Academic Regulations – Section C1 - 10

From Wikquality Impact Assessment

Revision as of 13:15, 15 August 2013 by WikiSysop (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

All feedback is welcomed from internal and external sources. Please email your comments to

The next scheduled review of this impact assessment is on Tuesday 10 June 2014.

Faculty or Service Area: Registrar and Secretary's Office
Name of policy owner: Louise Allen
Original policy document: None.
Creation date: 2010/06/10
Purpose of the policy being assessed:
To state the University’s regulations in relation to assessment including; examinations, achievement of credit, student progression, award conferment, cheating and plagiarism and disabled students and students with specific learning difficulties.

All students of the University and those staff involved in the academic processes referred to within the regulations.

Customer groups affected by the policy: Staff, Students
Relevant protected characteristics affected by the policy: Disability, Race, Religious belief, Mode of attendance (part-time or full-time)
Examples of how these protected characteristics are affected by policy with evidence, justification and course of action:
Disability:There is a difference of impact for this group where Section C10 refers to additional or different arrangements in place for students with a disclosed disability or specific learning difficulties. For example the use of individual learning contracts and alternative assessment arrangements. Assessment and examinations policies provide disabled students and those with specific learning difficulties, with the equivalent opportunity to their peers. This can include the provision of additional time, alternative methods of assessment, the use of support software etc. as agreed within the learning contract.

Religious Belief: Wherever possible exams are timetabled to avoid key religious dates in order to ensure that students do not experience conflict between the two events. There is the potential for this group to be affected by the policy in relation to the timing of religious festivals and practice. The regulations state that examinations should be timetabled to take account of these wherever possible.

Mode of attendance: Examination times are made available at least 2 weeks in advance allowing individuals to make alternative arrangements. There is the potential for part-time students to be more affected than full-time ones in relation to exam timetabling particularly where part-time students also work.

Supporting evidence: None.
Feedback from Equality Forums and other interested parties:
This is the first time these regulations have been impact assessed and the language used has not previously been considered in terms of the various equality strands.

Some of the language used in the existing regulations might be regarded as ethnocentric, e.g. the use of ‘foreign’ to describe languages other than English.

There are a number of references to ‘his’ or ‘her’ where a gender neutral alternative could be used instead.

Some of the terminology is highly specific e.g. rubric and synoptic. Both could be explained to improve accessibility more generally.

The current wording at C7.9.4 states that invigilators must include those of the same sex as candidates. This is to cover situations where invigilators may be required to accompany candidates from an exam. Where a student is transgender records may not reflect this. Ideally exams should be invigilated by male and female invigilators.

To replace the following words with alternatives: e.g.

‘Foreign’ with another or language other than English - C5.5.2, 5.5.3, 7.8.7, 8.5.5, ‘Normal’ with standard - C5.5.1 ‘her or his’ with the or their - C5.9.6, ‘he or she’ with the student – C10.6.1 ‘him or her’ with their entitlement – 9.10.2 schedule 4

To reword 7.9.4 to reflect the need for both male and female invigilators to be present.

Consultation open: Feedback on this impact assessment is welcome, but it is not officially under consultation at this time.
Review date: 2014/06/10
Personal tools