Supporting Information: School of Medicine
This is version 1.0 of the Supporting Information for the School of Medicine, which applies from the 2026/27 academic year onwards. This supporting information is owned by the School of Medicine. Please contact [email protected] (for CUPS programmes), [email protected] (for MBChB) or [email protected] (for PGT Medicine) for any matters related to this supporting information.
Contents
- Purpose and Scope
- Supplementary Information - Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes
- Supplementary Information - Assessment Policy and Procedures
- Other Supplementary Information
- Students awarded according to the Rules for Award
1. Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this supporting information is to set out principles and procedures which relate to assessment in the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, encompassing the School of Medicine
The supporting information underpins and should be read alongside the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes and the Assessment Policy & Procedures.
2. Supplementary Information – Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes
This section contains information supplementary and complementary to the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes.
2.1 Module Mark/Grade (Academic Regulations Section 7.4.2)
The MBChB pass mark does not conform to the standard university specified pass marks. Instead, pass marks are standard set according to the content and nature of questions using research-informed criterion-based methods. Each exam therefore has its own unique pass mark.
For in course assessment on the MBChB marks are for illustrative purposes and all assessments are pass/fail. The requirements to pass each in course assessment will be detailed in the assessment brief.
2.2 Module Attempts and Reassessment (Academic Regulations Section 7.5)
In line with the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes, a student shall be permitted two attempts to pass a module. In the School of Medicine, the only exception to this is the Medical Licensing Assessment (MLA) in Year 5 of the MBChB. This is a result of GMC regulations relating to the permitted number of attempts for the AKT component of the MLA, where 4 valid attempts are permitted.
The Medical Licensing Assessment (MLA) forms part of the summative assessment for Year 5 of the MBChB. In order to pass Year 5, a student needs:
- A pass in the Clinical and Professional Skills Assessment (CPSA) in that academic year
The CPSA consists of 2 parts both of which have to be completed in that academic year
- Programmatic review- completion of all work based placed assessments and passing at least 5 out of 6 placements
- A pass in the OSCE
- To hold a valid Applied Knowledge Test (AKT) pass (could be from the previous academic year)
Standard university resit and mitigation rules apply, with the exception of the AKT component of the MLA exam, where students can have 4 attempts without any mitigation (and in order to do so, must repeat year 5, in its entirety, as a second and final attempt without any mitigation, if they fail the first two attempts at the AKT).
Any further attempts would only be possible with approved mitigation.
In the School of Medicine, further 1st attempts for passed assessment components, following mitigating circumstances outcomes, are only available for students commencing programmes from 2025/2026 Academic year.
2.3 Credit and Progression (Academic Regulations Section 8)
For students enrolled on MBChB it is not possible to progress to the next year of the programme until all assessments have been satisfactorily completed. There is no opportunity for progression with incomplete or failed assessments. If any assessments are not passed, students must repeat the academic year in its entirety, including all assessments, in order to progress.
3. Supplementary Information – Assessment Policy and Procedures
This section contains information supplementary to the Assessment Policy & Procedures (AP&P) where Schools are required to develop and define their approach.
3.1 Setting and Approval of Assessment Methods (AP&P section 4)
Programme Teams are responsible for the internal checking of assessments prior to them being approved by external examiners. Module leads are responsible for completing assessment briefs which are to be reviewed by either year leads (MBChB) or Programme Leads for all undergraduate and postgraduate programmes prior to publication to students.
For examination papers where programmes have Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body (PSRB) requirements, exam questions will be mapped to external standards such as expected graduate outcomes.
Exam paper setting may also include the drawing of questions from nationally accredited PSRB’s or other assessment alliances and appropriately standard set.
Some examinations for MBChB are written and set by the GMC and in this instance are not checked internally.
3.2 Registration for Assessments (AP&P section 5)
Students on MBChB will have alternative resit arrangements, these will be detailed on commencement of the programme.
Specific timings for reassessment will depend on the details of the programme and the outcome of any application for mitigating circumstances. For example, if students need to undertake significant laboratory or project work to pass a module, or if the resit would clash with other work required on the programme, there may be insufficient time to undertake a resit over the summer. The School of Medicine will provide information on the resit opportunities available when the final module marks are published.
For students commencing their programmes in January, resit examinations are normally held in January or May. Students with coursework resits will be advised of the submission deadlines, which will normally be during the corresponding resit period.
For programmes within the School of Medicine the recommendation is that within a single assessment period no more than of 50% of the academic years credits that can be taken in any one opportunity; for example: 60 credits in an undergraduate taught programme where each academic year is 120 credits.
The final decision is taken on a student-by-student basis taking into consideration all assessment elements that are being undertaken. Exceeding this, against the advice of the Programme team, is done so at the student’s risk.
