Academic Registry Guidance Note:

ASS110
Assessment Grading: updated July 2021
The 1-20 scale was introduced for courses in the Faculty of Humanities in the mid-1970’s and was
adopted by the Modular scheme at its inception in 1985. It was subsequently used by ADPA from
1991, Business Studies and Management from 1992 and adopted for the whole University at the
start of the Common Academic Framework in September 1993. Its continued use by the University
has been subsequently reviewed three times and in each case no change from this scale was
recommended. Over one million modules have been graded using this scale so far. There is no
single marking/grading scale in use in this country, and this grading scale is unique to Middlesex
University.

The 20 points on the scale are signifiers for various standards of performance (see Regulations
Section E, Table B). The aim is to strike a balance between the “coarseness” of the four
undergraduate degree-classes and the “fineness” of a percentage scale, which offers spurious
precision. The university scale acknowledges that the distinction between four standards of
achievement within a class is the limit of fineness that can be reasonably achieved.

The aim is to even out differences in the marking culture of different subjects and programmes to
ensure equity and comparability between grades as far as possible and to ensure that the
university’s common award classification system uses a single comparable scale for the composite
grade in every module in every subject.

1. Using the 20 point grading scale

• The 20-point scale is set out in the Academic Regulations, Section E, table B.
• We use the 20-point grading scale to profile module results to generate a final
classification for any individual student’s qualification.
• These grades have no absolute percentage mark equivalent. They indicate to students
the quality of their achievement in the assessment of the module.
• It is non-linear, particularly so at its extremes.
• It should be used in relation to the university guidelines on assessment criteria.
• The smaller numbers on the 20 point scale indicate the higher achievement, as in
Honours Classifications: (1,2,3,4 = 1st; 5,6,7,8 = Upper 2nd; 9,10,11,12 = Lower 2nd;
3,14,15,16 = 3rd), and Masters classifications: (1,2,3,4 = Distinction; 5,6,7,8 = Merit;
9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16 = Pass).
• There are also several associated administrative grades (see Regulations Section UG
E4 and PG E5)
• Grade Y is the ungraded Pass mark.
• There is no ungraded fail mark.
• Compensation can be allowed for grades 17 and 18 in certain circumstances but this is
not a right and not guaranteed. For full guidance on compensation please see
regulations E8. The aim is to distinguish between different levels of poor performance,
including whether a module may be compensated on the basis of satisfactory
performance in other modules.
Page 1 of 7
Section E - Table B: The 20 Point Scale

Grade Class of Honours Degree Other Awards

1
2
FIRST CLASS DISTINCTION
3
4
5
6
UPPER SECOND MERIT
7
8
9
10
LOWER SECOND
11
12
PASS
13
14
THIRD
15
16
17 FAIL - Compensation allowed FAIL - Compensation allowed
18 FAIL - Compensation allowed FAIL - Compensation allowed
19 FAIL – Compensation not allowed FAIL – Compensation not allowed
FAIL –Failure to participate in all assessment FAIL – Failure to participate in all assessment
necessary to achieve all learning outcomes. necessary to achieve all learning outcomes.
20
Compensation not allowed Compensation not allowed

Page 2 of 7
2. Aggregating the components of assessment on a single module

2.1. It is the responsibility of every module leader (ML) to communicate to tutors, students and
external examiners to make clear if assessment is
• marked directly to the 20-point scale
• marked in percentages and then converted to a 20-point grade using the Middlesex
percentage conversion table.

2.2. For modules with multiple assessment components it is the responsibility of the ML to make
clear to all how the overall module grade has been calculated using the guidance notes to
relating to aggregate grade calculation.

It should be noted that Excel spreadsheet templates are available to support overall grade
calculation.

