduate courses of study. In situations
where a student has equalled the allowable number of PT grades,
the Course Coordinator may recommend the student be awarded a result
of SA or SE. This grade is used when a student falls short of satisfying all basic requirements for a Pass but can be granted concession for the deficiencies through:
|
| PN | Pass Non-grade. Used to indicate a pass in a course for which a full range of grades is not available. That is, the only possible outcomes are pass or fail. |
| T | Transfer Credit. Used to indicate that credit has been given for a specified course and it does not need to be completed by the student. |
| S | Successful. Used to indicate the successful completion of a research only course. |
| U | Unsuccessful. Used to indicate the unsuccessful completion of a research only course. |
| WF | Withdrawn Fail. A result given where a student has withdrawn from a course after the census date for enrolments with academic penalty. (Result of WF only applies to course enrolments withdrawn prior to the commencement of a formal examination period.) |
| F | Fail. Definitely used for composite marks below 40. May be used for composite marks in the range 40-49. Fails to satisfy some of the basic requirements of the course. |
| SP | Supplementary Pass. Used in lieu of a composite mark normally in the range of 50 – 64. Is the ‘only’ passing grade that can be awarded following the successful completion of a SA or SE. |
| First Class Honours. Awarded to students in a Degree with Honours or an Honours Degree who have achieved results in the range 85% - 100% (or GPA 6.0 for those programs which do not correlate with the percentage based calculations). | |
| Second Class Honours, Division A. Awarded to students in a Degree with Honours or an Honours Degree who have achieved results in the range 75% - 84% (or GPA 5.5 for those programs which do not correlate with the percentage based calculations). | |
| Second Class Honours, Division B. Awarded to students in a Degree with Honours or an Honours Degree who have achieved results in the range 65-74% (or GPA 5.0 for those programs which do not correlate with the percentage based calculations). | |
| Third Class Honours. Awarded to students in a Degree with Honours or an Honours Degree who have achieved results in the range below 65% and above 50%. |
Results PC & PT
The results Pass Conceded (PC) and Pass Terminating (PT) are used in lieu of a composite mark normally in the range of 40% – 49%. The maximum percentage of courses graded PC or PT that will be accepted as contributing towards the requirements of an award is 10%. This may be further restricted by a Faculty Education Committee or may be more closely defined in the application for a Faculty award.
Principles
Each student who is awarded a PC or PT grade should be notified of the significance of this grade and the effect this may have on the completion of an award.
Application
At the time of ratification of term grades by the Faculty Assessment Committee, those students who are awarded a PC or PT grade will be identified and the Faculty Assessment Committee will send a form letter to each student advising them of the:
To be eligible for an exemption from any course in a postgraduate Business program, a student must have received a “Pass” or above in a course of equivalent content, level and rated hours from an approved program at postgraduate level. The course previously completed must be related to the business or management discipline area. Documentary evidence of courses and grades must be submitted before consideration can be given for any exemptions. All exemptions must be approved by the Dean.
In any Master’s program the number of exemptions available from a completed postgraduate program, will be based on the number of courses that constitute an equivalent CQU program, for example for a Graduate Certificate of Management a maximum of three credit transfers. Notwithstanding this, the maximum number of exemptions available towards any postgraduate business program is 50% of the number of courses comprising the program.
In all Master’s programs, successful completion of either the Professional Year Program of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia or the CPA program of the Australian Society of Certified Practising Accountants makes a student eligible for a block exemption of four electives.
In all Graduate Diploma programs, successful completion of the Professional Year or CPA Programs will make a student eligible for a block exemption of up to 50% of the number of courses in the program. It should be noted that, in some programs, there will not be this number of electives available in the program and exemptions will be limited to the number of electives included in the particular program.
In the Graduate Certificate in Management program, only one exemption will be available.
Substitutions are offered so students do not need to duplicate course knowledge; they do not reduce the number of courses needed to complete the program.
Where a student has completed a course equivalent in content to a core course in any postgraduate Business program (which may be a major course area in a Bachelor’s degree program) but has not claimed or been granted an exemption from that course, an alternative course may be selected from the Table of Postgraduate courses, provided prerequisites have been met. If required, students must submit documentary evidence of courses completed and grades obtained to permit determination of possible course substitutions. The substitution and its replacement course must be approved by the Dean.
