Department of Information Studies Policy on Moderation of Assessed Work
1. Internal Moderation:
- The quality and consistency of marking by all internal markers on a module is moderated by the Module Coordinator or the appropriate Departmental Examinations Officer.
- All dissertations are second marked.
- If a student feels that a mark is markedly out of line with his/her expectations, they should arrange a personal tutorial with the original marker to discuss this. A student may only request that a piece of assessed work be remarked if a procedural error has occurred at any stage in the assessment process, for example:
• if the mark is perceived not to be compatible with the Report/narrative comments
• if the marker is perceived to have missed significant mark-winning material in the work, which may if noticed, have changed the mark for the work
• if a mark has been inaccurately recorded in Departmental or University student records
If the marker acknowledges there may have been a procedural error, the marker consults the appropriate Departmental Examinations Officer. Depending upon the nature of the procedural error, the Examinations Officer may recommend that the work is blind second marked by another member of staff. The mark will either remain the same or be altered in the light of the second marker's assessment. The Departmental Examinations Officer will notify the student that second marking has taken place.
2. External Moderation:
- The External Examiner looks at a sample of student work on a programme taken from the bottom, middle and top range of marks, i.e. to assess whether the marking range has been fairly implemented.
- The External Examiner also looks specifically at the quality of marking by individual internal markers to assess whether there is comparability across the board.
- The External Examiner will also look at all dissertations of 'distinction' standard.