2.2.1. Aggregation method for areas marking in percentages.

For a module with 𝑛𝑛 components with percentage grades, 𝑝𝑝1 , 𝑝𝑝2 , … 𝑝𝑝𝑛𝑛 , with relative weights
𝑤𝑤1 , 𝑤𝑤2 , … , 𝑤𝑤𝑛𝑛 then overall module grade is the sum of percentage grades 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖 multiplied by 𝑤𝑤𝑖𝑖 .
Rounding should be done at the final stage only, so at module level and done using fair
rounding with values of 𝑥𝑥. 5 rounded up and 𝑥𝑥. 49 rounded down. The rounded final/overall
grade should then be converted to a 20-point scale grade using the Middlesex University
Percentage to 20-point scale conversion table.

For example if a module has 3 components with the following weightings, A (30%), B (20%),
C (50%) and a student was graded 50.5%, 45.5% and 68% respectively then the overall
module grade would be calculated as follows

Assessment Percentage Weighting, Percentage ×

Component (% weight) grade awarded 𝒘𝒘𝒊𝒊 weight
𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒊 𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒊 × 𝒘𝒘𝒊𝒊
Assessment A (30%) 50.5% 0.3 50.5 × 0.3
Assessment B (20%) 45.5% 0.2 45.5 × 0.2
Assessment C (50%) 68% 0.5 68 × 0.5

o 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 = (50.5 × 0.3) + (45.5 × 0.2) + (68 × 0.5) = 58.25

o 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑒𝑒 = 58

o 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 20 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 = 9

2.2.2. Aggregation method for areas marking directly to the 20-point scale

Important Note: MLs should not directly aggregate 20-point grades and are required to
follow this guidance when determining the overall module grade. To aggregate by taking a
weighted average of grades on the 1 to 20 scale is an unsound practice since the scale in
not linear at its extremes. They are grades, not marks.

For a module with 𝑛𝑛 components with 20-point grades, 𝑡𝑡1 , 𝑡𝑡2 , … 𝑡𝑡𝑛𝑛 , with relative weights
𝑤𝑤1 , 𝑤𝑤2 , … , 𝑤𝑤𝑛𝑛 then the overall module grade is calculated in the following way.

• Identify the single aligned percentage, 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖 to represent an awarded 20-point grade 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖 for
each component (see appendix 2).

• For each assessment component multiply the aligned percentages 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖 by their relative
weights 𝑤𝑤𝑖𝑖 in turn. Do not round values.
Page 3 of 7
 • Calculate the total of step 2. Rounding should be done at this final stage only and done
using fair rounding with values of 𝑥𝑥. 5 rounded up and 𝑥𝑥. 49 rounded down.

• The rounded overall grade should then be converted to a 20-point scale grade using the
Middlesex University Percentage to 20-point scale conversion table

For example, if a module has 3 components A (30%), B (20%), C (50%) and a student was
awarded the following 20 point scale grades 12, 14 and 5 respectively then the grade would
be

Assessment 20-point Aligned Weighting, Aligned Percentage ×

Component (% grade, 𝒕𝒕𝒊𝒊 percentage, 𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒊 𝒘𝒘𝒊𝒊 weight
weight) (Refer to 𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒊 × 𝒘𝒘𝒊𝒊
Appendix 4)
Assessment A (30%) 12 50.5% 0.3 50.5 × 0.3
Assessment B (20%) 14 45.5% 0.2 45.5 × 0.2
Assessment C (50%) 5 68% 0.5 68 × 0.5

o 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 = (50.5 × 0.3) + (45.5 × 0.2) + (68 × 0.5) = 58.25

o 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 = 58

o 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 20 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 = 9

2.3. The weighting given to each component is published in advance and may only be amended
through the university quality assurance procedures.

2.4. It may be the case that one or more assessment components is a fail grade (20-17) but that
the calculated module grade is a pass (1-16).
2.4.1. In cases where the aggregate overall module grade is a passing grade (1-16) then
normally a marginal failure (compensatable grade 17/18) in a component will not
automatically lead to a failure in the module overall. It will only result in a failure if the
module has been validated as having a specific assessment grade hurdle for each
assessment component, e.g. all components should be passing grades. This may be
due to PSRB or professional requirement.
2.4.2. In cases where the aggregate is a passing grade (1-16) then normally an outright
failure (grade 19) or non-submission (grade 20) in a component will automatically
lead to a failure in the module overall. It will only result in a passing grade if the
learning outcomes have been assessed and met in other assessment components.

