Company number: 12497951
6 Sutton Park Road, Sutton, SM1 2GD

Examination Boards and Academic Appeal Regulations

Policy Statement

The School is committed to maintaining academic integrity, consistency, and fairness through its Examination Boards and Academic Appeal Regulations. These boards oversee assessments, verify marking processes, address academic misconduct, and review student progression and awards. They incorporate feedback from external examiners, faculty, and students, ensuring continuous improvement and upholding the standards of the School’s qualifications.

Principles

  • Fairness: Ensuring impartiality and equity in assessment and decision-making processes.
  • Transparency: Fostering a culture of openness in all examination and appeal procedures.
  • Consistency: Applying uniform regulations across all programmes to ensure reliable standards.
  • Rigour: Upholding stringent academic criteria in the conduct of examinations and assessments.
  • Integrity: Maintaining academic honesty and ethical conduct as the cornerstone of the regulations.
  • Objective Judgement: Ensuring that all evaluation processes are based on clear evidence and academic merit.
  • Student Welfare: Recognising the importance of student well-being and support throughout the examination and appeal process.
  • Right to Appeal: Affirming the student's right to a fair appeal if they are dissatisfied with an academic decision.
  • Proportionality: Guaranteeing that any actions or sanctions are appropriate and justified, respecting the principle of proportionality.
  • Responsible Oversight: Involving appropriately experienced and qualified individuals in the examination and appeal processes.
  • Equitable Treatment: Treating all students and their work with equal respect and consideration, regardless of background or circumstances.

Regulatory Context

This Policy has been developed in line with the applicable laws, regulations, regulatory advice, and sector best practices, including the following:

Authority Name Url
Office for Students (OfS) Regulatory framework for higher education in England
This framework outlines OfS' primary aim to ensure positive outcomes for students, including access, success, and progress in higher education. It covers quality academic experience, progress into employment, and value for money.
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) The Quality Code
This code represents a shared understanding of quality practice across the UK higher education sector, protecting public and student interests and championing the UK's reputation for quality.
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Subject Benchmark Statement - Computing
It describes the nature and characteristics of awards in computing and what graduates are expected to know, understand and be able to do.
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Advice - Assessment and Marking
Guidance on assessment and marking for higher education providers .
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Advice - External Expertise
Office for Students (OfS) Sector-recognised standards
The standards set with regards to B5 and B8 of the OfS' conditions of registration for higher education institutions.
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Making Use of Credit: A Companion to the Higher Education Credit Framework for England
This framework determines the use of credits for courses, measures student workload, facilitates transferability, and ensures eligibility for graduation by reflecting both contact hours and independent study requirements.

Authority and Functions of School Examination Boards

Title
Advice
Introduction

The School’s programmes lead to various undergraduate and postgraduate awards. Required credits are as follows:

Award

 

Level

Required number of credits

Taught masters’ degrees e.g. MSc

Postgraduate

7

180 (150 at Level 7)

Postgraduate diplomas

120 (90 at Level 7)

Postgraduate certificates

60 (40 at Level 7)

Bachelors’ degrees with honours e.g. BSc Hons

Undergraduate

6

360 (90 at Level 6)

Bachelors’ degrees

300 (60 at Level 6)

Graduate diplomas

80 (80 at Level 6)

Graduate certificates

40 (40 at Level 6)

Diplomas of Higher Education (DipHE)

5

240 (90 at Level 5)

Certificates of Higher Education (CertHE)

4

120 (90 at Level 4)

These awards can also be given as exit awards if the student meets the required credits and outcomes.

