University of Oxford Crest

Part 16 Marking and Assessment

To search within this page: Press CTRL + F (PC) or APPLE + F (Mac)

Ref: 08-16_Part_16_Marking_and_Assessment
  1. [1] Adjudication on the merits of candidates
  2. [2] 16.1.
    1. [3] (1) Every examiner who takes part in adjudicating on the merits of a candidate shall give careful attention to the examination of such candidates.
    2. [4] (2) No examiner adjudicating on the merits of any candidate shall take account of any circumstances, not forming part of, or directly resulting from, the examination itself, except as provided in Parts 10 or 11 of these regulations.
    3. [5] (3) The work of any candidate to whom Part 10 or 11 of these regulations applies shall be assessed with due and careful regard to the circumstances of that candidate and any relevant code of practice or guidelines adopted by the University in relation to such candidates.
    4. [6] (4) In the case of a candidate against whom an order has been made by a University Court under section 11 (3) or section 21 (1)(e) of Statute XI or by the Appeal Court in similar terms (intentional or reckless breach of examination regulations), the examiners shall give effect to that order.
    5. [7] (5) Where the Proctors have a recommendation to the examiners in respect of a candidate under section 32 (3) of Statute XI (breach of examination regulations which is neither intentional nor reckless) the examiners shall give due weight to the recommendation in assessing the candidate's work.
  3. [8] Examination conventions
  4. [9] 16.2.
    1. [10] (1) In adjudicating on the merits of candidates the examiners shall follow and apply the conventions approved under regulation 8.1 above subject to the right of the Board of Examiners in exceptional circumstances to make minor adjustments to the conventions during any particular Examination.
    2. [11] (2) In cases of doubt or difficulty arising under (1), the examiners shall consult the Proctors.
    3. [12] (3) Nothing in this regulation shall affect the authority of the examiners in the making of academic judgements on the performance of each candidate.
  5. [13] Viva voce Examination
  6. [14] 16.3. In any University Examination in which candidates are examined viva voce the examiners shall determine the order in which they are to be examined.
  7. [15] 16.4. Only one candidate at a time shall be examined viva voce in any one University Examination, but in cases approved by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Education) and Proctors the examiners in any University Examination may be permitted to divide themselves into groups which may examine candidates simultaneously.
  8. [16] 16.5.
    1. [17] (1) Except in the circumstances referred to in paragraph (2) below no examiner, other than an examiner in the Preliminary Examination in Medicine or in the Second Examination for the Degree of Bachelor of Medicine, or in the Honour School of Oriental Studies shall examine viva voce any candidate who belongs to any college in which he or she is tutor or in which he or she has been tutor during the previous two years or who has been instructed by him or her (otherwise than at a lecture or class open to all members of the University) within the previous two years.
    2. [18] (2) The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Education) and Proctors may relieve any Board of Examiners of the restriction imposed by this regulation if it would cause difficulty in the conduct of the Examination in question.
  9. [19] Submission of theses or other exercises: exceeding word limits and departure from title or subject-matter
  10. [20] 16.6.
    1. [21] (1) Where a candidate for any University Examination in which a thesis (or other exercise) may be, or is required to be, submitted as part of that Examination presents a thesis (or other exercise) which exceeds the word limit prescribed by the relevant statute, or regulation, the examiners, if they agree to proceed with the examination of the work, may reduce the mark by up to one class (or its equivalent).1
    2. [22] (2) Where a candidate submits such a thesis (or other exercise), the title or subject matter of which differs from that which was approved by the supervisory body concerned, the examiners (if they agree to proceed with the examination of the work) may similarly reduce the mark by up to one class (or its equivalent).1
  11. [23] Illegible scripts
  12. [24] 16.7.
    1. [25] (1) If a chairman of examiners shall consider that a script or scripts of a candidate in an examination are illegible, he or she shall thereupon inform the Proctors and the Senior Tutor or other proper officer of that candidate's college or other society or approved institution, provided that, if there shall be a dispute as to the illegibility of a script or scripts, the question shall be referred to the Proctors, whose ruling on the question shall be conclusive.
