. Introduction.... Regulations for the Submission of Assessed Coursework.... Illness and other good cause... 4. Assessment, Resitting and the Grades CR, CW and MV... 4 5. Level - Marking Scheme... 5 6. Honours Degree Marking Scheme... 6 7. Plagiarism... 7 8. Complaints Procedure... 8 9. Undergraduate Assessment Feedback Sheet... 9 0. Feedback Form for Oral Presentations... 0. Introduction Archaeology closely follows the Senate Office s Code of Assessment, which is the final authority on methods of assessment across the University. All taught courses are assessed by a combination of coursework and examination. Marks derived from assessed coursework will therefore form a substantial proportion of your final degree result (more than 60% of a typical Single Honours degree if the dissertation and portfolio are included). This means that you should give coursework the same priority as all other forms of examination and ensure that it is handed in on time. This handbook gives a general explanation of the principles and procedures. There are differences between Levels, Three-Year Degree, Honours and Postgraduate assessment, so see those particular handbooks for more information. Courses vary as well, so you will also need to look carefully at individual course handouts. The nature and proportion of the assessed coursework element varies according to the course concerned and it is your responsibility to ensure that you understand what is required of you and when. In all cases, assessed coursework is designed to help you to consolidate your understanding of course materials and to encourage more extensive reading around the subject area, as well as providing opportunities for work focused on a particular topic. Where appropriate, coursework enables reinforcement of intellectual and practical skills learnt during the course. Most importantly, coursework enables you to get feedback on your progress. In addition to formal written feedback on the coursework, you can also seek individual verbal feedback and clarification by arrangement with the course convenor. If you are unhappy with a mark awarded then you should go back to the Course Convenor and ask for an explanation. If that does not resolve the issue, you may request a second opinion and in such cases the Course Convenor will pass this on to the Progress Committee who will consider your complaint. If after this process, you are still dissatisfied, the case would be drawn to the attention of the External Examiner following the relevant examination diet, and their decision on the grade awarded is final. In order to ensure the integrity and security of the assessment procedures, we use an anonymous marking policy, except where in cases where it is impractical, such as the dissertation). You should therefore ensure that the only means of identification on submitted work is your student number. Except for the purposes of feedback, anonymity is retained in both coursework and examinations until the end of the assessment process, after the point at which a result has been reached.
Finally, as you will be constantly reminded, it is important to follow the instructions on the examination papers and answer all the questions. If you fail to tackle a question a zero mark will be returned, which will significantly affect your results no matter how well you do in the other questions.. Regulations for the Submission of Assessed Coursework Responsibilities It is your responsibility to know exactly what is required for each course and when the required work must be submitted. Referencing You must follow the Harvard system of referencing to acknowledge the source of information and any quotations included in your work. You should also attach a detailed list of references to show your sources. For more information see the Referencing webpage. Submission Your assessed coursework should be word processed. The first page should show the title of the work, your student number, the title of the course to which it relates, the convenor of the course, and a computed word count. Note that the word count needs to fall within the required range (e.g. 500 000 words), and does not include tables, appendices of data, and bibliography. Do not write your name on it, as it is marked anonymously. All Honours courses use Moodle assignments for the submission, management and return of coursework. Please follow the convenor s instructions carefully. All coursework will be checked by Urkund anti-plagiarism software: after submitting, you will get an automated email giving you an originality score and an indication of which passages could potentially be considered as plagiarism. Correct them, resubmit your coursework, and look again at the Urkund originality report. When all the marking is finished, the marks will be released on moodle, and you will be able to download an annotated copy of your essay and a one-page feedback form. Marks are for guidance and are subject to moderation by the Board of Examiners. Any single piece of assessed coursework to the value of 50% or more of the course concerned goes automatically to the external examiners. Other coursework is made available for consultation by external examiners, if required. Deadlines Submission dates are fixed and must be met. Extensions are not permitted. New deadlines can only be given in exceptional circumstances and only by the Progress Committee (see below). The Course Convenors cannot give extensions and should not be asked. Late submissions will be penalised in accordance with University regulations and this will be indicated on returned coursework: Up to 5 working days: points (i.e. normally two secondary bands) per day. This means a B grade will become C if submitted one day late More than 5 working days: Grade H awarded (zero) Sub-components of coursework are subject to penalties for late submission in the same manner as full coursework components. It is clearly important to avoid lateness penalities. Persistent failure to meet deadlines for assessed coursework will have a serious effect on your marks and could easily lead to the loss of one or more degree classes, or even failure in your final degree. For this reason it is always better to submit an incomplete piece of work, rather than nothing at all - even if that work is not of the standard you would have liked it to be. (see Section below for Illness and other good cause ). Plagiarism The University will deal severely with work showing signs of collusion or plagiarism. See the Plagiarism section below, the University s plagiarism statement, and the Student Learning Service s support pages on plagiarism.