The award of PC and/or PT grades is confined to undergraduate programs of study within the Faculty of Business & Law. Students with a mark in the range of 44% - 49% may be considered for the award of PC or PT. PC and PT grades are awarded at the discretion of the Dean. These grades are generally not awarded in Level 1 courses.
The award of PC or PT is restricted to a maximum of 10% of a program or fraction of a program required to be completed for the granting of a CQU award.
Under normal circumstances, a student shall receive only the award for the program in which they are currently enrolled, and for which they have satisfied graduation requirements.
If a student is unable to complete the full program of study for which they are currently enrolled, they may apply to exit from their current program with an exit award, if an approved exit award exists in relation to the program in which the student has been enrolled. In such cases, students must cancel their enrolment in their current program and apply in writing to graduate with the exit award in question. Approval of the exit award is required from the Dean.
It is faculty policy that all assessment in a course be finalised by certification date. However in exceptional circumstances special consideration may be given to students to complete the assessment in a course by a supplementary assessment or examination or by deferring the normal examination. The grounds for granting this delayed assessment are given in the policies on Supplementary Examinations/assessment and Deferred Examinations. The due dates for this delayed assessment will be conveyed to the student and no further extensions will be granted. If a student is unable to complete the assessment by the due date (or sit the examination on a set date), they will automatically fail the course. Thus, for a deferred examination no further extension will be granted and no supplementary examination or assessment can be awarded.
Where a student is required to sit a supplementary examination or complete supplementary assessment, in order to pass the course, the student is required to pass (ie. Score 50% or more) the supplementary examination or assessment. The only grades available to a student who passes this assessment are SP (Supplementary Pass) or Fail. Please note: If a student is unable to complete the assessment by the due date (or sit the examination on a set date), this will result in an automatic fail for the course.
The Faculty of Informatics and Communication confine the award of PC and/or PT grades to undergraduate courses of study. A grade of PC or PT will only be awarded to those students enrolled in their final term of study before graduation. A grade of PC or PT will not be counted towards graduation from a postgraduate program, and will not be awarded to students enrolled in core courses. PC and PT grades are awarded at the discretion of the Dean or Dean’s Nominee.
The award of PC and PT is restricted to a maximum of 10% of a program or fraction of a program required to be completed for the granting of a CQU award (i.e. the 10% cannot include exemptions, so any undergraduate student who has more than four exemptions can only use one PC/PT in a 24 course degree).
Policy on Processing of Interim Results
| SE | Supplementary Examination Where a student is required to sit a supplementary examination, in order to pass the course, the student is required to pass (i.e. score 50% or more) the supplementary examination. The only grade available to a student who passes this assessment is SP (Supplementary Pass) or Fail. |
| SA | Supplementary Assessment Where a student is required to submit supplementary assessment, in order to pass the course, the student must pass (i.e. score 50% or more) the supplementary assessment. The only grade available to a student who passes this assessment is SP (Supplementary Pass) or Fail. |
| I | Incomplete Assessment As per CQU policy. The full range of results is available to students when finalised within the deadlines set by the Course Coordinator. |
| RO | Result Outstanding As per CQU policy. This grade is only awarded when the student has completed all assessment, but a recommended grade has not yet been finalised by the examiners meeting date. The full range of results is available to students when finalised. |
| DE | Deferred Examination As per CQU policy. This grade is awarded when a student through illness or some other acceptable circumstances, has been prevented from sitting for a formal examination held in the official examination period. Students are usually granted only one opportunity to complete this examination. |
| DD | Deferred Deferred Examination As per CQU policy. This is where the student is unable to sit for a deferred examination due to ‘very’ exceptional/extenuating circumstances, for which documentary evidence is required. No student can be permitted more than one attempt at a Deferred Deferred Examination for a course. |
| AF | Absent Fail This grade is given to a student who has completed none or insufficient of the various assessment items and further submission of work will not be accepted. PLEASE NOTE this grade will appear as a Fail on the student’s official academic record. |
| NS | Not Sat This is where the student does not sit for a formal examination which is a requirement specified in the course profile. PLEASE NOTE this grade will appear as a Fail on the student’s official academic record. |
Each Faculty Education Committee shall establish procedures for the approval of assessment tasks and their relative weightings for each course (except for non-graded and pass/fail courses which must be referred by the Education Committee to the Education Committee of Academic Board according to the procedures for approval of new courses and changes to courses), subject to the availability of resources as advised by the Dean or Head of School. This information, together with any relevant detail regarding the assessment such as assignment due dates, project topics, or assessment criteria, shall be included on the Course Profile or Course Outline which shall be provided to each student (or mailed to distance students) enrolled in the course no later than the second week of term. Where assessment is subject to negotiation with students, this should be clearly stated on the Course Profile or Course Outline, and the outcomes of such negotiation completed in writing (both Course Coordinator and student retaining a copy) by the third week of term.