This structure ensures academic standards and compliance with OfS conditions of registration. The Academic Board, Director of Education, and Examination Boards oversee and report on these processes. The MEB ratifies module assessments, while the PEB oversees programmes and confers awards. Short courses are also covered under MEB and PEB.
Rule
Application of Regulations, including Module Results and Award Conferment Regulations

The Examination Boards must:

  • Ensure the School’s qualifications meet sector-recognised standards
  • Verify compliance with academic regulations, including the Module Results and Award Conferment Regulations, and scrutinise module marks
  • Ensure overall consistency, decide on progression, and confer awards
  • Address issues like extenuating circumstances, academic misconduct, and exclusions where necessary 
  • Collaborate with external examiners
  • Discuss sector and industry matters relevant to assessments
  • Monitor KPIs and other indicators
  • Ensure continuous improvement
  • Report to the Academic Board on standards 

These actions ensure the validity, reliability, and credibility of the School's qualifications while maintaining compliance with academic regulations and promoting continuous improvement.
Rule
Reporting and Accountability

Chairs of the Module Examination Board and Programme Examination Board must submit a report to the Academic Board covering:

  • Compliance with academic regulations
  • Quality and standards
  • Analysis of results, progression, and awards
  • Issues, such as misconduct 
  • Necessary regulation and policy changes
  • Review of external examiner feedback
  • Student and stakeholder engagement
  • Industry and sector trends and analysis
  • Continuous improvement observations
  • Factors affecting award standards

This ensures accountability, maintains high academic standards, and supports continuous improvement through comprehensive oversight and reporting.

Module Leader Responsibilities for Mark Submission

Title
Rule
Module Leader and Summative Assessments

After external examiner scrutiny, the module leader must:

  • Discuss draft marks with programme leaders
  • Prepare marks and lists for the Module Examination Board (MEB)
  • Obtain Director of Education approval
  • Submit final marks and lists to the MEB at least 3 working days before the meeting
  • Attend the MEB or appoint a suitable substitute if unavailable
  • Present final marks, relevant information, reports, and reassessment arrangements to the MEB for confirmation

This ensures marks are verified, academic regulations are followed, and all pertinent information is available for informed decisions by the MEB.

Responsibilities of the Module Examination Board (MEB) Regarding Module Results and Progression

Title
Rule
Remit of MEB

The MEB, with delegated authority from the Academic Board, must ensure:

  • Assessments follow academic regulations and standards
  • Academic misconduct and extenuating circumstances are addressed
  • Summative assessment marks are valid and reliable
  • Ratification of progression
  • Consultation with external examiners and stakeholders
  • Consideration of industry and sector trends
  • Maintenance of standards over time
  • Proper student profiles proceed to the Programme Examination Board

This ensures assessments are conducted fairly and consistently, maintaining academic standards and integrity across modules and programmes.
Rule
MEB Membership

The MEB membership consists of:

  • Director of Education (Chair)
  • All module and credit-bearing short course leaders
  • Approved external examiners

This structure ensures comprehensive oversight and accountability in the marking process, with input from key stakeholders and external examiners.
Rule
Timings of MEB

The MEB meets twice per semester:

  • After initial assessments
  • After defer, refer, and retake assessments

This scheduling ensures timely review and ratification of assessments, addressing all student outcomes.
Rule
MEB Quorum

The MEB requires a 75% quorum, including the chair and at least one external examiner.

All module leaders should also attend; if unavailable, they can nominate a team member approved by the Chair.

This ensures sufficient representation for decision-making, upholding the integrity and oversight of the examination process.
Rule
MEB Agenda and Meetings

The MEB agenda must include:

  1. Introduction: Chair's introduction, apologies, confidentiality, conflict of interest check, terms of reference overview.
  2. Previous Minutes and Actions: Discuss previous minutes and Chair’s actions. 
  3. Confirmation of Standards: Director of Education to confirm assessment process. 
  4. Ratification of Marks and Progression: Module leaders to present marks to MEB, noting of issues, corrections, and confirmation of marks.
  5. Defers, Academic Misconduct, and Cases: Discuss and ratify individual student issues, noting in minutes.
  6. External Examiner Report: External examiners’ comments and actions discussed.
  7. Trend Analysis: Compare KPIs and marks with previous years.
  8. Industry and Sector Analysis: Discuss relevant industry trends.
  9. Continuous Improvement: Note measures and suggestions for Academic Board. 
  10. Conclusion: Chair’s summary, any other business, action summary, procedural compliance statement, next meeting date set.