Getting coursework back After you submit your essay, it will be marked by either a lecturer or your tutor. Depending on the course, the essay will either be returned during a tutorial or be available from the Course Convenor. A Student Assessment Feedback form will be returned which serves to summarise the comments of the marker, including elements such as organisation, grammar and coherence of your arguments. If you wish further feedback you should make arrangements to discuss your work with the convenor, especially if the mark was poorer than you expected and you would like advice for improvement. The second copy of your essay will be kept for consultation by the external examiner (an examiner from another University who moderates the marks at the end of the academic year and who also reviews examination marks).. Illness and other good cause Good cause shall mean illness or other adverse personal circumstances affecting a candidate and resulting in either: i) the candidate s failure to attend an examination, or submit coursework at or by the due time, or otherwise satisfy the requirements of the scheme of assessment appropriate to his or her programme of studies; or, ii) the candidate s performance in examination or other instrument of assessment being manifestly prejudiced. Good cause refers to the sudden unforeseen onset of illness or adverse circumstances affecting the candidate. It is not intended to apply to chronic or persistent illness or to long-term adverse personal circumstances. Where there is a chronic medical condition good cause shall only be established where the candidate s performance in assessment has been compromised by a sudden severe episode of the illness. (Source: University Calendar, University Fees and General Information, Section 6.45. Further explanation available here) If you consider that you have a reason that may justify mitigation being applied for good cause, either for submitting coursework late or for reduced performance, then it is important that you:. Inform your Course Convenor as soon as possible by email (you may also be able to get help from your adviser).. Submit the coursework as soon as possible.. Obtain appropriate documentary evidence for your illness or other circumstances. 4. Fill in a Good Cause Claim on MyCampus. Submission of a Good Cause Claim is the mechanism which allows your circumstances to be considered by the Board of Examiners. Please note all Good Cause Claims must be submitted within a week of the date of the affected assessment. If you miss an examination due to adverse circumstances submit a Good Cause Claim instead of an Absence report. To submit a Good Cause Claim on MyCampus:. Go to the Student Center and select My Good Cause from the Academics menu.. Select the relevant course(s).. Complete the report in MyCampus (there is provision for particularly sensitive information to be provided separately, outwith the system, but a claim report must still be entered into MyCampus). 4. Add supporting evidence by uploading documents. (Scanners are available on level of the University Library). If you encounter any difficulties with this process please contact the appropriate Archaeology administrator immediately to let them know you have a problem with your Good Cause Claim. Their contact details are in your Level -/Honours/PG Handbook. What will happen to your Good Cause Claim The Course Administrator and/or Course Co-ordinator will ensure that your claim is considered and this will be in accordance with the section of the Code of Assessment which covers incomplete
assessment and good cause (paragraphs 6.45 to 6.5). The outcome of your claim will be posted into the Approval Information section on your Good Cause Claim in MyCampus. If it is accepted that your assessment was affected by good cause, the work in question will be set aside and you will (as far as is practicable) be given another opportunity to take the assessment with the affected attempt discounted. Note that University regulations stipulate a maximum deferral of any coursework deadline of days. If the piece of work is not submitted prior to coursework being marked and returned to the remainder of the class, and the Progress Committee determines that there is a justifiable case for mitigation, normally an equivalent new piece of coursework with a new deadline will be set. Note that it is your responsibility to make arrangements to catch up with missed classes unless alternatives have been agreed. 4. Assessment, Resitting and the Grades CR, CW and MV Different assessment and marking schemes apply for levels -, level, Honours and taught postgraduate courses. Special assessment arrangements are made for visiting students who may only be here for one semester. Pre-Honours A student who, by the end of the course, has failed to attain the threshold grade (grade D) in that course shall normally be permitted one further opportunity to attempt each component of the assessment, either by resitting the exam or submitting replacement coursework. The right to reassessment extends to all assessments for the course in which the student has failed to attain the threshold grade and performance is capped at the equivalent of Grade D, unless the student is returned as MV. A student who obtains a non credit-bearing grade (Grades E-H, MV or CW) will be offered the opportunity to resit. If this applies, you will receive an email after the Summer examination board in June, which will explain alternative assessment arrangements and provide instructions and information. Submission of reassessment coursework normally takes place on the same day of the resit examination. Explanation of non-grade terms used in MyCampus Credit Refused (CR): no grade is awarded