    2. [26] (2) The Senior Tutor or other proper officer shall then arrange for the candidate to dictate his or her illegible script(s) to a typist under the invigilation of a Master of Arts of the University or any other person who in the opinion of the Proctors seems suitable; the typist and invigilator having been approved beforehand by the Proctors. The dictation and typing shall be undertaken in a place to be approved by the Proctors, but subfusc need not be worn; the candidate shall dictate his or her script to the typist in the presence of the invigilator and shall ensure that the typescript is in every respect identical in form and content to the original script. No copies may be taken. The use of a tape-recorder is not permitted.
    3. [27] (3) The cost of the typing and invigilation shall not be a charge on the University.
    4. [28] (4) The examiners shall read the typescript page by page with the original script beside it and shall immediately report any discrepancy to the Proctors.
  13. [29] Late submission of work
  14. [30] 16.8.
    1. [31] (1) Where a candidate for any written examination in which a thesis (or other exercise) may be, or is required to be, submitted as part of that examination wishes on some reasonable grounds to be permitted to present such thesis (or other exercise) later than the date prescribed by any statute, or regulation, the procedure shall be as follows:
      1. [32] (a) the candidate shall apply in writing through the Senior Tutor to the Proctors for such permission enclosing the grounds for the application;
      2. [33] (b) the Proctors shall consult the chairman of examiners about any such application and shall then decide whether or not to grant permission.
    2. [34] (2) If permission is granted, the examiners shall accept and mark such a thesis (or other exercise) as if it had been submitted by the prescribed date.
    3. [35] (3) If a candidate fails to submit a thesis (or other written exercise) on time without prior permission, the Proctors may after making due enquiries into the circumstances permit the candidate to remain in the Examination and to submit the work late under arrangements similar to those set out in paragraph (1) above. It shall be a condition of any permission granted under this regulation that the candidate shall pay a late presentation fee, the amount of which shall be determined by the Proctors according to the facts of the particular case.
    4. [36] (4) In cases arising under paragraph (3) above, the Proctors may give leave to the examiners to impose an academic penalty according to any established conventions agreed by the relevant supervisory body or, if there is none, according to guidance issued by the Proctors.
    5. [37] (5) The examiners shall give due consideration to either the conventions or the guidance issued by the Proctors, and in either case report back to the Proctors on the penalty imposed. They shall give a reasoned justification for their decision where this differs from the conventions or the guidance.
    6. [38] (6) Where provided for by regulation, submissions must be accompanied by a declaration of authorship and originality. The examiners are under no obligation to mark any submission not so accompanied. This declaration should be in a sealed envelope (which may be included inside the envelope used to hand in the written work). In the event that the Declaration of Authorship is submitted late, the Proctors may recommend that the examiners apply an academic penalty.
    7. [39] (7) A candidate who is dissatisfied with a decision made by the Proctors under this regulation may, or his or her college may, appeal against it in accordance with the procedure set out in regulation 18.1 below.
  15. [40] Voting on candidates
  16. [41] 16.9.
    1. [42] (1) If in voting upon the place to be assigned to a candidate in any Class List the examiners shall be equally divided, the chairman of the examiners in that Examination shall (unless paragraph (2) below applies) have a second or casting vote.
    2. [43] (2) If the candidate in question shall be of the same college as the chairman of the examiners or of any college in which he or she is tutor or in which he or she has been tutor during the previous two years, or shall have been privately taught by him or her during the past two years, then the casting vote shall be with the senior of the examiners who is not disqualified on that ground.
  17. [44] 16.10. Candidates whose performance is not sufficient for the award of Honours but have satisfied the examiners at ‘pass’ standard shall be awarded a pass.
[45]
1 ‘Reduction by one class’ means a reduction from a II(i) to a II(ii) in the case of a mark which would otherwise have led to classification as a II(i).