Return of Marked Work

The Policy on the Return of Marked Work sets out the University's expections for all departments to follow to support the provision of timely and constructive feedback to students. The Policy was last revised in November 2014.

Policy Statement

Coursework Assignments

1. Feedback and provisional grading on coursework for undergraduate and taught postgraduate students will be returned within 21 days of the submission date for campus-based programmes; 28 days for distance learning and approved programmes*.
2. Professional doctorate students should be provided with a provisional mark and associated feedback on submitted assessed components (excluding the thesis) within twenty-eight days from the date that the assessed component was submitted (DSocSci, EdD, and EngD degree programmes) or within forty-two days from the date that the assessed component was submitted (DClinPsy degree programme).
3.

In exceptional circumstances where this is not possible, the following actions should be taken:

  1. Students should be notified in advance of the expected return date and the reasons for the longer turn-round time
  2. Where possible, staff should provide some interim feedback: for example in the form of generic feedback to the class regarding common errors and potential areas for improvement.
4. Students should be notified early in each module, through module handbooks or their equivalent, of both the submission date and the return date for all coursework.
5. Staff engaged in marking should be notified, well in advance, of the marking schedules, in particular the submission and return dates for each piece of work for which they will be responsible so they can plan their diaries accordingly.
6. Submission and return of assignments within a module should normally be scheduled such that students receive feedback on one assignment before completion of a further assignment of a similar format.
7. If the assessment design for a programme comprises single, summative module assignments that are to be submitted around the same time, then there should be provision of an element of formative feedback prior to submission.
8. Where there are co-requisite modules that are taken in parallel within a programme, there should be co-ordination between module convenors such that students receive feedback on one assignment before completion of a further assignment of a similar format.
9. Where possible, end of term/semester submission dates should be avoided in respect of marking and return of hard-copy submissions in order to avoid lengthy delays between the marking of the work and its collection due to intervening vacations. Note that where work is being marked on-line or posted back to students these constraints need not apply.
10. The returned work should incorporate appropriate feedback guidance to enable the students to identify both where they have demonstrated particular strengths and how to improve their performance in future assignments. Further guidance regarding the provision of feedback is provided on the University website.
11. It is recognised that some very large scale pieces of work, such as dissertations, may not be returned within the 21 days. In such cases, staging points should be scheduled when effective feedback on progress can be provided.
12. Consistency of implementation and management of expectation are essential. Heads of Department (or their delegated representatives) should therefore monitor and take responsibility for the turn-round time of coursework and provision of feedback for all their modules. Departments will be asked to comment in their Annual Development Reviews on any exceptions to the turn-round policy.
13. Departments should regularly review their methods of marking and assessment design, incorporating a range of approaches as appropriate.
*The periods of 21 and 28 days are defined as 21/28 calendar days from the published submission date of the piece of work, excepting when this period includes public holidays and days when the University is officially closed, these days of closure being added into the total. There are certain campus-based programmes for which, for professional reasons, large numbers of external experts are involved in marking. Subject to approval, these will also be permitted the longer turn-round time of 28 days.

Examinations

1. Following the approval of the provisional results by examination boards, departments should make the results available to students within 14 days. Where appropriate this should include a breakdown at the level of the examination and coursework.
2. Departments should arrange for feedback on examination performance to be provided. This can take the form of one of the proposed feedback schemes based on the pilot exercise undertaken in January 2014. The proposed schemes are set out below but departments are also encouraged to adopt other schemes, as appropriate.
3. Students should have the opportunity to discuss their results with their personal tutor or adviser.

Feedback on Examinations

Scheme 1

Students are invited to attend sessions when they will have the opportunity to view their scripts and, following that, can complete a request form to meet with a personal tutor/module convenor to talk through any specific question(s) where they feel they need further explanation.

It is explicitly stated that this is not an opportunity to challenge the marks awarded. The viewing session is to be monitored by ‘invigilators’ and the students are not allowed to write on or remove any paper, or to take any photographic record etc. If sufficient numbers of departments participate in this scheme it is proposed that this could be managed centrally in terms of organisation of venue and monitors.

Nationally, this is the most commonly applied scheme. The pilot results indicate that the numbers of students availing themselves of this opportunity are low.

Scheme 2

Generic feedback is written regarding overall performance on each paper, along with median marks, so students can see how they were placed in relation to the cohort. For essay papers, this includes the median marks awarded for each question and a brief commentary on common strengths and weaknesses. For SAQ papers this could take the form of a note of the question topic (not the full question) and the median marks along with identification of any specific common errors.

The feedback can be provided either in a lecture session or be posted on BlackBoard.

Scheme 3

The exam scripts are distributed to the personal tutors and the tutees are invited to attend a routine tutor meeting to discuss their performance.

Scheme 4

A short, generic checkbox template is drafted which can be completed for each question: this is probably most applicable to essay papers. As the marker undertakes the marking of each essay s/he can fill in the template which can be returned to the student. This template could take the form of 5 or 6 features of the essay, each of which would be scored on a 5 point scale. [Example indicators are shown in the full Policy document (see PDF)]

A note about action points for departments

Specific action points for departments were introduced in November 2014 and can be found in the PDF of the Adobe Acrobat (PDF) Policy on the Return of Marked Work.

Introduction of the Policy and history of revisions

The Policy on the Return of Marked Work was originally approved by Senate in July 2011, on the recommendation of the Academic Policy Committee. It was revised in July 2014 to incorporate Professional Doctorate programmes. Further revisions were approved by Senate in November 2014 departments to reflect the provision of feedback on examination performance and add action points for departments.

Share this page: