• Section 1 - Purpose and Context
• Section 2 - Definitions
• Section 3 - Policy Statement
• Part A - Responsibility of Academic Staff 
• Clear Expectations
• Curriculum Design for Student Success
• Varied Deliverables
• Equity, Diversity and Student Support
• Administration
• Part B - Responsibility of Students
• Part C - Responsibility of Deans and Deputy Deans
• Part D - Grading Rules
• Weighting of Assessments
• Grade Tables
• Table A, Final grades receiving a mark (0-100%)
• Table B, Ungraded assessments/subject (including for students in official and approved exchange programs)
• Table D, Foundation Studies and Undergraduate Preparation Programs Grading Schema*
• Part E - Review of Grade
• Section 4 - Procedures
• Supplementary Assessments
• Notification to Students of Assessment Tasks, Due Dates and Feedback
• Submission and Collection of Assessment Materials
• Late Submission of Assessments
• Part F - Circumstances for Consideration of the Re-marking of an Assessment Task
• Part G - Official Results 
• Notification of a Final Grade and Provision of Marks to a Student
• Circumstances when all Grades in a Subject may be Reviewed
• Reporting to Senate Assessment Committee
• Review of Grade
• Part H - Academic Transcripts
• Section 5 - Guidelines

Section 1 - Purpose and Context

(1) Assessment is an essential component of education at Western Sydney University. It provides feedback to students on their learning and academic progress, and opportunities to demonstrate that they have achieved the learning outcomes expected for their program and subjects of study, in accordance with the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021. This ensures that the University's academic programs meet the needs of students, professionally accredited program requirements, and expectations that align with Western Sydney University's mission statement. Further guidance is available from the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) Guidance Note: Course Design (including Learning Outcomes and Assessment).

(2) Assessment at Western Sydney University is conducted using best-practice models in university education, including a criteria and standards-based approach to student assessment requiring that criteria be identified and performance standards described so that students know the level of performance required for each assessment task and understand how their performance will be evaluated. This ensures fairness and reliability in assessment.

(3) This policy must be read and understood with reference to the Assessment Guide and the following University policies:

1. Indigenous Australian Education Policy
2. Academic Records Issuance Policy
3. Curriculum Advice to Students Procedures
4. Curriculum Approval Procedures
5. Deferred Exam Procedures
6. Disability Policy
7. Disruption to Studies Policy
8. Examinations Policy
9. Graduate Attributes
10. Graduation Policy
11. Inherent Requirements webpage
12. Posthumous Awards and Aegrotat Grades Policy
13. Records and Archives Management Policy
14. Assessment Procedures - Review of Grade
15. Student Misconduct Rule
16. Teaching and Learning – Fundamental Code and
17. Curriculum Publication Procedures.

Section 2 - Definitions

(4) The following definitions apply for the purpose of this policy:

