University of Technology Sydney UTS: Rules, Policy and Legislation

The information in this site is maintained by Governance Support Unit

by classification
Standing Orders
Faculty Management
Controlled Entities and Commercial Activities
Legislation, Rules
and Policies home

GSU home
Coursework Assessments Procedures




Policy statements

Responsibility, ownership and support


Approval information

PDF version


Appendix A: Results ratification

1. Purpose

1.1 The Coursework Assessments Procedures (the procedures) implement the Coursework Assessments Policy (the policy) and should be read in conjunction with the policy.

2. Scope

2.1 The procedures have the same scope and application as the policy.

3. Principles

3.1 The principles guiding the procedures are outlined in the policy.

4. Policy statements

4.1 The procedures, under the provisions of the policy, provide guidance on how to develop and design assessments, manage assessment administration, conduct examinations, provide for alternative assessment arrangements and manage exceptions, and manage the marking process.

Assessment pattern design

4.2 The assessment pattern for a subject should normally include two or three summative assessment tasks (each worth no more than 65 per cent), except in the case of subjects that have a 100 per cent project assessment (eg capstone).

4.3 Assessment patterns should normally include at least two different types of assessment task, except in the case of subjects that have 100 per cent project assessment (eg capstone).

4.4 Final examinations will not normally be worth more than 50 per cent of the final mark/grade, except in exceptional circumstances approved by the faculty. Where final examinations are worth more than 50 per cent, a supplementary assessment must be provided by the faculty for students with borderline results in the final subject of their degree (see Schedule 1, Student Rules for definition). These must be provided by the faculty.

4.5 A minimum of 70 per cent of the total mark/grade awarded in a subject must be for individually marked/graded work. This may include individually marked components of group tasks.

4.6 Assessment tasks for which most work is carried out outside class may include a viva, in-class or other invigilated component to confirm the integrity of student work. Students should be advised in the subject outline of the broad type of task component (for example oral, written) and any assigned weighting.

4.7 The following learning needs must be considered in assessment pattern design:

  • opportunities to practice and gain feedback prior to high-stakes competency-based and proficiency-based tasks
  • guidance and support for final projects or assignments worth more than 50 per cent of the total mark
  • opportunities to practise prior to online or technology-based examinations that are timed and/or invigilated
  • where self- or peer assessment contributes to final marks or grades (including through self- and peer assessment of group work), opportunities to practice and develop an understanding of the criteria
  • essential presentation events that require student attendance must be clearly stated in the subject outline, with the consequences of any unapproved non-attendance.

Assessment administration

4.8 Subject outlines describe students’ responsibilities and timelines for the submission and collection of assessment tasks (where appropriate). Tasks should be submitted online using the approved university assessment system where it is practical to do so, and students should not be required to submit additional hard copies.

4.9 Under Rule 3.9, the university reserves the right to retain students’ work under specific circumstances.

4.10 For changes to assessment requirements published in the subject outline, Rule 3.7.4 applies. Where approval is not forthcoming, the assessment requirements cannot be changed.


4.11 Student responsibilities in the examination of coursework subjects can be found in Rule 9.2.

Centrally conducted examinations

4.12 Centrally conducted examinations are organised and conducted in accordance with Rules 9.3 to 9.6, the procedures and any guidelines provided by the Student Administration Unit (SAU).

4.13 Subject coordinators must prepare examination masters and complete the necessary steps, standards and conventions required by SAU (see centrally conducted exams on Staff Connect). SAU may request additional information upon submission.

4.14 Subject coordinators are also responsible for the preparation of rescheduled, alternative and supplementary examinations.

Faculty-based examinations

4.15 Faculty-based examinations are run and coordinated by individual faculties in line with Rule 9.3.2 and the principles outlined in the policy and procedures.

Examination master and quality assurance

4.16 Subject coordinators must submit the examination master to the assessor for review to ensure that exam questions:

  • are subject-appropriate
  • are appropriate for the exam format (setting, duration, conditions, etc)
  • have a distribution of questions covering relevant learning objectives
  • are of a reasonable length for the completion time allowed
  • are clear and unambiguous
  • are capable of solution either from knowledge that students could reasonably be assumed to possess or from the data supplied (where appropriate)
  • are of equal difficulty, duration and complexity for each exam master (main, rescheduled, alternative and supplementary) or be weighted accordingly.

