Assessment Policy and Procedures

This is version 2.0 of the Assessment Policy and Procedures, which apply from the 2026/27 academic year onwards. This policy and procedures are owned by the Student Curriculum and Operations Directorate. Please contact [email protected] for any matters related to this policy and procedures. A copy of version 1.3 of this policy and procedures is available.

1. Purpose and Scope
2. Assessment Strategy
3. Assessment Definitions
4. Setting and Approval of Assessment Methods
5. Registration for Assessments
6. Submission of Coursework
7. Academic Integrity and Misconduct
8. Assessment Marking and Marks
9. Feedback to Students
10. Module Marks
11. Consideration of Module Marks, Progression and Awards
12. Publication of Module Marks and Classifications

1. Purpose and Scope

1.1. The purpose of this policy is to set out the principles and procedures which relate to assessment and feedback for taught programmes at the University of Leeds (including the taught components of postgraduate research programmes).

1.2. The policy underpins the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes and should be read in conjunction with the relevant Faculty or School Supporting Information.

1.3. The policy applies to all students undertaking taught programmes at Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQs) levels 3-7 at the University and its partners.

1.4. For apprenticeship programme End Point Assessments (EPAs), the requirements set out in the apprenticeship assessment plan, published by Skills England, will take precedence over this policy and associated procedures.

2. Assessment Strategy

2.1. Assessment at Leeds will be fair, inclusive and authentic and designed to support learning. Using digital technologies to deliver assessment and feedback practices and processes, we will ensure that assessment upholds academic standards and integrity whilst providing students with appropriate opportunities to demonstrate their potential and achievement. The Institutional Assessment Strategy was approved by Senate in June 2021. It is currently being reviewed with a planned implementation date of June 2027.

3. Assessment Definitions

3.1. Quality Assurance Agency Definitions

3.1.1 The Quality Assurance Agency has defined summative and formative assessment as follows:

i. Summative assessment: Used to indicate the extent of a learner’s success in meeting the assessment criteria to gauge the intended learning outcomes of a module or course. Typically, within summative assessment, the marks awarded count towards the final mark of the module/programme/award.

ii. Formative assessment: Assessment with a developmental purpose, designed to help learners learn more effectively by giving them feedback on their performance and how it can be improved and/or maintained. Reflective practice by students sometimes contributes to formative assessment.

3.1.2 ‘Assessment’ as used in this policy refers to all forms of summatively assessed activity.

3.2. University of Leeds Definitions

3.2.1 All assessments at the University of Leeds fall under one of the following definitions.

i Examination: A formal in-person assessment that is carried out under timed conditions and conducted under the supervision of invigilators or an academic member of staff. It may be written, digital, i.e. on a device, oral or aural. All examinations must be held according to the Examination Procedure.

ii Coursework: A piece of work with a clear assessment brief describing the parameters of the work, a defined period of time in which to complete it and a clear deadline for submission. Coursework can have a variety of formats such as essay, portfolio, report, presentation or group work, amongst others.

iii Online Time Limited Assessments (OTLAs): An assessment that a student completes online with a limited timeframe from the release of the work to the required submission time. It is not invigilated. The specific assessment format can vary, in a similar way to coursework. Generally, students have a 48-hour window (or less) in which to complete an OTLA, with guidance on the recommended amount of time to spend on this.

iv Practical Work: The assessment of a student’s practical skills or competence, for example clinical skills or performance. Practical work will be defined either as an examination or coursework, depending on the particular parameters of the work. Adherence to the Examination Procedure or an assessment brief if defined as coursework will be communicated to students by the relevant School.

4. Setting and Approval of Assessment Methods

4.1. There is a formal process through which the form of assessment for each module (e.g. examination, coursework) is agreed and approved in advance, as part of the module approval.

4.2. Modules are assessed in line with the approved module specification, using methods appropriate for the level of study, the subject material, the method of delivery and the learning outcomes.

4.3. The reassessment of a module will normally comprise one or more assessments that are the same, or similar to, those used for the original attempt. If the reassessment method is different from the original assessment method, this will be described in the module specification. The assessment brief or exam itself may or may not be the same as for the original attempt.