3.3 Submission of Coursework (AP&P section 6)
In the School of Medicine submission deadlines are set in accordance with the AP&P section 6.3.2.
All assessment deadlines are detailed within the Assessment Brief, any alternative deadlines that have been agreed by the Associate Pro-Vice Chancellor for Student Education and Engagement, or as an agreed reasonable adjustment, will be communicated via email.
Within the School of Medicine there are assessments where extensions are not available due to the nature of the assessment. This may include but is not exclusive to:
Timetabled oral presentations
Observed Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs)
Observed Clinical Assessments (OCA)
Laboratory practicals
Case based discussion
Group work
Students will be informed through relevant assessment briefs or module information areas where extensions are not available.
3.4 Late Submission of Coursework (AP&P section 6.4)
Assessments with a pass/fail grading cannot be submitted late. All in-course pass/fail assessments must be handed in by the stated deadline. Students unable to meet the deadline for valid reasons may apply for an extension where available, and this must be done before the deadline. Any student not submitting by the deadline and without an agreed extension will be given a fail grade for a pass/fail assessment.
For work with an allocated, mark penalties will be applied down to the pass mark as per the University AP&P, with the exception of the Gateway to Medicine year, where penalties will be applied down to the progression mark.
All penalties are applied at the School Assessment Board.
3.5 Resubmission of Own Work (AP&P section 6.5)
Where the reassessment of a module permits the re-work of the original submission this will be clearly stated on the module assessment brief.
Where re-worked submissions are not permitted a new assessment brief will be provided for the resit assessment.
3.6 Use of Systems to Identify Academic Integrity (AP&P section 7.2)
Students will be given a demonstration of how to use Turnitin to submit work either during programme induction or other suitable time prior to first assessment submission. In most cases this will be an instructor led teaching session, but some programmes in the School may have a different format for the session. Further information on using TurnItIn can be found in the TurnItIn Student Guide.
3.7 Referencing (AP&P section 7.4)
For modules within the School of Medicine students should use the official University of Leeds version of the Harvard style.
3.8 Assessment Marking and Marks (AP&P section 8.1.3)
The support recommended by the Disability Services team for taking different forms of assessment will be reviewed by the School of Medicine and applied in full where possible depending on the nature of the assessment.
For the School of Medicine assessment briefs will detail how students can flag that they have marking consideration confirmed by the University Disability Services. This is normally through the assignment coversheet that ALL students are required to upload with submitted coursework.
Feedback will be given on technical accuracy in written expression to all students for learning purposes only. If any student performs at a level which does not meet the minimum competence standard for the programme (as it would create a safety risk to patients), a referral will be made to the programme lead, via the Module Lead/ICU Manager, for further consideration. Where written communication is being assessed this will be detailed in the assessment brief.
3.9 Moderation: Check Marking and Double Marking (AP&P section 8.2)
Across most programmes within the School of Medicine a minimum of 10% of module marks are check marked, typically to include a range of marks and all fails and firsts. In incidences where there are disagreements, these are discussed between the first marker and the check marker to reach an agreement. In the event that an agreement cannot be reached a third marker can be asked to independently look at work to come to an agreement.
Examinations that are computer marked do not require check marking. Other examinations will be check marked in the same way as coursework.
The nature of the OSCE / OCA / VIVA and Case based discussions method of assessment is such that students are sampled by multiple markers, and there is no opportunity for check marking. Further details will be provided within the relevant assessment information.
Where there is significant credit weighting (40 credits undergraduate 60 Credits postgraduate) and where work cannot be marked anonymously, such as Final Year Projects and Dissertations, double marking will take place. Where double marking is completed, markers will meet to agree the overall mark. Where agreement cannot be reached, work will be marked by an independent third person (this is usually the module lead, or a nominated deputy).
3.10 Marks Return (AP&P section 8.3)
Within the School of Medicine, it is agreed that marks / grades for final year projects/ research projects will be returned within 25 working days.
Assessments that are not internally set may vary in return of marks timeline. This will be communicated through the module assessment brief.
3.11 Penalties for Not Meeting Assessment Requirements (AP&P section 8.4)
Penalties will be applied for not complying to assessment guidelines. This will be detailed within the module assessment brief.
The School of Medicine deducts marks for work that exceeds the word count. The penalty is the deduction of 5 marks when the work exceeds the target word count by >10% to <20%. If the word count exceeds the target by 20% or more, the submission will receive a mark of 0, and a resit will be provided as per the module’s normal rules.
3.12 Feedback to Students (AP&P section 9)
Module assessment briefs will be used to detail how and when feedback will be received. For assessments where Assessment Briefs are not utilised such as OSCEs details of how feedback will be returned will be outlined in the module assessment area on Minerva.
For examinations the minimum expectation within the School of Medicine is overall feedback will be given to student cohorts following release of marks, to include areas where students have performed well, and areas requiring improvement.