when a student has not submitted at least 75% by weight of the course s summative assessment (including any examinations) and/or has failed to comply with the outstanding requirements for the award of credit by the end of the academic year in which the course is taken. CR applies to pre-honours and taught postgraduate courses and is not used for Junior Honours, where an opportunity is available to fulfil the credit regulations in the senior honours year. Credit Withheld (CW): no grade is awarded. This is when a student fails to submit at least 75% of the summative assessment (including any examinations) of a course by the end of the first assessment diet or fails to comply with other specified course requirements. For pre-honours courses, an opportunity exists to redress this situation by the end of the academic year and the student will be offered opportunities to resit the examination and/or resubmit coursework, normally over the summer vacation (see below). Different opportunities for reassessment apply at Honours level but only where good cause can be demonstrated and alternative arrangements for missed examinations or replacement coursework are made on a case-by-case basis and co-ordinated through the Honours Convenor and the Progress Committee. Medical (MV): no grade is awarded. This is used where good cause has been established, when the student cannot attend an examination or submit coursework by the agreed deadline or complete other course requirements due to illness or other adverse personal circumstances deemed to be good cause. In such cases appropriate written evidence must be provided for consideration by the course convenor (Levels and taught postgraduate) or the Archaeology Progress Committee (Honours). For a detailed description of the regulations around good cause see the Guide to the Code of 4
Assessment, chapter 5. Please note that a chronic medical condition shall not itself be considered a good cause although a short-term exacerbation of such a condition might be so judged. Deferred (7): for a variety of reasons a grade can be deferred (e.g. non-completion of the fieldwork requirement at the end of Senior Honours). This is expressed in MyCampus as a 7. 5. Level - Marking Scheme Primary Grade A B C D E F G Secondary Band 4 5 Descriptive guidelines Excellent work which evaluates a range of archaeological evidence and covers all relevant points in a well-formulated discussion. Correct referencing. Good piece of work which answers the question well by covering the main issues involved and referring to a reasonable body of archaeological evidence. Correct referencing. Solid piece of work which discusses a wide range of archaeological evidence but contextualises this poorly. Alternatively: demonstrates a good grasp of the topic but provides little supporting evidence. Referencing largely correct. Basic piece of work which presents some relevant archaeological evidence, albeit with errors. Limited familiarity with the topic. Errors in referencing. Poorly structured piece of work which presents only few items of archaeological evidence and which poorly considers the question. Poor referencing. Entirely unstructured piece of work, which is both rambling and of little relevance to the question. Few or no references. Minimal attempt and largely irrelevant. H Not submitted. For a fuller explanation of the Code of Assessment, including the general characteristics of the different grades, see the document entitled Understanding the marking system a guide for students that you can find on the university s Assessment webpage. 5
6. Honours Degree Marking Scheme Degree Primary Secondary Descriptive Guidelines Band Grade Band st A General Exemplary range and depth of attainment of ILOs. Insightful. Shows signs of independent thinking. st Outstanding work with clear evidence of independent thinking. st st Excellent work with signs of independent thinking. st 4 st 5 Very good work. Addresses the topic comprehensively and adduces wide ranging supporting data. Shows some insight. II.i B General Conclusive attainment of virtually all ILOs. Utilises relevant data. II.i Good work. Addresses the topic very well and adduces wide ranging supporting data. II.i Solid work. Addresses the topic well and adduces good supporting data. II.i Addresses the topic reasonably well and produces some supporting data. II.ii C General Clear attainment of ILOs. Assembles relevant data. II.ii Provides much relevant data but addresses the topic poorly, or addresses the topic reasonably but produces little supporting data. II.ii Provides much data but its relevance is not made explicit. Only limited consideration of the topic. II.ii Provides some relevant data but does not adequately address the topic. rd D General Acceptable attainment of ILOs. Poorly structured and much irrelevance and/or misconception. rd Provides some relevant data but with major omissions and little consideration of the topic. rd Poorly structured. Provides some data but its relevance not made apparent. Some errors apparent. rd Little structure or organisation. Little data provided. May contain some more serious errors. Fail E/F/G/H Attainment deficient or missing in respect of specific ILOs. Failure to answer the question. Unstructured, rambling and irrelevant. For a fuller explanation of the Code of Assessment, including the general characteristics of the different grades, see the document entitled Understanding the marking system a guide for students that you can find on the university s Assessment webpage. 6