4.4. All summative assessments (for example the exam question, coursework task or approach to continuously assessed practicals) must be checked internally. An exception to this is in the case of assessments set by external bodies and forming part of professional learning and/or accreditation, which may not need to be checked internally at Leeds.

4.5. This check is required when the assessment is set or amended for all components of summative assessment and is undertaken by at least one member of academic staff who is not the person responsible for setting the assessment.

4.6. Internal checks of module assessments must be completed before assessments are distributed to students and normally before the start of the module. Reassessments, where a different task is used, should normally be checked at the same time.

4.7. The purpose of internal checking is to consider the clarity of instructions to support completion of the assessment, and to consider the alignment with learning outcomes and the appropriateness of the marking scheme.

4.8. Assessments, including assessment criteria and model answers where relevant, should be available to External Examiners for scrutiny in good time before the assessment is delivered. External examiners may request additional materials if required.

4.9. Internal and external checks must record the outcome of the process and Schools must retain records of the process.

5. Registration for Assessments

5.1. Students are automatically registered for the first opportunity for each assessment, on each module on which they are formally enrolled. All assessments must be taken on the first occasion that they are offered in the year in which the module is studied, unless the parent School grants the student specific permission to defer the assessment, which must be documented.

5.2. Reassessments must be taken at the next available opportunity, which is normally in July or August, unless the parent School grants the student specific permission to defer the assessment, which must be documented.

5.3. Schools may cap the number of credits that students are able to resit at any one opportunity. This is to support student success through the staggering of workload. This capping may be applied at cohort or individual level and will be in consultation with and consideration for individual student circumstances. If a student is unable to take all reassessments at the next available opportunity due to capping, the attempts will be deferred.

5.4. Students are not automatically registered for reassessment opportunities and must indicate their intention to take them.

6. Submission of Coursework

6.1. Students are responsible for submitting their own work.

6.2. It is a student's responsibility to ensure that assessments are submitted successfully and that the correct version has been submitted by the published deadline.

6.3. Coursework Deadlines

6.3.1 The deadline for submitting work must be made clear for each individual piece of assessment.

6.3.2 All deadlines should be set at 2pm on the selected day. Any deadlines set at alternative times must have prior approval from the relevant Associate Pro Vice Chancellor (Student Education and Experience).

6.3.3 Where possible, deadlines should be set in the context of the overall programme timetable, taking account of dependencies and capacity in order to avoid unnecessary concentration of workload at particular times.

6.3.4 Coursework deadlines should only be set on days when the University is open to ensure that students are able to access support if required.

6.3.5 Coursework deadlines may be set during a formal examination period, but these should be considered in conjunction with exam timings.

6.3.6 Extensions to coursework deadlines for up to 14 calendar days (or up to 28 days for clinical programmes) from the original coursework deadline can be applied for through the process for mitigating circumstances in line with the Mitigating Circumstances Policy. Under some circumstances, an extension will not be available. This can be due to the type of assessment that has been set, or, for example, the timing of the release of feedback. When an extension is not available, this will be made clear in the relevant assessment brief or in other School documentation.

6.3.7 The Reasonable Adjustments to Assessment Policy provides further guidance on how and when students may be able to receive flexibility in the submission of assessed work.

6.4. Late Submission of Coursework

6.4.1 Coursework should be submitted according to published deadlines.

6.4.2 Penalties will be applied if work is submitted past the submission date unless an extension due to mitigating circumstances has been granted in which case they will be applied from the new deadline.

6.4.3 For some coursework late submission will not be available. When this is the case, this will be made clear in the relevant assessment brief or other School documentation. No option to submit late is usually the case for work that is assessed on a pass/fail basis but can also be the case for other work such as lab/field-based assessments or when model answers are provided shortly after the published deadline.

6.4.4 If the assessed work is submitted over 14 calendar days after the original submission deadline, inclusive of any granted extensions, the submission will be deemed to have failed for non-submission (a day being a single 24-hour period).

6.4.5 The penalty is deducted from the mark for the assessment component that has been submitted late. For every period of 24 hours or part thereof that the assessment is overdue, 5% of the total marks available for that assessment component will be deducted. This includes weekends, bank holidays and other days when the University is closed.