1. Academic integrity means ‘the moral code of academia. It involves using, generating and communicating information in an ethical, honest and responsible manner’ (TEQSA Guidance Note: Academic Integrity).
2. Dean means the Dean of the School that teaches the subject that is the focus of the review of grade application, or the relevant Director of a University Research Institute or Director, or Academic Director at a partner provider.
3. (Reasonable) Adjustments means administrative, environmental or procedural alterations that remove barriers for people with a disability so they can perform the inherent requirements of the job or program of study. For students, it could mean adjustments to the mode of delivery of classes or written material or the assessment process and timeframe. An adjustment is reasonable if it takes into account the requirements of the person and balances the interests of all parties affected. See the Disability Policy.
4. Alignment means the deliberate linking of stated learning outcomes, teaching and learning activities and assessment tasks.
5. Assessment tasks means tasks that generate insights into student learning by contributing in a meaningful way to the subject and program learning outcomes. This may include essays, reports, tests, examinations, laboratory, clinical or field practicums, calculations and computer programs, musical performances, placements, projects, compilations, productions, presentations, performances or web-based discussion. All assessment tasks should generate valid evidence of achievement of the subject's learning outcomes.
6. Authentic assessment means assessment that requires students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in ‘real world’ contexts. Tasks may either be analogous to the kinds of problems faced by professionals in the field, or project/tasks defined by an external client or partner.
7. Cohort means all students correctly registered in a subject of study.
8. Contract cheating occurs when a third party provides assistance to students that forms a substantial part of an assessment task that students are required to personally undertake. This applies regardless of the other party’s relationship to the student and whether any payment was agreed. It also applies if somebody who is not the student sits an examination or viva voce test on a student’s behalf. 
9. Criteria means specific performance attributes or key characteristics of student performance in an assessment task.
10. Feedback means appropriate and timely information provided to students about their performance. 
11. Formative Assessment means an assessment task that provides timely feedback to students about how their learning is progressing, and identifies to students and staff any problems or obstacles that students are encountering. It typically begins early in the subject (before the end of week 4), usually with a small percentage of the overall mark (also see Clause (4)i).
12. Graduate Attributes means statements of the desired attributes that Western Sydney University undergraduates and postgraduates will possess upon graduation. See the Graduate Attributes Guidelines.
13. Learning Outcomes means statements describing what students will be able to do upon successful completion of a subject or program of study. Qualifications must be designed and accredited to enable graduates to demonstrate the learning outcomes expressed as knowledge, skills and the application of knowledge and skills specified in the Australian Qualifications Framework.
14. LMS means the University's Learning Management System.
15. Mandatory Assessment means an assessment that must be at least attempted for the student to be able to pass a subject. A blank or minimal response does not constitute an acceptable attempt. Students will receive a Fail Non-Submit (FNS) grade for the subject if they do not submit an attempt at a mandatory assessment. Mandatory assessment tasks are indicated in the Learning Guide. See Clause (22).
16. Mixed cohort subject means students of different levels being taught together, such as:
    1. a postgraduate cohort and an undergraduate cohort
    2. an advanced undergraduate program cohort and a standard undergraduate program cohort or
    3. a language subject comprised of both native and non-native speakers.
17. Moderation means regulation to achieve consistent quality through peer review of tasks, criteria and standards. Peer review or moderation of assessment tasks is used to ensure the appropriateness of the tasks set and their conformity with this policy. 
18. Rubrics (or Marking Schemes) means a document that explains how student responses to an assessment task will be assessed. They are provided to markers prior to assessment. For some assessments, a rubric is also written for students and provided prior to assessment.
19. Special Requirements means requirements related to enrolment in programs or registration in subjects where clinical, practical or work placements are part of a program or subject structure, such as a Working with Children Check or First Aid Certificate.
20. Standards means statements communicated to students in advance outlining how judgements will be made about the quality of their work. Standards-based assessment requires the articulation of expected student standards of performance, providing a clear and defensible framework within which to judge students’ work.
21. Summative Assessment means an assessment that typically occurs at the end of a series of learning activities or follows formative assessment. It is intended to verify performance and award grades or marks, measuring a student’s performance in a subject, but may also incorporate further formative elements.
22. Threshold Assessment means a specific type of mandatory assessment where a student’s failure to complete the assessment and achieve a pre-defined mark specified in the Learning Guide results in a subject fail irrespective of the value of the assessment item or the marks attained. Threshold assessments are indicated in the Learning Guide.
23. Work-integrated assessment/Partnership pedagogy means the assessment of learning that is conducted through ‘real world’ tasks requiring students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills in meaningful contexts. Wherever possible, assessment should embody partnership pedagogy by being co-created with stakeholders to ensure authenticity, relevance and engagement.

Section 3 - Policy Statement

(5) Assessment at Western Sydney University is:

1. Aligned: Assessment tasks are aligned with program and subject learning outcomes, professional accreditation (where this applies) and relevant graduate attributes. Assessment will fairly and reliably validate student attainment of these learning outcomes.
2. Supportive: Assessment will support effective student learning and the transition to university study. Early formative assessment tasks, particularly for students in their first terms of study, will provide diagnostic feedback to identify and support at-risk students.
3. Guided: Feedback on assessment tasks will be timely and informative to provide students with guidance on performance on the task and how this can be improved on subsequently assessment tasks. Guided feedback is applied to encourage effective learning.
4. Authentic: Assessment tasks that reflect the circumstances and complexity of professional workplace environments add authenticity to assessment tasks. Where possible in degree programs, authentic assessments will be developed in partnership with students and external organisations to enrich the student experience and enhance the employability of Western Sydney University graduates. 
5. Criteria and standards-based: Assessment is based on clearly established criteria and standards, not ranking. These are designed to sufficiently, fairly, validly and reliably measure student performance of intended learning outcomes and define and maintain academic standards.
6. Quality Assured: Quality assurance processes are applied to ensure the appropriateness and quality of assessment meets the standards required by the University.