This comprehensive agenda ensures thorough review and discussion, maintaining academic standards and promoting continuous improvement.
Rule
MEB Secretary

The MEB Chair is responsible for:

  • Ensuring all necessary information is provided beforehand
  • Circulating the agenda and sending invites
  • Noting minutes and actions
  • Recording all marks, changes, and progressions accurately
  • Sharing action lists and sending them to appropriate staff
  • Tracking progress on actions
  • Processing final marks and progression decisions on the AGS
  • Reporting on minutes and actions at the next MEB

This ensures efficient organisation, accurate record-keeping, and effective follow-up, maintaining the integrity and smooth functioning of the MEB.

Duties of Programme Leaders and the Programme Examination Board (PEB)

Title
Rule
Programme Leader and MEB Ratified Module Marks

Once the MEB ratifies final module marks, programme leaders must:

  • Use these marks, regulations, and the School’s algorithm to determine awards and classifications, noting defers, retakes, withdrawals, or expulsions
  • Produce a list of provisional awards and classifications
  • Obtain Director of Education approval for this list
  • Submit final marks and lists to the PEB at least 3 working days before the meeting
  • Attend the PEB or appoint a substitute if unavailable
  • Present provisional awards and classifications to the PEB
  • Report pertinent information, including academic misconduct, as needed

This process ensures accurate and fair determination of final awards, compliance with academic regulations, and effective oversight.

Roles of Credit-Bearing Short Course Leaders within the Programme Examination Board (PEB)

Title
Rule
Credit-Bearing Short Course

After MEB ratification, the leader of a credit-bearing short course must prepare a final list of marks and students for the PEB to ratify awards.

This ensures proper documentation and final approval of credit awards, maintaining academic standards.

Functions of the Programme Examination Board (PEB) in Award Decisions

Title
Rule
Remit of PEB

The PEBs, under the Academic Board's authority, must:

  • Determine programme awards and classifications, and ratify credit-bearing short course results
  • Ensure awards and credits are valid, reliable, and meet sector standards
  • Use MEB-ratified module profiles for award classification and credit decisions
  • Decide on withdrawals and expulsions
  • Ensure compliance with academic regulations
  • Ratify exit awards
  • Consult external examiners and stakeholders
  • Consider industry and sector trends
  • Maintain consistency and standards over time

This ensures all awards and decisions are credible, standardised, and compliant with academic and sector requirements.
Rule
PEB Membership

The PEB consists of:

  • Director of Education (Chair)
  • Relevant programme leaders
  • Approved external examiners

This structure ensures comprehensive oversight, representation, and accountability in the award and classification process.
Rule
Timings of PEB

The PEB meets twice per semester:

  • After initial assessments
  • After defer, refer, and retake assessments

This ensures timely review and ratification of all assessments, addressing all student outcomes.
Rule
PEB Quorum

The PEB requires a 75% quorum, including the chair and at least one external examiner. Programme leaders must attend in person; if unavailable, they can nominate a module team member, subject to Chair approval.

This ensures adequate representation and effective decision-making, maintaining the integrity of the examination process.
Rule
PEB Agenda and Meetings

The PEB agenda must include:

  1. Introduction: Chair introduces programmes, notes apologies, states confidentiality, checks for conflicts of interest, and covers terms of reference.
  2. Previous Minutes and Actions: Discuss previous minutes and Chair’s actions.
  3. Confirmation of Standards: Director of Education confirms programme leaders' lists comply with regulations.
  4. Ratification of Awards: PEB reviews and ratifies conferment lists, short course results, deferrals, and exit awards.
  5. Withdrawals and Exclusions: PEB decides and ratifies withdrawals and exclusions, noting them with follow-up actions.
  6. External Examiner Report: PEB invites external examiners to comment, discuss, and note actions and comments.
  7. Trend Analysis: Compare KPIs and awards with previous years to identify trends.
  8. Industry and Sector Analysis: Discuss relevant industry trends affecting standards.
  9. Continuous Improvement: Note measures and suggestions for improvement.
  10. Conclusion: Chair summarises; discuss any other business; actions summarised; state procedural compliance; set next meeting date.