6.4.6 The penalty will only be applied until the threshold of 40 for undergraduate modules (FHEQ level 4, 5 and 6) and 50 for postgraduate taught modules (FHEQ level 7) of the component mark. If an assessment component receives a mark below this threshold before the application of penalties, penalties for late submission will not be applied. Penalties for late submission will be applied after other penalties are applied to the mark e.g. penalties for not meeting the assessment requirements.

6.5. Resubmission of Own Work

6.5.1 The University’s approach to the resubmission of a student’s own work is described in Section 10.7 of the Academic Misconduct Procedure. However, in some cases submissions can be ‘re-worked’ in order to meet the module learning outcomes at the point of resubmission. If this option is available to students, the School will communicate the requirements clearly.

7. Academic Integrity and Misconduct

7.1. Academic Integrity

7.1.1 Guidance on academic integrity and academic misconduct is available on the students’ website. The guidance includes relevant definitions and links to resources to develop good academic practice, including the compulsory academic integrity tutorial and test. The definitions of specific academic misconduct offences are included in the Academic Misconduct Procedure.

7.1.2 Students agree an academic integrity declaration upon registration at the University and when submitting work for assessment, confirming that it is their own work.

7.1.3 All cases of suspected academic misconduct will be considered in line with the Academic Misconduct Procedure or the Student Discipline Procedure.

7.2. Use of Systems to Identify Academic Integrity (e.g. Turnitin)

7.2.1 Schools determine if academic misconduct is suspected. Schools will use similarity detection available within Turnitin to inform their decision. Guidance on Turnitin is available to students on the Digital Education Systems website.

7.2.2 Schools will provide students with an introduction to the use of systems such as Turnitin at the commencement of their studies.

7.2.3 Schools will allow students who are new to study at the University to view a similarity report based either on a model assessment or a draft of their work as a learning exercise.

7.2.4 All similarity reports generated by Turnitin will be reviewed by Schools.

7.2.5 Schools will decide the point at which similarity reports are reviewed and whether this is before or after the marking is undertaken, but it must be prior to the Assessment Board. Where plagiarism is suspected following consideration of a similarity report, Schools will determine whether or not the assessment is marked.

7.2.6 Schools will not use AI detection tools to identify academic misconduct.

7.3. Assistance with Coursework

7.3.1 The Academic Integrity and Assistance Policy explains what students must do to maintain academic integrity and use assistance responsibly. The policy explains the different types of assistance, including generative artificial intelligence and proofreading, and how students can use them to prepare their coursework.

7.4. Referencing

7.4.1 Schools will select a single referencing style for use by all taught students. If a specific assessment must require students to use an alternative to the School’s referencing style, the requirement will be specified in the relevant assessment brief.

7.4.2 Schools that have adopted the Harvard or Numeric referencing styles shall use the standardised Leeds version for all taught students. If a School selects a referencing style other than the standardised Leeds version of the Harvard or Numeric referencing styles due to subject-specific requirements, the School will apply the official guide for the referencing style.

7.4.3 Schools will assess students using the official guide of the applicable referencing style. Official guides of referencing styles will not be adapted or adjusted by Schools, including through assessment briefs or marking criteria.

7.4.4 Schools will direct students to the official guides of referencing styles on the Library website.

8. Assessment Marking and Marks

8.1. Marking Principles

8.1.1 As a minimum, all marking will be undertaken by an appointed internal first marker.

8.1.2 All summative assessment will be marked anonymously except for those situations where this is not practicable, for example:

i Where the assessment takes the form of a practical demonstration performed in the presence of or otherwise viewed by examiners (such as orals, scientific practicals, lab books, clinical examinations, or performances);

ii Where the assessment takes place over a period of time with support from a designated supervisor, tutor or supervisory team who is also assessing the work.

8.1.3 All Schools are required to operate a flagging system for work submitted by students with Specific Learning Difficulties (SpLDs) and other disabilities which affect written work. It is recognised that there may be different ways in which this is done, in accordance with different types of assessment. Guidance and templates are available from Disability Services. The School must inform relevant students as to how the flagging system is conducted.

8.1.4 Summative assessment will not be re-marked at a student’s request. This will only be done if the School is instructed to do so by the University following a formal appeal (see section 13 of the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes) or the identification of an administrative error.

8.2. Moderation: Check Marking and Double Marking

8.2.1 Check marking is defined as another member of staff, in addition to the first marker, sampling or auditing the marking across the module to review overall marking standards and consistency between individual markers. Schools may use check marking, or an alternative process, to verify the validity of the marking.