(6) Each subject of study will have:

1. assessable tasks developed to collect evidence of student attainment of subject learning outcomes. The logic of the assessment tasks will be explained to the students in the form of a rationale
2. standards developed by applying professional judgements about expected levels of student performance on assessment criteria. Standards will be benchmarked against acceptable levels of performance within the University, discipline and/or profession
3. clear criteria and standards of performance developed for each assessment task, based on criteria published in the Learning Guide. Assessment criteria should align with the learning outcomes for the subject and guide students’ efforts, informing them what is important and what they must do in an assessment task. These criteria and standards will be described so that students are informed about the level of performance required for each assessment task and
4. a clear indication in the Learning Guide as to the required referencing style for the subject (where relevant), based on the supported options in the Referencing Styles Guidelines.

(7) Programs and, where possible, subjects will include a variety of assessment tasks, including authentic assessment, that are academically appropriate and consistent with professional accreditation requirements. This policy applies to all of these types of assessment, including but not limited to those in Clause (4)d above.

(8) Programs, subjects and assessment tasks will be designed to ensure that all students receive clear instruction about maintaining academic integrity, and that opportunities for contract cheating and other breaches of integrity are minimised. See the Assessment Guide for a range of options. Guidance on using online alternatives to traditional assessment formats, such as invigilated exams, can be provided by Office of the Pro Vice-Chancellor, Learning Futures (OPVC, LF) staff.

Part A - Responsibility of Academic Staff 

(9) The Subject Coordinator (or equivalent; for example, at a third-party provider) is responsible for ensuring that assessment items validly assess the learning outcomes of the subject. Benchmarking and peer review of assessment should be used to assess this alignment and ensure that the nature of the assessment elements and learning outcomes are up to date with current University assessment practice. There should be clear evidence of standard setting when assessments are designed.

Clear Expectations

(10) The Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) will ensure that the timing and requirements for assessment tasks are clearly communicated to students in the Learning Guide and through the Learning Management System (LMS). Standards and criteria should be described in a rubric/marking scheme, where relevant.

(11) The Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) will ensure that the number and nature of assessment tasks and the learning outcomes they relate to are specified in the subject documentation approved through the Curriculum Approval process.  

Curriculum Design for Student Success

(12) Schools and other academic units will ensure that subjects of study have a variety of assessment types ensuring students get instructive feedback from early formative assessments and the opportunity to demonstrate competencies in a variety of formats. See Clauses (4)d and (28).

(13) Wherever possible, subjects should incorporate work-integrated assessment, developed using partnership pedagogy.

(14) Formative assessments should start occurring early in the subject (before the end of week 4) and can use a wide variety of methods to conduct in-process evaluations of student comprehension, learning needs, and academic progress during a lesson, subject or program.

(15) Formative assessments should be held in all Level 1 subjects before the end of week 4. See Clause (30).

(16) Formative assessments may be either ungraded or have minimal marks allocated. They should neither be mandatory nor threshold, except where the assessment has the additional function of identifying students who will be advised to undertake a more introductory or more advanced subject in the same discipline. 

(17) Feedback should actively improve student learning by describing to students how to improve the quality of their work. Students should be told clearly when they will be receiving feedback on written assessment tasks.

(18) Where possible, assessment tasks should be designed to enable students to apply feedback provided for an earlier task to a later task. This is particularly relevant to Level 1 subjects. There should be a focus on assessment that generates timely and useful feedback.

(19) Academic staff should ensure that feedback on student work, either individually or in a group, provides enough detail to help students identify their strengths and areas for improvement, without discouraging self-reliance in learning and assessment.

(20) Feedback on written assessment tasks will normally be provided to students within three weeks of the submission date. An exception will be incorporated for staged assessment tasks whereby all feedback must be provided to students prior to the submission of an assignment that aligns with one that was previously submitted.