1.1.1 These assessment tasks and relative weightings, once distributed or negotiated, cannot subsequently be altered without the express approval of the Dean or Head of School, and the agreement of all the affected students enrolled in the course.
1.1.2 However, notwithstanding the above, the Course Coordinator, with approval of the Dean or Head of School, may set further assessment tasks for a particular student or group of students in order to resolve any doubt about the students’ performance in the course.
To the extent possible, the University will endeavour to schedule examinations in the periods designated as examination periods in the approved Calendar of Principal Dates. However, on occasion, it may be necessary to schedule examinations outside these designated periods.
1.2.1 The Dean or Head of School shall advise the Vice-President & Registrar by the due date, of all courses which shall be assessed by formal examination, the nominated Course Coordinator for each course, and the resourcing arrangements.
1.2.2 Course Coordinators, unless otherwise designated by the Dean or Head of School, shall be responsible for drafting examination papers according to the current guidelines for the preparation and printing of examination papers, providing required details on the examination instruction sheet, and verifying the appropriateness and accuracy of the examination papers using procedures agreed to with the Dean or Head of School.
1.2.3 The Dean or Head of School shall provide the Vice-President & Registrar by the due date, all examination papers prepared by Course Coordinators.
1.2.4 The Dean or Head of School should ensure that all worked examination scripts are collected from the Vice-President & Registrar within an appropriate timeframe which allows for the marking and onforwarding of results to students.
1.2.5 The Vice-President & Registrar shall advise students and Course Coordinators of the time and location of examinations by the due date as set out in the Academic Calendar.
1.2.6 The Dean or Head of School shall ensure that, for each examination, a person conversant with the course is available to answer questions that may arise during the examination, including perusal time.
1.2.7 The Dean or Head of School shall ensure that worked examination papers are retained in a readily accessible location for a period of twelve months after the notification of results in case they are required for review.
Assessment tasks used during term are to be completed by each student by the due date as stated in the Course Profile or Course Outline (for distance students, this may be the post-marked date).
Feedback from such assessments should be provided to each student, with adequate time for the student to respond to this feedback before completing the next assessment task. In a twelve-week term, two weeks would be a minimum period.
1.4.1 Each assessment committee shall meet at least once after each term in which students are enrolled, at a date determined by the Chair of the Faculty Education Committee but prior to the due date for submission of results to the Vice-President & Registrar.
1.4.2 Each Course Coordinator shall, using the moderated judgements of students’ work submitted by examiners, submit a recommended result for each student enrolled in the course through the Dean or Head of School to the Vice-President & Registrar. The Dean or Head of School, at his/her discretion, may require further moderation and/or marking of assessment work by a second examiner. Results submitted shall conform to the format required by the Vice-President & Registrar for data processing/submission at the time. The submitted results shall be considered at the scheduled meeting of the assessment committee. If no grade can be determined at the time of the assessment committee meeting, an alternative result shall be recommended pending determination of the grade. For criterion referenced assessment in courses which have more than one assessment task, the final grade shall be a weighted 'average' of performance against the criteria for each assessment task, unless otherwise stated in the Course Profile or Outline. For norm referenced assessment, consideration should be given to the following when determining grades:
1.4.3 The Vice-President & Registrar shall prepare, for the use of assessment committees, schedules showing proposed results for each student.