8.2.2 The criteria for determining the check marking sample marking may include failed pieces; marking undertaken by multiple assessors; marking undertaken by new markers; and assessment with a substantial weighting.

8.2.3 Double marking is defined as work being marked independently by another member of staff in addition to the first marker.

8.2.4 Double marking is not a requirement but can be used in some circumstances e.g. where it is specifically required by Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs).

8.2.5 If a difference of judgement cannot be resolved between the first internal maker and the check marker, or between both markers if double marking is used, a third person will be appointed to receive an explanation of the difference and to contribute to the decision on the final mark or set of internal marks. The third person will be someone with appropriate seniority and experience in assessment processes.

8.2.6 The above moderation processes apply to all forms of summative assessment.

8.3. Marks Return

8.3.1 Marks/grades for summative assessments will be provided to students within 15 working days of the published assessment submission deadline. This may be later for individual students if an extension has been granted (usually 15 days after the extended deadline) or if there are concerns relating to academic misconduct.

8.3.2 Marks/grades for final year/research (capstone) projects will be returned within a timeframe to be agreed with the relevant Associate Pro Vice Chancellor (Student Education and Experience) and communicated by the teaching School.

8.3.3 In exceptional circumstances, when these timeframes cannot be met, an alternative timeframe will be agreed with the relevant Associate Pro Vice Chancellor (Student Education and Experience) and clearly communicated to students.

8.3.4 For logistical reasons, marks/grades on any assessment type (i.e. examination, OTLAs) taken during a formal examination period may be returned on a different timescale from other assessment. This will be clearly communicated to students.

8.4. Penalties for Not Meeting Assessment Requirements

8.4.1 Where an assessment requirement (e.g. the assignment length) is specified in an assessment brief, students must adhere to this. If a student does not adhere to the requirement(s) then it will be determined by the marker that the task has not been completed in accordance with the instructions and this will be reflected in the mark awarded, in accordance with the assessment criteria and the feedback given to the student and/or penalties may be applied.

8.4.2 Assessment parameters should be communicated in detail within the assessment brief (e.g. font size and inclusion of title page where page lengths are used, inclusion or otherwise of footnotes and tables if word count is used, timing of a presentation etc.).

8.4.3 Students must declare their compliance with any relevant parameters set out in the assessment brief on their submitted work.

9. Feedback to Students

9.1. When assessment is set, students will be told when and how they will receive feedback. The purpose of providing feedback will also be explained and students will be informed of who to contact should they want to discuss the feedback they receive.

9.2. Students can expect to receive feedback on all forms of formative and summative assessment. Feedback will normally be returned alongside assessment marks, and it may also include cohort or peer feedback. It may be verbal and may take the form of live in-class feedback.

9.3. Individual feedback given to students should help them to improve their future work.

9.4. Schools will provide students with information on how and when they are able to access their marked examination scripts for the purposes of feedback.

10. Module Marks

10.1. Marking scales and pass marks are set out in the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes (see section 7.4).

10.2. Marks for assessments that are not taken will be recorded as absent and given a zero mark.

10.3. Non-registration for a resit when an opportunity is available will mean that attempt is forfeited and a mark of AB will be recorded on the transcript.

10.4. Students who are in their final year of study may meet the criteria for awards notwithstanding the existence of outstanding resit opportunities. In such cases, where a student does not take up those opportunities, the academic record will reflect the outcome of the original assessment attempt only.

10.5. Suffixes may be added to module marks to indicate a particular status. Some suffixes also perform an action in the University’s student records system such as awarding or withholding credit.

10.6. Calculating module marks

10.6.1 Final module marks are calculated using aggregated weightings for by their relative percentage contribution to the module when calculating the overall module mark.

10.6.2 Individual component marks must be on the same scale (e.g. 0 – 100) when used in the overall module mark calculation.

10.6.3 Rounding will only take place once the overall module mark is calculated, when the module mark must be rounded to an integer.

10.6.4 Pass/fail components of a module carry a 0% weighting when calculating the overall numeric module mark.

10.6.5 Any decisions made by the School Special Circumstances Committee that involve removing the marks for an individual component from the final module mark means that the remaining components will be re-weighted proportionately.