(21) In providing feedback to students, academic staff are to:

1. ensure adequate records of marks and any relevant comments on individual student assessment tasks are kept in accordance with the University's Records and Archives Management Policy
2. maintain the principles of the University's Privacy Policy in relation to students (refer to the section Information Protection Principles) and 
3. in instances of suspected student cheating, collusion and/or plagiarism, ensure that actions taken are consistent with the University's Student Misconduct Rule.

(22) Mandatory and threshold assessment tasks should only be assigned if required by accreditation and/or if an academic rationale is approved through the Curriculum Approval process. These assessment tasks should be clearly indicated in the Learning Guide. Schools should progressively review the requirements for each subject through the scheduled review process for programs and subjects.

(23) Where a student experiences difficulty in meeting submission deadlines, they can apply for an extension using the Guidelines - Request for Extension or Missed Compulsory Activity (or equivalent) or, for more serious situations where there are extenuating circumstances, resubmit assessment tasks as approved through the Disruption to Studies Policy. 

(24) A subject may, at the discretion of the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent), incorporate routine resubmission of work as part of the assessment process to provide students with the opportunity to improve their performance against the criteria and standards.

Varied Deliverables

(25) Mixed cohorts can have different assessment tasks, but they must have the same weighting for each cohort, and align with the learning outcomes.

(26) Subjects offered in different delivery modes (face-to-face, blended, HyFlex, fully online) must show equivalence in terms of students successfully achieving or demonstrating (through a variety of means) learning outcomes. This will be monitored by the School Academic Committee (SAC), under the oversight of Academic Senate's Assessment Committee.

(27) Learning Futures staff will provide guidance about conducting assessment tasks through the University's LMS.

Equity, Diversity and Student Support

(28) Schools and other academic units will ensure that a variety of assessment tasks are provided, where appropriate, to recognise the diversity of the students at the University, allowing students the opportunity to complete work in a manner that is meaningful and/or significant to them. Where possible, this should include flexibility of assessment (deliverable) format where student digital literacy and/or other emergent skills can be demonstrated through creative use of media.

(29) All assessment tasks, including examinations, must allow reasonable adjustments to reflect students’ Academic Integration Plans (AIPs), as long as the inherent requirements have not been compromised.

(30) Early, formative assessment tasks should be included up to the end of week 4 or earlier in all Level 1 subjects to help identify students who are not engaging or who may need additional support. Feedback on these assessments should be provided to the students before subsequent assessments are due to be submitted. Ideally this feedback should be provided before the census date for the term, but this may not always be possible, especially for short terms.

Administration

(31) Data Integrity, Quality and Operations will administer no more than one formal/invigilated examination per subject and it will be held during the official Final Examination Period. For information about Deferred Exams, refer to the Deferred Exam Procedures.

Part B - Responsibility of Students

(32) Students have a responsibility to:

1. make sure they understand assessment requirements by reading this policy, their Subject Outlines and Learning Guides
2. follow guidance from their Teacher/Lecturer/Instructor/Subject Coordinator/Online Learning Advisor (or equivalent)
3. seek advice from the Disability Service if they have a disability or chronic health condition and wish to have adjustments and/or an AIP. Liaise with the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) about any reasonable adjustments that are required by the AIP
4. complete the Academic Integrity Module, adhere to the Student Code of Conduct, read and understand the Student Misconduct Rule and commit to ethical behaviour
5. address all the Special Requirements for the subject or program they are undertaking, as often these requirements are the gateway to assessable tasks such as placements and practicums
6. contact the IT Service Desk and keep evidence of that contact if they are having technical problems with uploading of assessments to digital platforms
7. apply within five working days of the due date if a supplementary assessment or other Disruption to Studies Provision is required. See Clause (53)
8. apply within two working days of the due date if Disruption to Studies application is required for students studying at The College.

Part C - Responsibility of Deans and Deputy Deans

(33) It is the responsibility of the Dean or relevant Associate Dean, as determined by the Dean, and Deputy Dean with support from Directors of Academic Programs (DAPs), Subject Coordinators and Academic Program Advisors (APAs)(or equivalent), to:

1. ensure that their staff comply with this and related policies and that School Academic Committees follow due process, confirming that Quality Assurance practices, such as moderation and external peer-review of assessment, are undertaken as appropriate
2. approve supplementary assessments and Disruption to Studies requests in accordance with policy.

