15.1 Marking criteria are designed to help students know what is expected of them. Marking criteria differ from model answers and more prescriptive marking schemes which assign a fixed proportion of the assessment mark to particular knowledge, understanding and/or skills. The glossary provides definitions for: marking criteria, marking scheme and model answer.
15.2 Detailed marking criteria for assessed group work, the assessment of class presentations, and self/peer (student) assessment must be established and made available to students and examiners.
University level marking criteria
15.3 University level marking criteria, provides an over-arching framework for student attainment across a programme by that guides marking within and across programmes by level of study:
Establishing and applying criteria for assessment at level 8 should be managed by the school that owns the associated programme, in liaison with the faculty.
15.4 Schools or faculties must have marking criteria that is appropriate to their programmes and units but are congruent with these institutional-level criteria. The criteria associated with the pass mark threshold at the level of study at which an award is made should align with the intended learning outcomes for the programme. All forms of specific marking criteria must be approved by the Faculty.
15.5 The marking criteria should also be used to provide clarity about marking expectations within assessment briefs for students.
Marking scales
15.6 Assessment must be marked and returned as an integer using one of the sanctioned marking scales, as follows:
Standard setting in marking is permitted in programmes where it is a professional accreditation requirement.
Any mark on the chosen marking scale can be used.
TABLE 1: Relationship between the two marking scales
| 0-20 Point scale | Equivalent to these fixed points on the 0-100 point scale |
|---|---|
|
20 |
100 |
|
19 |
94 |
|
18 |
83 |
|
17 |
78 |
|
16 |
75 |
|
15 |
72 |
|
14 |
68 |
|
13 |
65 |
|
12 |
62 |
|
11 |
58 |
|
10 |
55 |
|
9 |
52 |
|
8 |
48 |
|
7 |
45 |
|
6 |
42 |
|
5 |
35 |
|
4 |
29 |
|
3 |
22 |
|
2 |
15 |
|
1 |
7 |
|
0 |
0 |
15.7 Schools should utilise the marking scale that is best suited to the form of assessment. This and the marking criteria for the assessment should be established prior to its commencement.
15.8 Where the averaging of different component marks within an assessment or the outcome of two markers creates an assessment mark with a decimal point, markers should reconcile any significant difference in marks and make a deliberate academic decision as to the exact mark on the scale that should be awarded. Otherwise the mark will be rounded to the nearest integer and returned (if on the 0-20 marking scale, then this should take place before converting to a mark on the 0-100 scale).
Exceptions to the sanctioned marking scales
15.9 Highly structured assessments that are scored out of a total number less than 100 may be utilised where each mark can be justified in relation to those marks neighbouring it. In these cases, the mark must be translated onto the 0-100 point scale, mapped against the relevant marking criteria, and students informed of the use of this method in advance of the assessment in the appropriate medium (e.g. on Blackboard).
15.10 Norm-Referencing(as defined in the glossary) is not permitted as a means of assessment in the University of Bristol. Criterion-referenced assessment (e.g. marking schemes, marking criteria) is to be used for all assessments.
15.11 Negative Marking may be employed in subjects where it is essential that the student should not guess the right answer. If negative marking is employed, this must be with the full knowledge of the student. There must be appropriate rubric, explaining that the assessment will be subject to negative marking on the cover of an examination paper, and the students should be given opportunities to practice such assessments before undertaking a summative assessment marked in this way.
Reaching the ‘Unit Mark’ (see also Sections 29 and 36)
15.12 Marks awarded on the 0-20 scale should be translated to a point on the 0-100 scale before entry into the VLE to calculate the overall unit mark for the purposes of progression and classification (see table 1).
15.13 The 0-20 point scale is a non-linear ordinal scale; for example, a mark on the 0-20 point scale IS NOT equivalent to a percentage arrived at by multiplying the mark by 5. Table 1 provides an equivalence relationship between the scales to enable the aggregation of marks from different assessment events to provide the overall unit mark which will be a percentage. This is illustrated below for a notional unit.
In this example, the MCQ uses all points on the 0-100 scale whereas all the other assessments use the 0-20 point scale.
To achieve the final unit mark each component mark needs to be adjusted as:
| Dissertation (25%) | Unseen written exam (35%) |
MCQ (25%) |
Oral exam (15%) | Total unit mark out of 100 | |
| Actual score | 12 on 0-20 scale | 8 on 0-20 scale | 57 on 0-100 scale | 15 on 0-20 scale | |
| Adjusted to 0-100 scale | 62/100 | 48/100 | 57/100 | 72/100 | |
| Final weighted mark | 62 x 25 = 1550 | 48 x 35 = 1680 | 57 x 25 = 1425 | 72 x 15 = 1080 | 5735/100 = 57.35 (57) |
15.14 The overall unit mark must be expressed as a percentage as the University’s degree classification methodology is based on the percentage scale.
15.15 The final programme will be calculated by applying the agreed algorithm to the unit marks (see sections 32 and 39).