4.17 Where the subject coordinator and the assessor disagree on the examination master, the Responsible Academic Officer (RAO) will act to resolve the difference of opinion.

4.18 Where an error in the examination master is discovered prior to the examination, the subject coordinator will provide an erratum/addendum sheet for distribution with examination papers, or otherwise be present at the commencement of the exam to explain the error (eg typing or numbering errors).

Responsibilities during examinations

4.19 Subject coordinators (or nominees) must be available to provide advice during centrally conducted examinations in a manner appropriate to the exam setting or location. Alternative arrangements can be made with the approval of SAU and the RAO.

4.20 Where special materials or exam conditions are permitted in the centrally conducted examination, as per the subject outlines, subject coordinators must be in attendance (physically or remotely as appropriate) before the exam.

4.21 All students must verify their identity to undertake their examination to protect the integrity of the examination process. Identity verification may include some or all of the following:

  • presentation of Student Identification Cards to gain entry or access to the examination location
  • restrictions on entry and exit to the examination location
  • use of logins and passwords (or similar identifiers)
  • use of examination specific authentication technologies (including continual authentication technology where appropriate).

Responsibilities after examinations

4.22 Completed examination scripts from centrally conducted examinations are usually delivered to the faculty office or the school or department office one business day after the completion of the exam. Exam Attendance Sheets (showing the students enrolled in the subject and indicating those who attempted the examination) must be attached to the collected examination papers.

4.23 To ensure data security and integrity, records resulting from online examinations will be managed via approved examinations and/or information systems in line with the Coursework Assessment Policy, Privacy Policy and Records Management Policy using relevant information technology security checks (see also Information Security Classification Standard (PDF) on Staff Connect).

Administration of alternative assessment arrangements and special consideration

4.24 Where a scheduling difficulty arises in the examination of coursework subjects, students should advise UTS, as prescribed by Rule 9.1.5, via the exams website, by the prescribed deadline.

4.25 Special conditions for examinations are outlined in Rule 9.4 with further information further information available online (see exam provisions). Special conditions apply to both centrally conducted and faculty examinations.

4.26 In addition to the provisions of Rule 8.2, any students experiencing difficulties in meeting an assessment deadline or requirements should consult with their subject coordinator in the first instance. Students who experience significant difficulty can apply for special consideration under Rule 8.3.1.

4.27 Details on alternative and rescheduled examinations for specific students (held at a time other than the published time) are outlined in Rule 9.5.

4.28 Special consideration is available for students who feel their performance in an examination has been significantly disrupted due to circumstances beyond their control, as outlined in Rule 8.3.2. Information about alternative exam arrangements is available from SAU.

4.29 A student who is absent from an entire examination should consult Rule 8.3.3. A student who has not informed themselves of the time or place of an examination will not be eligible for an alternative examination, as defined in Rule 9.5.

4.30 Where a student fails to meet, or is unable to meet, the prescribed attendance and/or participation included in the subject outline (Rule 3.8.3), students may be eligible to apply for special consideration (Rule 8.3).

4.31 All UTS student forms and procedures will be made available on the special circumstances webpage.


4.32 Faculties must have fair and consistent processes for requesting and granting assessment extensions. This must include fair and consistent penalties for late submissions in the absence of an approved extension (for example, 10 per cent per day late penalty and late submissions periods after which assignments will not be eligible for more than 50 per cent of marks and/or will not be marked).

4.33 Processes for requesting extensions and penalties for late submission must be clearly stated in the subject outline, or in a faculty- or course-level student guide referred to in the subject outline.

Marking, grades, results and feedback

Marking and feedback to students

4.34 Marking should be conducted, and feedback provided to students, in a fair, timely and confidential manner in line with the principles and practice outlined in the policy. Online marking and feedback will be used where it is reasonable to do so.