Part D - Grading Rules

(34) All of the elements relating to Grading Rules should be clearly addressed in the Learning Guide, with reminders given in class and through the LMS. Refer to the Guidelines section of this Policy.

(35) Marks cannot be given solely for attendance, except if attendance is required (for example, for professional accreditation), in which case it will be recorded but no marks assigned. See Clause (44). Where this is a mandatory assessment task, the minimum required attendance (e.g., 80%, 100%) should be specified as a threshold requirement. 

(36) Scaling of marks is not permitted, except in accordance with Clause (84).

(37) Moderation practices are essential for quality assurance purposes. Moderation must occur before the marks for an assessment task are returned to students and not afterwards.

(38) Moderation should ensure that markers develop a shared understanding of the expected standards and apply them consistently. The relevant Associate Dean and Learning Futures staff can give advice about discipline-appropriate moderation practices.

(39) Assessment-related decisions that may impact on a students’ progression or graduation must:

1. be based solely on the assessments specified for that purpose and
2. not depend on judgements made by a single marker without review by colleagues for calibration or moderation.

(40) Before submitting final marks and grades for approval by the School, the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) must ensure that individual student grades that are one mark below a grade boundary (for example, 49 F or 64 P) have been reviewed to confirm that the criteria and standards have been applied properly, and to determine whether the student has met the subject learning outcomes and can be awarded the higher grade. Students with final marks between 45% and 49% can consider applying for a supplementary examination. See Clauses (49) to (55).

(41) Final marks for a subject are rounded to the nearest whole number. This only applies to the final mark for a subject. 

(42) Results will only be communicated to students through formal channels, as described in Part F – Official Results.

Weighting of Assessments

(43) Specific weightings must be used (for example, 25% not 20-25%).

(44) Participation in in-class and online activities can be encouraged with a 10% maximum mark. Participation must be more than just attendance (see Clause (35)) and expectations will need to be defined by the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) and included in the Subject Learning Guide.

(45) Unless specifically approved through the Curriculum Approval process, the maximum weighting for any assessment item, including a final assessment item, is 50% of the total mark.

(46) Level 1 subjects should not have assessment tasks that are weighted at greater than 40% of the total mark for the subject. Exceptions will be made for subjects with professional accreditation requirements or for iterative deliverables, such as items in a design portfolio, that add up to more than 50%. Exceptions are also possible for Project subjects, and subjects at higher levels; for example, capstone subjects. All assessment weightings must be approved through the Curriculum Approval process.

(47) Group work can be marked at no more than 30% of the total mark, unless approved through the Curriculum Approval process. Individual contributions to group work should be recognised if they are differentiated within the project. 

Grade Tables

Table A, Final grades receiving a mark (0-100%)

Table B, Ungraded assessments/subject (including for students in official and approved exchange programs)

Table C, Administrative grades (applied by Data Integrity, Quality and Operations staff on advice from the School or Director, Data Integrity, Quality and Operations) 

Table D, Foundation Studies and Undergraduate Preparation Programs Grading Schema*

(48) If a student has a subject for which the grade is not yet finalised at the time of the results release, a status will be applied to the subject giving the reason for the un-finalised grade. Upon the grade being finalised, the status will be removed and the final grade will be applied. Temporary grades should be finalised before the following census date.

Part E - Review of Grade

(49) Students may apply for a review of their final grade in a subject following the release of results at the end of each term where the:

1. Subject Coordinator did not provide a Subject Learning Guide
2. assessment requirements specified in the Subject Learning Guide were varied in an unreasonable way
3. assessment requirements specified in the Subject Learning Guide were unreasonably or prejudicially applied
4. student believes that an administrative error has occurred in the release of the grade
5. due regard has not been paid to any Disruption to Studies provision granted to the student as a result of illness or misadventure.

(50) Review of grade applications must be:

1. made within ten (10) working days from the official release of results for that term
2. an individual application for each subject request and
3. accompanied by relevant supporting documentation.

(51) The University may prescribe a fee for review of grade applications where the student is applying for a passing grade. Any fees will be approved by the Vice-President, People and Advancement and published on the University's website. If a fee is charged for passing grades, it will be refunded if the grade changes.