2.5. At module level a grade 20 will only be awarded if none of the required assessment has
been submitted for the assessment point. For main assessment points this means no
assessment has been submitted, and for resit assessment points none of the required resit
assessment has been submitted even though work may have been submitted for the main
submission point.
2.6. Where the passing of one or more components of assessment is essential for the
successful passing of a particular module, the module description must make this explicit.
The fact that failure in that component cannot be redressed by a good grade in any other
component should also be made clear in the module handbook. In such cases, where the
calculated aggregate would otherwise be a pass grade, then a grade 19 should be recorded
to indicate that this essential hurdle has not been attained.

Page 4 of 7
 2.7. It is important to retain the component grades of any assessments completed by a student
who defers or fails another component so that it can be subsequently aggregated when the
other part(s) of the assessment are completed.
2.8. For modules at levels 3 and 4, there is no capping of marks/grades upon re-assessment.
2.9. For modules at level 5 and above, capping is at the component level, not at the level of the
overall module grade.

3. Entry of module grades into MISIS

Academic staff are required to enter module grades directly into MISIS using ‘final grade’ on
myUnihub, except in the case of deferred or resit grades.

4. Translation of Grades from other Institutions

Specific credit transferred to a Middlesex University award from another institution will not have
individual grades recorded. It will be recorded as “ungraded pass” (Y grade). The effect of
ungraded passes on degree classification is neutral. This also applies to credit gained on
exchange visits to North American or other universities. The only exceptions to this are credits
gained by a Middlesex student through ERASMUS exchange programmes where a translation is
made and agreed by the University Exchange Grade Panel or where a bilateral agreement
specifies a conversion scale at institutional level.

5. Translation of grades to other Institutions

Grades obtained by students at Middlesex University are not translated to other grading scales
for other institutions or employers other than in terms of undergraduate degree or Masters
degree classes. Some outline guidance is given to North American institutions on the transcripts
issued for visiting students taking credit on exchange/study abroad programmes at Middlesex
University.

Page 5 of 7
Appendix 1.

Calculating and forecasting the Final Classification

University regulations | Middlesex University London (mdx.ac.uk)

Undergraduate E3 Qualifications and Classification

Postgraduate E4 Qualifications and Classification

Undergraduate E8 Compensation Rules

Postgraduate E9 Compensation Rules

Page 6 of 7
Appendix 2: MDX 20-point Conversion

20-point scale General scale General scale (full Aligned percentage used for aggregation
ranges) purposes only
(for areas marking directly to the 20 point scale on
modules with multiple assessment components)
1 80% - 100% 79.50% - 100% 90%
2 76% - 79% 75.50% - 79.49% 77.5%
3 73% - 75% 72.50% - 75.49% 74%
4 70% - 72% 69.50% - 72.49% 71%
5 67% - 69% 66.50% - 69.49% 68%
6 65% - 66% 64.50% - 66.49% 65.5%
7 62% - 64% 61.50% - 64.49% 63%
8 60% - 61% 59.50% - 61.49% 60.5%
9 57% - 59% 56.50% - 59.49% 58%
10 55% - 56% 54.50% - 56.49% 55.5%
11 52% - 54% 51.50% - 54.49% 53%
12 50% - 51% 49.50% - 51.49% 50.5%
13 47% - 49% 46.50% - 49.49% 48%
14 45% - 46% 44.50% - 46.49% 45.5%
15 42% - 44% 41.50% - 44.49% 43%
16 40% - 41% 39.50% - 41.49% 40.5%
17 35% - 39% 34.50% - 39.49% 37%
18 30% - 34% 29.50% - 34.49% 32%
19 0% - 29% 0.01% - 29.49% 15%
20 Non-participation 0% 0% (non-submission of a component)

Page 7 of 7