4.35 Where marking is carried out by multiple markers, benchmarking of marking standards should be used prior to or at the commencement of marking, to assist markers to apply the criteria in similar ways.

4.36 Any moderation of results after marking must be based on comparison of samples of student work given the same grades or marks across different markers, and never on comparison of mark distributions alone.

4.37 Where moderation is used, this will be indicated in the subject outline and, wherever possible, completed before marks/grades are released to students.

4.38 Any moderation of results must be completed prior to submission of marks and grades for ratification.

4.39 Formal mark queries should be conducted within the five day window outlined in these procedures (statements 4.49 and 4.50). Students may request a copy of their examination for informal review within three months of the results release date (except where the examination paper or submission contains material that is to be used in successive examinations).

4.40 Students should contact subject coordinators (or their nominee) who will facilitate requests for exam scripts, grades and results.

4.41 Students requesting examination results (marks or grades) must be provided with this information.

Processing and recording results

4.42 SAU issue results processing schedules to subject coordinators and RAOs each teaching period (usually in May and October). The timelines for the other teaching sessions (Summer, March, May, July, August, October, December) are distributed separately.

4.43 Instructions for recording final results are drafted and published by SAU on Staff Connect (see academic progression, results and student records).

Interim results

4.44 When an interim result is awarded, the student must contact the subject coordinator or relevant academic adviser to determine the reason for the interim result.

4.45 The designated administrative officer, SAU is responsible for contacting students who have been awarded ‘T’ results. Communication with respect of all other interim results is the responsibility of the designated administrative officer of the faculty administering the subject.

4.46 Procedures for the management and correction of interim results are drafted by SAU, approved by the Provost and published by SAU on Staff Connect (see academic progression, results and student records). These should be reviewed every three years.

Borderline results and supplementary assessments

4.47 A supplementary examination or assessment must be provided for students with borderline results in their final subject in line with statement 4.4. Notice of supplementary examinations will be provided as soon as possible, within the boundaries of the examination calendar.

4.48 Supplementary assessment in all other circumstances may be provided, as described in the subject outline, or, where not described, at the discretion of the subject coordinator, in consultation with the RAO, as appropriate. Students may choose not to accept the offer of supplementary assessment.

4.49 The Director, SAU may approve procedural steps for the management of borderline results in line with the policy and procedures. These will be published by SAU on Staff Connect (see academic progression, results and student records).

Querying marks

4.50 Students who wish to query marks must do so no later than five working days from the date of the return of the marks to the student or, for final examination or subject results, no later than five working days from the official release of the final subject result.

4.51 Specific guidelines for querying marks and grades are approved by the Provost (or nominee) and published by SAU.

Resubmission and remarking

4.52 Resubmission or re-marking may be undertaken as a consequence of:

  • a determination made as a result of a student querying a mark or result (see 4.50 above) or making a complaint
  • a borderline result (at the discretion of the subject coordinator and/or RAO).

4.53 Resubmission or re-marking conditions and possible outcomes must be provided to the student in advance.

4.54 One resubmission or re-mark is possible per assessment task.

4.55 Where the outcome of a query or complaint investigation is the re-marking of an assessment task by a different marker (subject coordinator, assessor or external marker), the following apply:

  • the second marker must receive a clean copy of the assessment task (supplied by the student where possible) on which to undertake the re-marking
  • both markers shall compare assessments and then agree a mark/grade, and
  • the new mark/grade may be higher or lower than the original
  • if the markers cannot agree, the matter is resolved by the RAO.

Changing final results and finalising interim results

4.56 After results are released, subject coordinators must submit results for interim notations and any other changes to results on SAU’s Authority to Vary Results form, available from the designated administrative officer, SAU.

4.57 Changes to final assessment results may be made:

  • following re-marking and/or supplementary assessment
  • to finalise interim results (E, Q, T, W)
  • to amend a final result following a review of final subject assessment result
  • to correct an administrative error (documentation must be attached, as outlined in Rule 2.4)
  • following a successful query or complaint by a student
  • by the subject coordinator and RAO on the basis of a finding by a faculty Student Assessment Review Committee (Rule 8.7.3).