11. Consideration of Module Marks, Progression and Awards

11.1. University Progression and Award Regulations

11.1.1 The criteria for progression and award are determined by the University’s regulations set out in the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes, as well as by individual programme rules set out in the programme specification. The programme specification identifies the modules within any given programme of study that must be passed in order to allow progression/award. The Progression and Awards Board is required to implement decisions in accordance with the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes and the programme specification. The School does not have discretion to vary the rules for individual students at the Progression and Awards Board.

11.2. Assessment Committees

11.2.1 The School Assessment Board considers the module marks/grades for all students registered on modules that it parents and recommends them for approval to the School Progression and Awards Board.

11.2.2 The Progression and Awards Board has responsibility for approving module marks and making decisions about progression, award and classification. For apprenticeship programmes with integrated End Point Assessments (EPAs) where the University is the End Point Assessment Organisation (EPAO), the Progression and Awards Board (or EPA and Awards Board) also approves apprenticeship grades and awards.

11.2.3 The School Special Circumstances Committee is responsible for assessing all applications for mitigating circumstances and making recommendations to the Progression and Awards Board on any adjustment that the Board should make to accommodate those circumstances.

11.2.4 The School adopts the standard Terms of Reference and Membership for the Assessment Board, the Progression and Awards Board and the Special Circumstances Committee.

11.2.5 The Assessment Board and the Progression and Awards Board will be conducted anonymously, i.e. without reference to student names.

11.3. Normalisation

11.3.1 Consideration of the distribution of marks and an assessment as to whether the overall outcomes are in line with previous years will take place at the Board. If there are incongruencies, normalisation may be applied.

11.3.2 Normalisation refers to a process of adjusting mark profiles for each module so that the overall average falls within an expected range. Normalisation is used only exceptionally and if a School does normalise marks for a module, particular attention will be paid to setting and marking of assessment in that module the next time it is offered.

11.4. Timings of Assessments Committees

11.4.1 The School Assessment Board normally meets after Semester 1 to agree recommended marks and grades for completed modules. These are published via Minerva. The marks/grades are provisional at this stage.

11.4.2 The School Assessment Board meets again after completion of Semester 2 to agree recommended marks/grades for completed modules. The marks/grades for all undergraduate Semester 1 and 2 modules (those at FHEQ levels 3, 4, 5 and 6) will be approved by the Progression and Awards Board (of which the External Examiner is a member). The School Assessment Board normally meets again in September to agree marks/grades for August reassessments.

11.4.3 The Progression and Awards Board normally meets in June for undergraduate programmes and in October/November for taught postgraduate programmes.

11.4.4 Where Schools operate with non-standard timelines, the timing of these Boards will be defined and communicated as appropriate.

11.5. External Examining

11.5.1 The role of the External Examiner, as set out in the External Examiner Handbook, is to ensure comparability of the University’s standards with those in other institutions and with national benchmarks. It is not to contribute to the assessment of individual students. If an issue is identified with the marking process during the sampling of work, an External Examiner may require:
i Additional marking of all the student work within the group;
ii Additional marking of an element of the assessed work of all students within the group; or
iii Adjustment of the marks for all students within the group.

11.5.2 In exceptional circumstances, an External Examiner may be permitted to determine an individual mark where they have been specifically invited to adjudicate between markers.

11.6. Referral to the University Special Cases Committee

11.6.1 The Progression and Awards Board can only exercise its powers within the context of the University’s rules and regulations, and in particular, the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes and the programme specification. However, if following these procedures would, in the School’s opinion, lead to a perverse or unfair judgement, the School may make an application to the University Special Cases Committee to make exceptions to the rules.

12. Publication of Module Marks and Classifications

12.1. The University publishes final confirmed module marks and classifications on Minerva. If provisional module marks are made known by the School prior to this, it must be with the caveat that the final published module marks may be higher than or lower than (or the same as) the provisional module marks.

12.2. Once the University has published the formal decisions of the School Progression and Awards Board, module marks will not be changed. The only exception is if the School is instructed to make amendments by the University following a formal appeal or after consideration of an exceptional case.

12.3. Following the publication of classification, attendance at a graduation ceremony confirms acceptance of the award and revokes any outstanding resit opportunities.