1.4.4 The assessment committee shall determine a result for each enrolled student in every course offered by the Faculty during the term. In cases of obvious apparent anomaly, the assessment committee may request the withholding of grades in a course pending a review of the assessment or proposed grades by the Dean or Head of School. Final moderation in all courses is the responsibility of the assessment committee, which may request that further assessment be conducted to resolve any doubt or ambiguity.
1.4.5 Students who have been prevented from sitting a formal exam through illness or some other circumstances acceptable to the assessment committee, may apply for a deferred examination (through the Course Coordinator), within the prescribed timelines.
1.4.6 The Chair of the assessment committee shall advise the Vice-President & Registrar of the student’s results in each course as determined by the assessment committee by the due date stated in the Academic Calendar.
1.4.7 Students who receive a result advice of an I, DA, DE, or SA will be advised to contact the Course Coordinator (or Dean or Head of School) within one week of viewing the result notification to arrange for resolution of the grade. Students who do not do this may be awarded a failing grade.
1.4.8 Interim non-grade results (I, DA, DD, DE, SE, NS, RO, or SA) awarded pending determination of a grade are to be finalised by the assessment committee (or delegated authority) as soon as practicable after the certification of results. The assessment committee (or delegated authority) shall review all interim results six weeks after the certification of results to resolve outstanding grades where possible. No interim result should remain unresolved after one year, except by specific resolution of the assessment committee.
1.4.9 The Chair of the assessment committee shall advise of any changes of result subsequent to the assessment committee meeting, using the prescribed procedure of the time.
Students’ results will be published via e.rolment. Results will not be released over the telephone, and students should not ring the University seeking such information.
Students will be required to print copies of their results via e.rolment. If unable to access e.rolment contact the Student Services Line on 1300 550 900.
Calculate the Weighted Grade Point Average (WGPA) (as per the Policy for the Calculation of WGPAs).
To be eligible for consideration for the award of a Degree with Distinction a student must have achieved the weighted grade point average (WGPA) of 6.00.
This calculation should be based upon the senior two or more equivalent years of previous study within the undergraduate degree program, for which the Degree with Distinction is to be awarded.
Transfer credit (exemptions) included as part of the degree program will usually not be included in the calculation of the WGPA. However, in exceptional circumstances the Faculty Dean may approve the inclusion of transfer credit in these calculations.
Courses for which the grade of Pass Non-Grade (PN) has been awarded are not included in the calculation of the WGPA.
Only the first attempt at courses will be included in the calculation of the WGPA.
Students enrolled in double degrees which lead to two separate awards may be eligible for Degrees with Distinction in both degrees or only one of the degrees.
Ongoing calculations with a running tally within the Faculties is needed to pinpoint Degrees with Distinction on a regular basis in alignment with University Graduation Ceremonies, to ensure that all graduands within an academic year of January to December are considered for this award.
The awarding of a Degree with Distinction shall be approved in each instance by the Faculty Education Committee, and referred to the Education Committee of Academic Board for noting by Academic Board.
The Faculty is responsible for advising Student Administration of the award of these degrees.
1.1 The University may award Honours degrees and degrees with Honours.
1.2 Students who have completed an initial three year Bachelors degree, and who have demonstrated a record of outstanding achievement from an early stage in the initial degree, may enter an Honours degree program. An Honours degree shall consist of the equivalent of a further year of full-time study which will have a predominant research focus comprising at least 40% of the course content.
1.3 Honours degrees will be graded as follows:
1.4 Four-year Bachelor’s degrees may be awarded with Honours. Students wishing to qualify for the award of a degree with Honours will have been identified for their meritorious performance no later than the end of the third year and will be required, in the fourth year, to undertake a more demanding program of study comprising a project which is predominantly research-based.
1.5 Degrees with Honours will be graded as follows:
1.6 In interpreting the above principles, research is defined as "the careful and critical investigation or enquiry into subject matter with the endeavour to discover new facts by scientific methods." (Concise Oxford Dictionary 6th edition and as adopted by the Research Committee of Academic Board).