4.58 The Director, SAU will only approve the processing of changes to final grades or results from the teaching period immediately preceding that in which the request is made. The only exceptions are cases where the subject coordinator provides sound reasons for requesting an amendment together with an Authority to Vary Results form. If the Director, SAU does not approve the request, the matter should be referred to the Provost for resolution.

Review of final subject assessment results

4.59 Reviews of final subject assessment results are only permitted where procedural irregularities (see Schedule 1, Student Rules for definition) have been identified in line with Rule 8.6 and Rule 8.7.

4.60 This is separate from any special consideration requests (Rule 8.3) or a mark/grade query. Further information on review of final subject assessment results is available to students at review of final subject assessment results.

Releasing results

4.61 The Director, SAU approves the release of final results online via My Student Admin on the published date in line with Rule 8.4.3 and Rule 8.4.4 under the provisions of Rule 4.4.


4.62 Students may request an official academic record as outlined in the Academic Records Policy.

5. Responsibility, ownership and support

5.1 Policy owners

  • The Provost, in line with the policy, is responsible for enforcement and compliance of these procedures, ensuring that its statements are observed.
  • The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education and Students) is responsible for UTS’s educational strategies.

5.2 Policy contacts

  • The Director, SAU.

5.3 Additional responsibilities

Additional responsibilities in the procedures are assigned to:

  • subject coordinators
  • RAOs
  • assessors
  • SAU
  • Academic Board
  • faculty boards.

6. Definitions

The terms used in these procedures are defined in the policy and Schedule 1, Student Rules, with additional definitions provided below.

Data steward is defined in the Data Governance Policy.

Essential presentation event means an event (via a number of delivery options) which students are expected to attend at a specific time and location (physical or online) in order to present work to a group of assessors, collaborate with others on an observable assessable activity, or similar, for which it is not reasonably practical to arrange alternate times for individual students.

Examination location or exam location means the place of the exam. This can be in a classroom, lecture hall, examination centre, laboratory or an online environment.

Information system or system is defined in the Data Governance Policy.

Re-marking means the re-presentation of a previously submitted assessment task.

Resubmission means the submission of a new version of an assessment task.

Summative assessments are those that contribute to students’ final assessment results in a subject. Summative assessments other than final examinations normally also have the formative function of providing feedback on students’ work.

Supplementary assessment is defined in Schedule 1, Student Rules.

Approval information

Policy contact Director, Student Administration Unit
Approval authority Provost
Review date 2021
File number UR17/3560
Superseded documents Procedures for the Assessment of Coursework Subjects (file UR09/798)

Version history

Version Approved by Approval date Effective date Sections modified
1 Provost 02/11/2017 01/01/2018 New procedures.
1.1 Provost 06/12/2019 01/01/2020 Updates to sections 4.38, 4.46 and section 6 following feedback from the post-implementation working group to Teaching and Learning Committee.
1.2 Provost 18/06/2020 18/06/2020 Changes to incorporate references to online examinations.

PDF version

Coursework Assessments Procedures (PDF 209KB)


Academic progression, results and student records

Academic Records Policy

Centrally conducted exams (Staff Connect)

Coursework Assessments Policy

Information Security Classification Standard (PDF, Staff Connect)

Managing your study

Privacy Policy

Review of final subject assessment results

Student Rules

Appendix A: Results ratification

Results ratification occurs in line with the policy (section 4.19), to:

  1. review the performance of students undertaking subjects offered by the faculty, paying particular attention to borderline results (defined in Schedule 1, Student Rules) and special consideration applications, to determine appropriate action in consideration of the table of results and grades, in view of the policy and its appendix.
  2. approve the publication of results for all subjects offered by the faculty
  3. submit a final copy of the subject results sheets to the designated administrative officer, Student Administration Unit (SAU)
  4. determine interim results:
    • E – grade not submitted
    • Q – project, clinical practicum or field excursion
    • T – supplementary assessment to be completed by the faculty
    • W – withheld results.

Responsible Academic Officers would normally consult with relevant program directors, course coordinators and/or subject coordinators prior to ratifying results.

A designated administrative officer, SAU, will be available (via telephone) to provide advice on ratification.