This comprehensive agenda ensures thorough review, ratification, and continuous improvement, maintaining high academic standards.
Rule
PEB Secretary

The PEB Chair is responsible for:

  • Ensuring all necessary information is provided beforehand, including from programme and other leaders
  • Circulating the agenda, information, and sending invites
  • Noting minutes and actions
  • Accurately recording all lists, including conferment, exit awards, and exclusions
  • Sharing action lists and sending them to appropriate staff
  • Tracking progress on actions
  • Entering and processing final awards and decisions into the AGS
  • Reporting minutes and actions at the next PEB

These duties ensure organised, accurate, and efficient management of the PEB process, upholding academic standards.

Procedures for Conducting MEB and PEB Meetings

Title
Rule
Student Attendance

No student may be a member of or attend an examination board meeting, except:

  • When, as a qualified leader or examiner, they are a student on a separate programme and pose no conflict of interest; 
  • For their own viva voce or oral examination

This ensures impartiality and avoids conflicts of interest in examination board decisions.
Rule
Chairs

The Director of Education chairs all examination boards (EB) by default, ensuring efficient operation and fulfilment of duties. Chairs must:

  • Ensure all necessary information is submitted beforehand, including from module and programme leaders 
  • Circulate agendas, information, and sending invites
  • Open meetings
  • Brief members
  • Validate quorum for legitimacy
  • Submit a report to the Academic Board on EB work
  • Handle declarations of personal interest
  • Appoint a deputy in their absence
  • Ensure trends, insights, and continuous improvement are discussed and reported on 
  • Convene additional meetings 
  • Note minutes and actions
  • Record marks, changes, progressions, awards
  • Share action lists, sending them to staff
  • Track progress on actions
  • Process marks, changes, progressions, awards on the AGS
  • Report on minutes and actions at next EBs

Deputy Chair:
A Deputy Chair is appointed for all EBs. In the Chair’s absence, the Deputy assumes responsibility. Any instance of the Deputy Chair leading an EB must be formally recorded and ratified by the Chair of the Academic Board. If both Chair and Deputy Chair are unavailable, a replacement is designated by the Chair of the Academic Board.

This structure ensures effective, transparent, and continuous oversight of examination boards, maintaining high standards and quality.
Rule
Conflict of Interests

All examination board members must declare any conflicts of interest, particularly concerning students. If no declaration is made, it is assumed that no conflicts exist.

This ensures transparency and impartiality in examination board decisions, maintaining integrity and trust.
Rule
Quorum and Inquorate Boards

The rules on quorum for each board are set out in these regulations. Exceptionally, the President may make a decision if either Board is inquorate, provided that the Director of Education has approved that all academic regulations have been followed.

This ensures decisions can still be made in line with academic standards, even if a board lacks quorum.
Rule
Privacy and Retention

All members must keep information and proceedings confidential per School privacy policies. The Chair is responsible for securely storing minutes and actions, following retention policies, and using the AGS as needed.

This ensures confidentiality and proper record-keeping in line with the School's privacy and retention policies.

Documentation and Record-Keeping for MEB and PEB Meetings

Title
Rule
Implementing Board Actions

Chairs must manage and process actions including progressions, defers, retakes, academic misconduct, awards, short course results, withdrawals, and expulsions. They must enter decisions into the AGS and notify relevant staff. They must monitor progress, and update at the next examination board meetings.

