A Student Guide to Marking and Moderation of Examinations on the MPharm Programme

This guide should be read in conjunction with the following University policies:

• Marking Policy
https://my.sunderland.ac.uk/display/AQH/Assessment+Policy?preview=/105484817/10558
3351/Marking%20Policy%20v7.pdf
• External Examiner Policy
https://my.sunderland.ac.uk/display/AQH/External+Examiners?preview=/105484616/10959
9885/External%20Examiner%20Policy%20v9.pdf

Also, please note the following:

• Extenuating Circumstances Procedure

https://my.sunderland.ac.uk/display/AQH/Extenuating+Circumstances
• Academic Appeal Procedure
https://my.sunderland.ac.uk/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=105484836

A student is unable to appeal a decision based on academic judgement; i.e. disagreement over a
mark that has been awarded for a particular assessment. The information in this document gives an
overview of our assessment, standard setting and the moderation processes.

An academic appeal can only be considered on the following grounds:

1. Procedural irregularity;
2. Unconsidered extenuating circumstances.

Note. For any time-constrained assessment, students are required to sign before commencement
that they are ‘Fit-to-Sit’ that assessment (e.g. MCQ, written examination, simulated pharmacy
assessment, numeracy assessment, OSCE). Even if you do not sign this declaration (either in error or
deliberately), in sitting an assessment you are confirming and declaring that you are ‘Fit to Sit’ and
that your assessment is not affected by extenuating circumstances (for example illness or events
happening in your personal life). If you are not ‘Fit-to-Sit’ you should not attempt the assessment
and should follow the University extenuating circumstances procedures.

Examinations

Module exam papers are prepared by the team of academics that teach across the module; exam
papers cover set learning outcomes which are detailed in the relevant module descriptor and may
come from material delivered across ALL types of teaching sessions, including lectures, labs and
other practical sessions, seminars, IPL, placements and independent learning. Even if a topic has only
been mentioned in one lecture, it may still appear as a topic being assessed in a module assessment.

Pre-Exam:

• Exam questions, indicative answers and associated mark scheme are prepared by the
academic team. Mark schemes will often include the use of half marks for each correct
point, particularly at the higher stages of the programme.
• Questions and associated supporting materials are collated by the Module Leader and the
first draft of the examination paper is assembled.
 • The examination paper is then moderated by a team of internal academic staff and
appropriate changes are made. The moderation process includes matching the questions to
learning outcomes and identification of where taught in the module, assessing the academic
level of the questions, scrutinising the question in conjunction with the indicative answer to
ensure appropriateness of expectation.
• The exam paper is then reviewed by four external examiners (external examiners are
academics from other Schools of Pharmacy in the UK and are representative of the range of
disciplines covered by an MPharm).
• Changes suggested by the external examiners are made by Module Leaders and the final
examination paper is prepared.
• Students sit the examination and papers are anonymised for marking.

Post Exam:

• Exam papers are distributed by Module Leaders and marked anonymously in accordance
with the indicative answers. Any relevant material not covered by an indicative answer will
be given credit for, as appropriate.
• Marks are totalled and collated by the Module Leader.
• Marking and totals are moderated by a team of internal academic staff and separately by
independent scrutineers (these are salaried individuals that have no connection to teaching
on the MPharm programme); this process ensures that all pages of an examination paper
have been marked and that all finalised totals are verified.
• Failed papers are identified, and papers are reviewed by module leaders to confirm marks.
• Student details are uncovered and marks collated by the Module Leader
• The four external examiners self-select a random sample of student assessments and review
marking across all examination papers, confirm that marking schemes have been
appropriately followed and confirm that the marks awarded are correct and that University
processes have been followed in accordance with Regulations. Any identified issues are
addressed and acted upon.
• Marks are confirmed and verified by the MPharm Programme Assessment Board

Dispensing Exam

Pre-Exam

• As detailed under ‘Examinations.’

Post-Exam

• Student responses and mark sheets are anonymised.