2.1 A student must have achieved the following results to be eligible for the award of degrees with Honours and Honours degrees:
| First Class Honours | In the range 85-100% (or GPA 6.0) |
| Second Class Honours, Division A | In the range 75-84% (or GPA 5.5) |
| Second Class Honours, Division B | In the range 65-74% (or GPA 5.0) |
| Third Class Honours | Below 65% and above 50%. |
2.2 Note: GPA ratings are only to be used for those programs which do not correlate completely with the percentage based calculations.
2.3 The awarding of degrees with Honours and Honours degrees shall be referred to the Education Committee of Academic Board for noting by Academic Board.
2.4 An annual report from each Faculty, listing the amount and type of Honours degrees which have been approved, will be compiled and sent to the Education Committee of Academic Board for consideration.
3.1 Degrees with Honours and Honours degrees at First Class Level will be awarded only to those students with clearly outstanding academic performance.
3.2 Should the frequency of granting of the award reach or exceed 10% on a continuing average basis, then the criteria for making the award should be reviewed by the Faculty concerned.
3.3 While in the process of marking an Honours degree, an examiner external to the University should be utilised by each Faculty. When this is not practicable, it is then a requirement that the Faculties ensure that there is external moderation of a representative sample for all Honours degree programs.
1.1 The scope of this document is limited to courses within both undergraduate and postgraduate programs. It does not relate to Honours theses, research dissertations, and courses which are set up as a Special Topic. If a student wishes to appeal the grade awarded in these instances, the appeal will be directed immediately to the University Appeals Committee.
1.2 The function of teaching in Central Queensland University is to facilitate learning and development of skills for life long learning.
1.3 In this spirit, educators shall develop their courses to ensure students are very clear as to the objectives of a course, the assessment requirements of the course, and the criteria by which such items of assessment will be graded.
1.4 All these details shall be outlined clearly in a Course Profile issued to students by the end of the first week of term, and for distance education students, in the first mail package. While some courses encourage students to negotiate the actual assessment, this negotiation shall be finalised within the first two weeks of term. Where negotiation is not encouraged, there shall be no changes to the assessment information stated in the Course Profile, without the written agreement of all students in the course, the Course Coordinator and all staff involved in the delivery of the course across the range of locations and modes of delivery.
1.5 If a Course Coordinator subsequently awards Supplementary Assessment to a particular student or group of students, that Supplementary Assessment shall be agreed by the Course Coordinator and the Head of School or nominee.
1.6 The teaching and learning activities, assessment, and assessment criteria shall all be consistent in their support of stated course objectives. Heads of Schools are responsible to ensure there is a quality assurance mechanism in place to monitor this consistency within the Course Profile.
1.7 No item of assessment shall be of a nature which surprises students, in that the course should be structured and resourced to provide practice in the development of skills and critical thinking related to the course content.
1.8 All assessment shall be fully transparent, and the lecturer shall be able to fully explain the requirements of assessment before the fact, and the application of such criteria in the marking of the assessment items, after the fact.
1.9 This policy statement details processes for ensuring adequate feedback on each item of assessment, an Informal Review process to which all students are entitled if further information is needed, followed by a Formal Faculty Review of Grade if deemed appropriate, and a final avenue for appeal to the Office of the Student Ombudsman.
2.1 Course Profile is a document prepared by the Course Coordinator, in consultation with the Head of School, which provides details of the course, including the names and contact information of the Course Coordinator and any other relevant staff involved in the delivery of the course, objectives of the course, required textbooks, suggested reference materials, details of the mode of delivery and any student study resources, the structure of assessment, details of the assessment items and due dates for submission, assessment criteria, and a study schedule, among other information.
2.2 Assessment Items is used to describe any work, whether a written or oral presentation, a performance or dossier which documents activities required to be performed and which form the basis of the assessment for the purpose of determining a grade in the course.