This ensures actions are implemented and tracked efficiently, maintaining academic integrity and continuous oversight.
Rule
Minutes

The Chair is responsible for taking minutes and managing actions, including recording module marks, progressions, and conferment and exit awards in the AGS.

MEB/PEB minutes must include:

  • Attendance list and capacity of attendees
  • Apologies for absence
  • Statement of confidentiality
  • Amendments to previous minutes
  • Report on matters arising and actions
  • Confirmation of standards from the Director of Education
  • Ratified marks, progression decisions, awards, and any changes with reasons
  • Decisions on extenuating circumstances, academic misconduct, and exclusions
  • Exercise of discretion
  • Comments from external examiners
  • Trend analyses
  • Comments on standards and improvement
  • Closing remarks from external/internal examiners and the Chair

Minutes must be retained in the AGS for a coherent, formal record, ensuring consistency and transparency in decisions and trends.

Role of the Automated Governance System (AGS) in Board Operations

Title
Rule
Uploading Board Decisions to the AGS

After ratification by the boards, Chairs must upload all module results, progression, programme and short course conferment lists, and decisions on retakes, defers, withdrawals, and expulsions to the AGS.

This ensures that all decisions and actions are properly recorded and accessible, maintaining accountability and transparency.
Rule
Quality Assurance and Accuracy of Entries

Modules: After the MEB ratifies and uploads module and short course marks and progression decisions to the AGS, module leaders should check and confirm these to the Director of Education. who will then notify programme leaders that they can be used to produce lists for the PEB. 

Programmes and Credit-Bearing Short Courses: After the PEB ratifies awards and classifications and uploads them to the AGS, programme and course leaders must check and confirm the accuracy of these for the purposes of issuing transcripts and certificates. The Director of Education will verify this before they are used to produce transcripts and certificates.

This ensures accurate records and proper validation before issuing official transcripts and certificates, maintaining academic integrity and correctness.
Advice
Informing Students

After the Director of Education's approval, students will receive an email to log onto the AGS to check decisions, transcripts, and certificates. They may contact the School with any questions.

Students can access their transcripts only after fulfilling contract conditions, including fee payment and compliance with academic regulations and policies.

Please see the Module, Progression, and Award Regulations for further information on the contents of transcripts and certificates. 

This ensures students are informed of their results and have access to official documents while providing a channel for inquiries.

Process for Handling Academic Appeals

Title
Advice
Challenging a Board Decision: Academic Appeal

The Module Examination Board and Programme Examination Boards, authorised by the Academic Board, decide on extenuating circumstances, ratify module marks, progression, refers and retakes, exclusions, and awards. Challenges to these decisions must be made through an academic appeal, based only on procedural irregularity.

These decisions impact students significantly. Allowing appeals based solely on procedural irregularity ensures fairness while maintaining the integrity of academic judgement.
Definition
Academic Appeal Distinguished from Complaints and Extenuating Circumstances

An academic appeal addresses final decisions from the Boards. It differs from a complaint about the School’s processes and an application for extenuating circumstances. See the Student Complaints and Academic Appeals Policy for more details.

This clarifies the scope of academic appeals, distinguishing them from complaints and extenuating circumstances applications, ensuring students understand the proper channels for their concerns.
Rule
First Stage Academic Appeal: Timeline for Initiating an Appeal

Students must submit an academic appeal within 10 working days of the Board’s decision by emailing the Student Success Team, which will forward it to the chair of the Academic Board. Appeals should include a statement and supporting evidence on procedural irregularity. The chair may extend the deadline in exceptional circumstances.

This ensures timely and organised processing of appeals, while allowing flexibility for extenuating circumstances.
Rule
First Stage Academic Appeal: Investigation

Upon receipt of the statement and evidence, the chair will either investigate or appoint another Academic Board member (not involved in the Board in question) as the 'investigator.' The investigator will review all materials to determine if procedural irregularity exists.