(52) A review of grade application will be rejected where:

1. no valid grounds in accordance with the Review of Grade have been provided to substantiate the application
2. grounds exist to review the grade, but such a review, if conducted, would not result in any alteration of the grade 
3. the student has not completed all mandatory assessments for the subject as outlined in the Subject Learning Guide (except in some cases where a Disruption to Studies provision has altered a mandatory assessment item) or
4. the grade awarded was the outcome of a determination under the Student Misconduct Rule.

Section 4 - Procedures

Supplementary Assessments

(54) Students will be eligible to apply for a supplementary assessment attempt where they:

1. have failed a subject either by failing one item with an assessment weighting of less than 50% or multiple items whose cumulative total amounts to less than 50% of the marks available and
2. have come within 5% of the passing grade for the subject (scoring 45-49%).

(55) Supplementary Assessment attempts are not available for threshold assessments.

(56) A Summary of the outcomes of any supplementary assessments offered this Policy must be reported to the relevant SAC.

(57) Students in end-on Bachelor (Honours) programs and subjects with exceptions approved through the Program and Subject Approvals process (for example, clinical placements) are not eligible for supplementary assessments.

(58) Students will not be eligible for a supplementary assessment where a fail grade for that Subject has been imposed as a result of a finding of misconduct under the Student Misconduct Rule. 

(59) Students must apply for a supplementary assessment in writing to the Subject Coordinator (or as published to students at results release) within five working days of the official notification of results. One attempt only will be offered to achieve a pass in the supplementary assessment.

(60) The supplementary assessment should be designed by the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) to allow staff to determine as efficiently as possible whether the student has met the desired learning outcomes for the assessment task(s) they have failed.

(61) The final grade awarded for the subject will be ‘Pass’ with a mark of 50 or, if the marks are lower than the original attempt, the original mark will stand. 

Notification to Students of Assessment Tasks, Due Dates and Feedback

(62) Any variation in the assessment task(s) after assessment information has been provided to students in the Learning Guide, and that affects all students within a subject, will only be made in exceptional and compelling circumstances. The Dean or Deputy Dean is to approve such changes, and all students are to be formally notified in accordance with the normal University communication protocols.

(63) Students will be informed of their numerical mark for every component of assessment in the subject unless the component is assessed as satisfactory/unsatisfactory.

(64) The results of the Final Examination or other assessment task in a subject will be available from the School that teaches the subject after the official grades and marks have been provided to students by Data Integrity, Quality and Operations. 

Submission and Collection of Assessment Materials

(65) All text-based assessment tasks, with the exception of those submitted through a University-sanctioned plagiarism checker, must be accompanied by a completed assignment cover sheet, which includes a student declaration confirming that the task has been undertaken ethically and that the work does not include plagiarism. For information on the processes that follow from allegations of plagiarism, refer to the University's Student Misconduct Rule.

(66) Students should collect their marked assessment task(s) with sufficient time to understand why the mark/grade has been awarded and to learn from the feedback provided by the marker.

(67) Unclaimed student work for assessment will be retained for a period of one month after the end of the relevant term. Examination papers and final major assessments are kept for a period of 12 calendar months following the end of the relevant term. 

Late Submission of Assessments

(68) Late submission penalties will be applied at 10% per calendar day up to 10 days, i.e. marks equal to 10% of the assignment’s worth will be deducted as a ‘flat rate’ from the mark awarded for each calendar day the assignment is late up to 10 calendar days. Saturday and Sunday each count as one calendar day. 

(69) Late assessment tasks will not be accepted after the marked assessment task has been returned to students who submitted the assessment task by the due date.

Part F - Circumstances for Consideration of the Re-marking of an Assessment Task

(70) Assessment criteria and standards (rubric or marking scheme) should be provided to all students for each assessment task. If a student does not understand why they achieved their mark/grade for an assessment or how they might have attained a better grade, they can ask to discuss the assessment task with the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent). Students should make this request for discussion no more than five working days after the assessment task has been made available for collection by the student.