2.3 Course Coordinator – for the purposes of this document, it is assumed that the course coordinator has responsibility, under the approval of the Head of School or Dean, for preparation of the Course Profile, the setting of assessment, monitoring of all marking in the course, recommendation of grades to the Dean, and the monitoring of all feedback on assessment items or grades. It is recognised that Faculties may distribute responsibility among a group of staff, however, in those instances, the Faculty Dean shall be responsible for ensuring there is a documentation of such delegated responsibilities.
2.4 Evaluation Criteria describe the basis for marking an assessment item.
2.5 Faculty Campus Coordinator is a person at a campus other than the one where the Dean normally is located, who is so designated by the Dean. The Faculty Campus Coordinator is the person on that campus to whom all communications from the Dean and Associate Deans related to the conduct of the operations of the Faculty at that campus, will be directed. The Faculty Campus Coordinator is the first point of reference for students at that campus.
2.6 Staff Member for the purposes of this document, describes all persons that a student, in any mode of study and at any location, in their dealings with the University in the enrolment process or in the delivery of courses, might reasonably assume to be an employee of Central Queensland University. It is deemed that all persons, whether Central Queensland University employees or employees of related institutions, who are charged with responsibility for administration or teaching on behalf of Central Queensland University, are equivalent to staff members for the purpose of this document.
2.7 Faculty Sub-Dean is a person at a campus other than the one where the Dean is normally located, who is so designated by the Vice-Chancellor. The role is similar to that of the Faculty Campus Coordinator.
3.1 Information included in Course Profile
3.1.1 The Course Profile shall set out clearly and concisely, the course details for enrolment purposes, contact details for relevant staff, objectives of the course, textbook, software and other requirements, assessment information including details of any on course assessment items, assessment criteria, and an outline of the study schedule for the term.
3.1.2 Assessment items shall clearly be linked to the learning objectives of a course. This applies equally to assessment of information literacy skills, teamwork and other generic skills which are integrated in the discipline content of a course and to the technical skills and competencies relating to the discipline.
3.1.3 For each assessment item, there shall be included in the Course Profile a listing of Evaluation Criteria to guide the student in preparation of the assessment item.
3.1.4 In the development of Evaluation Criteria, it shall be noted that failure to meet particular requirements of the assessment, such as a failure to reference correctly, will mean that the student may not be given full credit for that aspect of the assessment. However, additional penalties shall not be imposed for failure to meet the same specified requirement.
3.2 Student Feedback
3.2.1 Students shall be given definitive, constructive feedback on their performance on the assessment item especially, for any assessment item which is formative rather than summative assessment.
3.2.2 This feedback shall be consistent with the evaluation criteria.
3.2.3 An assessment feedback sheet or another identified mode of feedback may be used for this purpose. The function of this Assessment Feedback Sheet or alternative mechanism is:
3.3 Informal Review Process
3.3.1 In addition to this Assessment Feedback Sheet or alternative mechanism, a student has the right to approach relevant members of the lecturing team, as delegated by the Course Coordinator, regarding their mark or result for the assessment item, feedback on the examination, or the grade for the course, in order to clarify any issues relating to the assessment item or the mark/grade awarded. On a campus where the Course Coordinator is not located, the initial contact must be made to the Faculty staff member, who will clarify the appropriate person to conduct the informal review.
3.3.2 Contact for the purpose of an informal review may be made in person or by telephone or e-mail. It is at this stage that any oversight, omission of marking, or arithmetic discrepancies in the marking can be corrected.
3.3.3 It is expected that the creation and use of the feedback sheet or alternative mechanism will explain more fully the student’s performance, and reduce the need for further queries regarding the grade.
3.3.4 Students are encouraged to seek immediate feedback on assessment. A request for an informal review of any assessment item shall normally be received within 14 days of the assessment item being returned to the student, or within 14 days of there being a reasonable assumption that the student will have received the assessment item. However it is recognised that on occasion, a student will be reticent to question the application of assessment criteria during a term, for fear of retribution. Hence, a student may choose to wait until all assessment has been marked and graded before making a request for informal feedback on any assessment item in the course. Such request for an informal review of any or all items of assessment, shall normally be received within 21 days of notification of grades for a term, or within 14 days of there being a reasonable assumption that the student will have received notification of results by mail.
3.3.5 A request for an informal review of an examination shall normally be received within 21 days of notification of grades for the term, or within 14 days of there being a reasonable assumption that the student will have received notification of results by mail.
3.3.6 If a student does not become aware of the grade awarded for a course because of University sanctions being applied to the results, the student will be deemed to have received the results 21 days after notification of grades for the term.
3.3.7 In other instances where a student can demonstrate, through isolation or remoteness from reliable mailing services, that 21 days is not a reasonable time for responding to the need for action by the student, a time shall be determined by the Faculty Dean or Associate Dean (Teaching and Learning).
3.3.8 It is normally expected that the Faculty staff member will advise the student of the outcome of their application for an informal review of grade within 14 days of receipt of the application.
3.4 Principles Underlying the Informal Review
3.4.1 A student is entitled to one informal review with the Faculty staff member for each assessment item, and for the course in total.
3.4.2 Unless there has been a computational error in calculating the result there will be no reduction in the mark/grade awarded to a student following this informal review.
3.4.3 Students should be advised that, in combining the outcomes from various assessment items, some method must be applied to this combination. It may be that it is not appropriate to simply add results to determine a total. Where this is the case, the same method of combination must be applied to all students, and this method must be made available to students as part of the informal review process.
4.1 Should the student have further queries with the grade awarded for a course after the informal process has been followed, they may seek a Formal Faculty Review of Grade, through the relevant Faculty offering the course. This must be sought as soon as possible following the completion of the informal review, and in any case, within 4 weeks of the notification of the grade for that course.
4.2 Students at non-Rockhampton campuses must submit a completed application and consult with their Faculty Campus Coordinator or Sub-Dean, before submitting a formal review of grade. The Faculty Campus Co-ordinator (or Sub-Dean) is required to counter sign the application for a Formal Review of Grade before it will be accepted. A student will need to demonstrate and state in writing that the informal review process has been pursued prior to requesting a formal review.
4.3 A student is entitled to one formal review of grade for each course.
4.4 It is normally expected that the Faculty will advise the student of the outcome of their application for a formal review of grade within 14 days of receipt of the application.
4.5 Grounds for Formal Faculty Review of Grade
4.5.1 The grounds upon which the student may proceed with such a formal review may include:
4.5.2 The following grounds cannot be used as a basis for applying for a Formal Review of Grade:
4.5.3 An application for a Formal Review of Grade may be denied by the Faculty for the following reasons:
4.5.4 If the application for review of grade is for a course or part of a course which constitutes a fieldwork, practicum or performance where the student’s performance at the time is assessed by a group of examiners, then the only grounds on which a review of a grade may be requested are:
4.6 Review Process
4.6.1 When the Faculty receives the student’s written application for a Formal Faculty Review of Grade, the Associate Dean (Teaching & Learning) will review the application, and may:
4.6.2 Depending on the circumstances, a student may request, or the Faculty may choose in addition, to include either or both of the following processes as part of the Formal Faculty Review of Grade:
4.6.3 If the grounds for review relates to a group of students who appear to have suffered the same system breakdown as identified in a specific case, and it is determined that the group has been disadvantaged by the system breakdown, then every effort shall be made to identify all those students and ensure that the group of student grades is reviewed. The Associate Dean (Teaching & Learning) or nominee is responsible for ensuring this process is completed.
5.1 A student’s grade cannot be reduced as a result of the review by an independent marker.
5.2 If an increase in grade is recommended, this will be processed by the Associate Dean (Teaching and Learning).
6.1 In certain academic situations, if there are contentious issues surrounding the review of grade, the Associate Dean (Teaching and Learning) may determine, or the student may request, that a Faculty Hearing is held, to further resolve or investigate these issues. If there is to be a Faculty Hearing, the student will be notified within 14 days of lodging the request for Review of Grade, and at least two (2) working days before the Hearing.