This ensures an impartial review process, maintaining fairness and integrity in handling concerns.
Rule
First Stage Academic Appeal: Outcomes

A. If no reasonable evidence is found:

  • The Student Success Team will notify the student and inform them of the right to a panel hearing.

If reasonable evidence is found:

  • The investigator will refer the statement, evidence, and decision to the chair of the relevant examination board.

This must be completed within 10 working days.

B. The chair will review the materials and consult with an external examiners present.

Following consultation, the chair will either:

  • Implement a change, inform relevant parties, and document the decision, including in their report
  • Reject the change in writing, informing the Student Success Team, who will notify the Academic Board and student, and inform the student of the right to a panel hearing

This must be completed within 10 working days.

This ensures a thorough, timely, and transparent review process, maintaining fairness and procedural integrity.
Rule
Second Stage Academic Appeal: Timeline for Initiating an Appeal

Students must request a panel hearing within 10 working days of the decision by writing to the Student Success Team, including a statement and any evidence of procedural irregularity. The chair of the Academic Board may extend the deadline for exceptional circumstances.

This ensures appeals are submitted promptly and allows flexibility for exceptional situations.
Rule
Second Stage Academic Appeal: Investigation

The Chair of the Academic Board must convene a panel within 5 working days. The panel will consist of:

  • A Director from the Executive Committee, not involved in the matter (Chair)
  • 2 academic staff members, not involved in the matter
  • A member of the Student Success Team (Secretary)

The Secretary will notify members and the student, providing at least 5 days' notice. The student may bring a staff member or fellow student. The Secretary will record evidence, keep records, and document decisions.

During the meeting, the panel will review the student's statement, evidence, academic records, and minutes. The student may address the panel. The Board's Chair may submit a written statement. The panel will decide at the meeting or within 3 working days.

This process ensures a fair, impartial review of appeals, maintaining transparency and accountability.
Rule
Second Stage Academic Appeal: Outcome

A. The panel's decision will be made by simple majority vote and communicated to the student in writing as soon as possible. In case of a tie, the student receives the benefit of the doubt.

  • If no reasonable evidence is found:
    • The Secretary will notify the student and advise that the decision is final.
    • Provide information on engaging the Office of the Independent Adjudicator.
  • If reasonable evidence is found:
    • Refer the decision to the Chair of the relevant Board.

B. The Chair of the relevant Board will review the statement and evidence, consult with the external examiners, and then:

  • If agreeing with the change:
    • Implement the change, inform the student and relevant staff, and document it in minutes and actions, and note it in their reports.
  • If rejecting the change:
    • Notify the Student Success Team in writing. They will inform the Academic Board and the student and advise on the Office of the Independent Adjudicator.

This ensures a fair process for appeals, clearly communicating decisions and providing a path for further review if needed.
Rule
President

The President may overturn the Chair's decision to reject a change if deemed manifestly unreasonable, at their discretion.

This allows for a final check to ensure fairness and reasonableness in decision-making.
Rule
Communication and Continuous Improvement

The Student Success Team must keep students informed of actions taken, collect data on complaints and appeals, and submit regular reports to the Departmental Director, who will report to the Executive Committee and Academic Board.

This ensures transparency, accountability, and continuous improvement in handling student complaints and appeals.

Metrics and KPIs

The following metrics will be measured and regularly reviewed as key performance indicators for the School to ensure the effectiveness of this policy and associated operations.

Title
Academic Appeal Resolution Time
Resolve 90% of academic appeals within 20 working days of the appeal submission.
Ensures efficient handling of appeals, improving fairness and reducing student uncertainty.
Accuracy of Academic Records
Achieve less than 1% error rate in recorded marks and progression decisions each academic year.
Maintains the credibility and reliability of academic records, ensuring fairness in student evaluations.
Response Rate to Progression Queries
Respond to 95% of student inquiries regarding progression and awards within 5 working days.
Fosters clear communication and support for students, enhancing their experience and satisfaction with the School’s processes.
Policy: Examination Boards and Academic Appeal Regulations