(71) If the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) agrees that the assessment requires re- or cross-marking because the original marker did not properly apply the criteria and standards applicable to the assessment, the re-mark should be undertaken by the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) or another appropriately experienced academic. Where a re-mark is undertaken, all comments from the previous marking should be removed before the assessment is re-marked, or where possible, a copy of the original submitted assessment task should be provided. Where the assessment task has a performance, practical or clinical skills component, the matter should be referred to the relevant DAP for review and to plan action. Marks should never be added unless there is a re-mark undertaken on proper grounds.

(72) If the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) does not agree at the end of the meeting with the student that a re-mark is justified, the student will be advised that the assessment task will not be re-marked. The student should be made aware of the provisions for a Review of Grade at the end of the term in the University's Assessment Procedures - Review of Grade. 

(73) The outcome of the discussion with the student will be recorded as per the University's Curriculum Advice to Students Procedures. 

Part G - Official Results 

(74) Final grades and marks in a subject are endorsed by the Dean or nominee and forwarded to the relevant SAC for consideration and approval.

(75) Marks will be provided to the OSUP by Schools and will be recorded into the Student Management System (SMS). Official results will be released at the direction of the Director, Data Integrity, Quality and Operations after being approved by SACs.

(76) Where a result has not been finalised within the timeframe, Schools will:

1. review the list of outstanding temporary grades provided by the Director, Data Integrity, Quality and Operations and resolve the results by the due date advised by the Office of Student and University Planning
2. in certain circumstances, and with the approval of the Dean or Deputy Dean, ask the Director, Data Integrity, Quality and Operations to allow an I grade or N grade to continue past the relevant due date.

(77) If a change of final grade is required after approval of the results for a subject, for example as a result of supplementary assessments, the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) will recommend the change, providing reasons, to the Dean for approval. A summary of approved changes of grade will be submitted to the next meeting of the SAC for noting. 

(78) Except for any unfinalised grades that have been approved to remain outstanding by the Dean or Deputy Dean, the OSUP will apply an FNS Grade for all teaching periods after the Autumn/1H and Spring/2H relevant census dates. 

Notification of a Final Grade and Provision of Marks to a Student

(79) Students will be advised by Data Integrity, Quality and Operations in the Office of Student and University Planning of final grades for a subject and subsequent changes of final grades for a subject. Students will not be provided with final grades for a subject by any other means.

(80) For grades in Table A of the Table of Grades, marks will be recorded on the SMS and provided to students by Data Integrity, Quality and Operations in the Office of Student and University Planning. Marks and grades may be viewed by accessing the results notice online and on official transcripts.

(81) Online results notices and official transcripts will only have marks for subjects taken from 2002, or in the case of Fail grades, from 2009.

Circumstances when all Grades in a Subject may be Reviewed

(82) Subject Coordinators (or equivalent) may be asked to justify final grades allocated to a cohort.

(83) If a significant number of students in a cohort receive extremely high or extremely low or bunched grades, or if there are significant inconsistencies between groups undertaking the subject in different locations or by different modes, this may indicate a failure to properly apply the criteria and standards application to the assessment items in the subject.

(84) Where it appears that criteria and standards may not have been properly applied, the SAC will ask the Deputy Dean or nominee to investigate the matter in consultation with the Subject Coordinator and DAP (or equivalent). Re-marking of assessment tasks or adjustment of marks may be undertaken in these exceptional circumstances, and the Subject Coordinator (or equivalent) will be advised of the outcome. It may be necessary for some or all of the results for the whole subject to be withheld pending investigation.

Reporting to Senate Assessment Committee

(85) Following terms, each School will submit a report to the Senate Assessment Committee, including a summary of the approved results for subjects, any significant variability, anomalies and trends, and any recommendations about assessment policies and practices.

Review of Grade

(86) Refer to the Assessment Procedures - Review of Grade.

Part H - Academic Transcripts

(87) An Australian Higher Education Graduation Statement, which incorporates academic transcript details, will be provided to students at the time of graduation.

(88) An academic transcript may also be requested on payment of a fee. If the student is identified as eligible and approved to graduate, this will be noted on the transcript. Refer to the Academic transcript/record webpage.

Section 5 - Guidelines

(89) Related Guidelines are:

1. Assessment Guide
2. Guidance on Application of Grades
3. Guidelines - Request for Extension or Missed Compulsory Activity
4. PF Grade - Application Process
5. The College Guidelines for Students - Assessment Extensions
6. Referencing Styles Guidelines.