7. Plagiarism Plagiarism is the theft of someone else s ideas, words, or data, and the attempt to pass them off as your own. In the process, it may appear that something is your own idea whereas it has in fact been derived from someone else. The University takes a very dim view of plagiarism, whether intentional or unintentional. It may result in the work being given a zero mark in a serious case, it may become a disciplinary matter and be referred to the Clerk of Senate for action under the University Code of Discipline. Suspected cases will be investigated and dealt with by the Head of Subject as required by University Regulations. Plagiarism typically involves copying passages from books, articles, or web sites without acknowledging the source or using quotation marks where appropriate. It can also consist of using an author s form of expression without appropriate acknowledgement, perhaps modifying words to try to disguise the fact. Copying from another student s work is plagiarism, and so is making your material available to someone in the knowledge that they will use it in this manner. In the examples below, () is an original quote, () is a plagiarised version, and () avoids plagiarism. As you can see, plagiarism can be a somewhat grey area as it is not just a matter of copying verbatim in () the words have been moved about and slight changes made, but it is still recognisably derived from the quote in (). Of course, you do not have to go to the extent of the example in () - simply adding a reference to the end of () would get round the problem. The golden rule is simple: if in doubt, source it. Bear in mind, however, that an essay which simply consists of sourced quotes stitched together isn t a suitable alternative to writing in your own words, drawing on sources to support your points where appropriate.... Archaeology is basically about three things: objects, landscapes, and what we make of them, now and for the future. Archaeology is quite simply the study of the past through material remains and with that activity come responsibilities (Gamble 00, 8) What is archaeology? Archaeology is simply the study of the past through the material remains, focussed around three things: landscapes, artefacts, and what we make of them, both in the present and in the future. What is archaeology? As Gamble points out, archaeology is about three things: objects, landscapes, and what we make of them (00, 8). Archaeology is the study of the past through its material remains however, with that activity come responsibilities (Gamble, op cit). Gamble, C. 00 Archaeology: The Basics (Routledge, London). If you submit work, which was carried out as part of a group (for example, in the Portfolio), it should still be your own work that is submitted, unless the instructions clearly state otherwise. Illustrations and photographs etc. produced by another member of the group should clearly be identified as such. More information on plagiarism can be found on the University s Student Conduct webpage, the University s plagiarism statement, and the Student Learning Service s support pages on plagiarism. If you are accused of plagiarism, you can get support from the SRC. If you have any concerns, talk to the course convenor in the first instance. 7
8. Complaints Procedure The University has introduced a new Complaints Procedure for 0 4. If you have a complaint please raise it with a member of staff in the area concerned. We aim to provide a response to the complaint within five working days. This is Stage. If you are not satisfied with the response provided at Stage you may take the complaint to Stage of the procedure. Similarly, if your complaint is complex, you may choose to go straight to Stage. At this stage the University will undertake a detailed investigation of the complaint, aiming to provide a final response within 0 working days. You can raise a Stage complaint in the following ways: by e-mail: complaints@glasgow.ac.uk by phone: 04 0 506 by post: The Senate Office, The University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G 8QQ in person: The Senate Office, Gilbert Scott Building, The University of Glasgow Complaints do not have to be made in writing, but whether it is at Stage or Stage you are encouraged to submit the completed Complaint Form, which is available here. This will help to clarify the nature of the complaint and the remedy that you are seeking. Remember that the SRC Advice Centre is available to provide advice and assistance if you are considering making a complaint. (Tel: 04 9 854; e-mail: advice@src.gla.ac.uk) 8
9. Undergraduate Assessment Feedback Sheet Student No: Course: Coursework title: Due date: Date submitted: See the Assessment Handbook for information on marking scheme, grades, late submission, plagiarism, complaints etc. Aspects handled well: Aspects handled less well: How to improve: Does this assignment address the 4 5 Depth and breadth of reading 4 5 question/task? Use of evidence 4 5 Structure, explanation, argument 4 5 Use and formatting of references (guidance available here) 4 5 Clarity of writing and expression 4 5 = very good, = adequate, 5 = very poor. These are indicative only and are not used to calculate your grade Word count (please tick): Too short: Within range: Too long: Provisional mark Penalty Adjusted mark Marker: Date: 9
0. Feedback Form for Oral Presentations Student No: Name of presenter: Topic of presentation: Criteria Content and argument Data & research Introduction & conclusion Research design: aims, context, methods Clarity of argument Poor... Good...... Comments Powerpoint presentation Clarity and relevance Problem-oriented Use of images Viewer-friendly...... Oral presentation Fluency and delivery Time management Clarity of explanation Engaging audience...... Discussion Listening! Responding to questions Encouraging discussion Managing your audience...... What s good? What needs improving? Marker: Date: 0