• Prescriptions and mark sheets are marked by a practicing pharmacist; each prescription is
allocated an outcome (pass/fail/moderate). The guidelines for pass/fail criteria in the
simulated pharmacy assessment are detailed on Canvas.
• Any student with a fail or moderate outcome is discussed anonymously during a moderation
meeting; moderation meetings consist of a team of 3-5 practicing pharmacists and each
prescription will be allocated an outcome (pass/fail). If the team are undecided, the majority
decision is taken. Details of discussion are noted on student mark sheets.
• Student details are uncovered and marks collated by the Module Leader.
 • The external examiners self-select a random sample of student assessments and review
marking across the simulated pharmacy assessment and confirm that the pass/fail decisions
are correct, that University processes have been followed in accordance with Regulations
and that outcomes are consistent with their experiences at other Schools of Pharmacy. Any
identified issues are addressed and acted upon.
• Pass/fail decisions are confirmed and verified by the MPharm Programme Assessment Board

OSCE

Pre-Exam

• As detailed under ‘Examinations.’

During Exam

• Students are marked during the OSCE by a member of the academic team or salaried
academic tutor against the marking scheme; each OSCE station is recorded for moderation
and quality assurance processes. Each OSCE station is allocated an outcome
(pass/fail/moderate); the details of pass/fail criteria for an OSCE assessment are detailed on
Canvas.

Post Exam

• Any student with a fail or moderate outcome is discussed anonymously during a moderation
meeting; video recordings of stations are used to inform the decision-making process.
Moderation meetings consist of a team of 3-5 practicing pharmacists and each station will
be allocated an outcome (pass/fail). If the team are undecided, the majority decision is
taken.
• The external examiners self-select a random sample of student assessments and review
marking and videos for the OSCE assessment and confirm that the pass/fail decisions are
correct, that process has been followed and that outcomes are consistent with their
experiences at other Schools of Pharmacy. Any identified issues are addressed and acted
upon.
• Marks are confirmed by the MPharm Programme Assessment Board.

Coursework

• Coursework (including student material, teaching materials and assessment criteria) is

prepared by the Module Leaders and academics involved with the module.
• Assessment information is provided to students and marking criteria are provided for
academic staff.
• Students submit coursework (usually via Canvas).
• Coursework is marked by academics in line with the marking criteria; if appropriate,
reference to similarity scores is made to determine possible Academic Infringement.
INSERT POLICY
• Marks are assembled by the Module Leader and a minimum of a 10% sample is moderated
by a second academic.
 • Any coursework mark that falls below the pass mark is reviewed by the module leader to
determine the mark is correct and consistent with the marks of other academics.
• Final marks are allocated to students and released, alongside feedback on Canvas.
• The external examiners review coursework and confirm that marks are correct and that
process has been followed.
• Marks are confirmed by the MPharm Programme Assessment Board. If marks have been
released to students in advance of a meeting of the Programme Assessment Board, any
marks returned are provisional and subject to change until confirmed by the Programme
Assessment Board (the Programme Assessment Board meets in June and September).

Feedback to Students

• Students are entitled to receive feedback on all assessments on the programme following
the Universities ‘Feedback to students on assessed work policy.’
https://my.sunderland.ac.uk/display/AQH/Assessment+Policy?preview=/105484817/10558
3349/Feedback%20to%20Students%20on%20Assessed%20work%20v4.pdf
• Students should liaise with the academic member of staff marking the assessment or the
Module Leader if they require additional feedback from that provided through normal
mechanisms (usually Canvas).
• It is not currently University policy to return to students work from time-constrained
assessments.
• Feedback is not an opportunity to argue with academic staff over marks awarded (i.e.
academic judgement) - it is an opportunity to enhance learning and improve performance in
future assessments. Academic staff would not normally permit a student to view work from
time-constrained assessments but will discuss student responses and marks awarded; albeit
occasional, we have historically experienced confrontation in this process and no such
behaviour will be tolerated.