6.2 Assistance with presentation before a Faculty Education Sub Committee
6.2.1 A student may present a case in person to the Faculty Education Sub Committee Assessment Hearing and may be assisted by an enrolled student or staff member of the university or a representative of the Student Association. The student and the faculty representative will have the opportunity to question each other. None of these persons has any voting right. Their purpose in attending the hearing is to ensure that information relating to the matter is presented in full, and fairly from all points of view.
6.2.2 Faculty Education Sub Committee members may question all parties to the hearing. The Faculty Education Sub Committee may be conducted in person, by videoconference or by teleconference.
6.2.3 The personnel involved in a Faculty Hearing Panel shall consist of:
6.2.4 The Dean or Associate Dean (Teaching & Learning) may request input to the considerations of the Panel from staff of the Faculty including:
6.2.5 The Faculty Education Sub Committee may:
6.2.6 The Faculty Education Sub Committee will make a determination and communicate that determination to the student in writing within 3 working days of the Hearing. The decision will also be communicated to the Head of School of the course involved in the review.
6.2.7 The Faculty shall keep a record of the outcomes of all Faculty Education Sub Committee Hearings, which can be made available to the Ombudsman if required and filed in the central student file.
7.1 Students may approach the Office of the Student Ombudsman:
The student will advise the Student Ombudsman in writing of the nature of the complaint in respect of the review of grade. This application should normally be received within 9 weeks of notification of grades for the term. In relation to an appeal of a review of grade based on the need to view examination papers or written assignments, these complaints will only be considered if received within 4 months of the finalisation of the Formal Faculty Review of Grade.
Powers of the Student Ombudsman in Relation to Review of Grades
7.2.1 The Student Ombudsman’s Office may determine there are insufficient grounds for appeal, and determine not to proceed with the investigation of the student’s complaint. The Student Ombudsman’s Office will provide the student with reasons in writing for that decision, within 7 days of receiving the appeal.
7.2.2 The Student Ombudsman’s Office may determine that there is sufficient evidence to initiate an investigation into the review of grade. In addition to interviewing the student, either in person, by video or by telephone, the Student Ombudsman’s Office will arrange meetings with any relevant staff member who, in the opinion of the Student Ombudsman’s Office, may be able to assist in understanding the circumstances relating to a course, its teaching delivery or assessment, or the enrolment in the course and the delivery of study support materials.
7.2.3 If the determination relates to an Appeal as a result of a Review of Grade, the Student Ombudsman shall make determination as to the appropriate processes. The Student Ombudsman shall consult with an academic discipline expert, normally from within the University, and the Faculty Dean (or nominee) responsible for the course, to determine a redress if the Student Ombudsman determines there are grounds for the student’s grade to be reconsidered.
Determinations of the Student Ombudsman
7.3.1 The Student Ombudsman’s Office shall make whatever further enquiries may be necessary, and subsequently report and make recommendations to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor or Vice-President & Registrar, and the Dean of the relevant Faculty.
7.3.2 The decision of the Student Ombudsman’s Office will be relayed to the Faculty and to the student by the Student Ombudsman. This will normally occur within 21 days of the student lodging the appeal.
7.3.3 It is the responsibility of the Faculty to implement any recommendation of the Student Ombudsman’s Office.
7.3.4 The determinations of the Student Ombudsman will be the final stage of any particular review of grade within the institution.
7.3.5 The Office of the Student Ombudsman may separately follow up any recommended changes to Faculty policies and procedures.
7.4 Reporting by the Student Ombudsman
7.4.1 The Student Ombudsman will provide a brief summary report of issues raised and recommendations for changes to Faculty policies and procedures to Academic Board at least twice each year. The report should be statistical, and not contain any reference to named individuals (either students or staff).
1. Council has established an Appeals Committee to hear and determine appeals from students of the University on academic matters. It is Council’s intention that the Appeals Committee of the Academic Board will be the final appeal body for students in the University on these matters, with no further right of appeal from the Appeals Committee’s decisions to the Council. 2. Functions - The Appeals Committee may hear and determine appeals from students on the following matters:
1. Appeals from students will be heard by the Appeals Committee of the Academic Board comprised of:
CQU CRICOS Provider Codes: QLD - 00219C; NSW - 01315F; VIC - 01624D
This handbook was correct as at: 16-06-2003