The specific format of feedback will be communicated within the module assessment area on Minerva and assessment brief.
Exam scripts will not be released to students.
3.13 Timings of Assessment Committees (AP&P section 11.4)
Details of dates of School Assessment Board and Progress and Awards Board will be published within the Taught Student guide for all programmes. Due to the start date and progression dates of some Programmes these may vary from the University timelines.
3.14 Publication of Module Marks and Classifications (AP&P section 12)
Some programmes within the School of Medicine do not follow the normal university timelines therefore details on publication of module marks will be available within the relevant Minerva pages.
Typically, provisional module marks will be available to students following the School Assessment Boards. Provisional component marks for coursework are typically available 15 working days following the submission deadline, with the exception of research/final year projects, unless an extension to this is agreed by the Associate Pro-Vice Chancellor for Student Education and Engagement.
For students who are enrolled on a programme that is accredited by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body, an alternative awards date may have been agreed. In such instances, students will be informed of the date they will receive their results on their Assessment Briefs.
The final date for the publication of marks and classifications for undergraduate students will be published on the University website. The dates on which degree classifications are published apply across the University.
The School of Medicine will not publish students’ classifications, provide written confirmation of it nor discuss it with students prior to the official publication.
4. Other Supplementary Information
4.1 Health and Conduct Committee
The Health and Conduct Committee in the School of Medicine deals with fitness to practice issues that arise from student’s health and/or conduct. Identifying symptoms early enables the School of Medicine to assist the student to obtain the support and guidance for overcoming any difficulties. Ill-health may also prevent students undertaking their studies or discharging their duties as a student or, in the future, as a Healthcare Professional.
The School of Medicine Fitness to Practice Policy can be found here
4.2 Reporting of academic malpractice to Professional Standards and Regulatory Bodies
If students are found to have committed academic malpractice, they may be required to report this to the appropriate Professional Standards and Regulatory Body (PSRB), either when they register, or immediately if already registered. In cases of academic malpractice that cause the School of Medicine to be concerned with a student’s fitness to practice, the case may also be referred to the School’s Health and Conduct Committee or the School will report the case to the relevant PSRB.
4.3 Assessment Deadlines
It is possible to have assessment deadlines on the same or consecutive days, and this is not grounds for applying for mitigating circumstances. If students have concerns about their assessment deadlines, can contact their programmes Student Education and Experience Team.
5. Students awarded according to the Rules for Award
The Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes superseded the Rules for Award following the 2023/24 academic year. Awards for students who commenced their current programme at Leeds before the 2022/23 academic year or commenced their final year of study before 2024/25 academic year will be determined using the degree classification algorithm from the Rules for Award (iteration A), which includes provision for academic discretion.
Academic discretion, as described in the Rules for Award, applies to students being awarded under these circumstances:
Any student with a Classification Average falling within the discretionary band should be selected for consideration. The discretionary band is 0.05 below a classification threshold for Bachelor’s Degrees with Classified Honours and 0.10 below a classification threshold for Foundation Degrees, Undergraduate Diplomas, Graduate Diplomas and Certificates, and Taught Postgraduate Awards
In the School of Medicine, the following criteria for academic discretion apply:
Undergraduate:
Untypical Performance in relation to one module – if one module result has been untypical when compared to overall achievement and 50% or more of the module credits at level 3 fall in the higher band.
Untypical Performance with mitigation – if one or more modules over level 2 and/or level 3 are untypical when compared to overall achievement and the student had mitigation accepted for the module they passed at first attempt.
Module marks will not be changed as a consequence of discretion at classification boundaries and whilst a student may satisfy the numerical criteria for academic discretion this does not guarantee promotion to the higher degree classification. The basis and process for any discretion will be recorded in the School Assessment Board (SAB) Minutes.
These rules for academic discretion will also apply for decisions regarding progression from Gateway to Medicine to MBChB programmes.
Taught Postgraduate:
Criterion A: Untypical performance
- A School Assessment Board may apply discretion, but is not obliged to do so, where student performance in one component has been untypical when compared with the overall achievement of the candidate.
Criterion B: Improvement
- A Committee of Assessors may apply discretion, but is not obliged to do so, where student’s performance improved during the period of study, with the candidate achieving higher module marks in later modules (for at least 50% of modules overall) when compared with those studied at the start of the programme. Examples are where mature or international students adjust to new learning styles and cultures at the beginning of a programme, and this initial adjustment may contribute to poor performance.
- Module marks will not be changed as a consequence of any consideration of discretion at classification boundaries and whilst a student may satisfy the numerical criteria for academic discretion this does not guarantee promotion to the higher degree classification. The basis and process for any discretionary consideration will be recorded in the Committee of Assessors Minutes.