NU Assessment Criteria Guidelines Contents Checklist for Setting Assessments at Northumbria University 1. Introduction 2. Setting assessment tasks 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4
Grade descriptors Marking schemes Assessment briefs Assessment briefs for exams
3. Formative preparation for assessments 4. Providing feedback on assessed work 4.1 Individual feedback; feedback sheets 4.2 Generic feedback on assessments 4.3 Feedback on examinations 4.4 Feedback timelines 5. Approval of work set for assessment purposes 6. Establishing levels of learning A. Blooms taxonomy B. ICE model C. SOLO taxonomy D. External reference points
1. Introduction These guidelines for managing the assessment journey provide guidance in implementing the NU Assessment Policy 2013, particularly as it relates to the setting of, and providing feedback on, assessment tasks. The principle underpinning the Assessment and Feedback Policy is that empowering students to become self regulated learners is key to improving assessment and feedback. In relation to setting and providing feedback on assessment tasks, this is achieved through engaging students in developing a shared understanding of what is expected of them by effectively communicating standards, while recognising that these are not always transparent in written assessment criteria, but need to be discussed, and students given opportunities to actively engage with them. However, in the first instance standards need to be made clear by developing high quality and consistent written generic grade descriptors, marking schemes and assessment briefs. Furthermore, clear and consistent grade descriptors and marking schemes help academics to develop common standards in marking, which are clear and transparent to academics, students and external examiners, thus assuring confidence in the fairness of marking. The NU Assessment and Feedback Principles are underpinned by a constructivist approach to student learning, in particular the need to align learning outcomes, the teaching/ learning environment, and assessment, while recognising that assessment is central to learning (Biggs and Tang 1999). There is also a need for a programme based approach, so that students progressively develop the learning outcomes identified for a programme from level 4-7, and that these can be demonstrated to be taught and assessed across the modules of a programme. An aligned curriculum is important in making HE accessible to diverse learners, by making clear to all students the learning expected, and facilitating learning towards these expectations. The key elements of the NU Assessment Policy relating to setting and providing feedback on assessments are: Northumbria Assessment and Feedback Principles "1. Help clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, standards). To what extent do students in your course have opportunities to engage with, clarify and understand goals, criteria and standards, before, during and after an assessment task? 2. Encourage ‘time and effort’ on challenging and authentic learning tasks To what extent do your assessment tasks focus student learning on meaningful and applied learning tasks, rather than surface learning of isolated facts and figures? 3. Provide high quality feedback and opportunities that enable learners to close the gap between current and desired performance. What kinds of feedback do you provide – in what ways does it help students evaluate their levels of 1
Grades are clearly delineated making use of the full marking range, with 3 marking blocks in the 70-100% range (70%-79%, 80-89%, and 90-100%)
achievement, and does it include ‘feed forward’ that can be used before the final hand in date? To what extent is feedback attended to and acted upon by students in your module, and if so, in what ways? 4. Ensure summative assessment impacts positively on learning To what extent do you use summative assessment rigorously, but sparingly, to develop valued qualities, skills and understanding? 5. Ensure formative assessment opportunities To what extent do students have opportunities to try out and practice knowledge, skills and understanding before they are summatively assessed? 6. Encourage interaction and dialogue around learning and assessment (peer and teacher-student). What opportunities are there for feedback dialogue (peer and/or tutor-student) around learning and assessment tasks in your module/programme?” 7. Facilitate the development of self-assessment, reflection in learning and autonomy To what extent are there formal opportunities for reflection, self-assessment or peer assessment in your course to enable students to learn to evaluate their own progress and direct their own learning? 8. Ensure an inclusive approach to assessment and feedback To what extent have you developed flexible assessment tasks and feedback that facilitates learning and achievement across a diverse and increasingly internationalised student body? While the Assessment Principles will be applied across all assessments, it is recognised that these will be adapted to the specificities of the particular programme, and type of assessment. Section 3 of the Assessment and Feedback Policy provides guidelines for implementing the policy, which are: 1. Using professional judgement in implementing the Principles and recommended good 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
practices Involve students actively in the implementation of the Principles Align responses to the National Student Survey to the Principles Align responses to the International Student Barometer Survey to the Principles Align responses to External Examiners feedback to the Principles Use digital technologies to support and add value to the implementation Take a holistic approach to implementing improvements across modules and programmes Evaluate the impact of changes brought about by the implementation of the Principles
In addition, the enabling requirements identify specific criteria that should be in place in order to implement the assessment principles:
1
Grades are clearly delineated making use of the full marking range, with 3 marking blocks in the 70-100% range (70%-79%, 80-89%, and 90-100%)
Enabling Requirements Underpinning NU Assessment and Feedback Principles • “Expected learning outcomes have been defined for modules and programmes, and module outcomes are mapped to programme outcomes. • There is clear alignment between the expected learning outcomes, what is taught and learned and the knowledge and skills assessed, thus ensuring validity. • Assessment criteria, grade descriptors and marking schemes have been developed that distinguish between different knowledge and skills, and between grades 1, and that are aligned across modules and programmes. Assessment criteria, grade descriptors and marking schemes are shared with students, and feedback is given in relation to these. 0F
• Module assessment is integrated into an overall plan/timeline for programme assessment which is shared with students. • Learning outcomes and assessment criteria are written in a way that is understandable to students and can be used to develop their graduate attributes. • There is variety and complexity in assessment methods appropriate to the learning outcomes that encourages a deep approach to learning (e.g. essays, problem-based, portfolios) • There is a progression in the complexity and demands of assessment requirements in later years of modules. •
Plagiarism is minimised through careful task design, explicit education and appropriate monitoring of academic integrity.
• Steps are taken to ensure that assessments and feedback are fair, reliable, flexible and inclusive, taking into account student diversity, including processes to take account of the requirements of individual students, as appropriate. •
1
Assessment and feedback practices adhere to The UK Quality Code for Higher Education, in particular Chapters B6 Assessment of Students and Recognition of Prior Learning, B3 Learning and Teaching, Part C Indicator 4.
Grades are clearly delineated making use of the full marking range, with 3 marking blocks in the 70-100% range (70%-79%, 80-89%, and 90-100%)
2. Setting Assessment Tasks 2.1 Generic Grade Descriptors (assessment standards) Definition: Generic grade descriptors are statements of standards to be reached across a range of generic criteria in order to achieve different grades. A full set of generic grade descriptors for a university or department will involve statements of standards across the different levels of the awards. They are intended to provide greater consistency in marking across different disciplines. Generic grade descriptors should be adapted and applied to individual assessments in developing marking schemes (see Bloxham and Boyd 2007 2).
1F
Guidelines: •
ADs Learning and Teaching should ensure that generic grade descriptors are available for each level that cover the types of assessment offered in their faculty These may be at institutional, faculty, department and/or subject level. These should be aligned across faculties.
•
Generic grade descriptors should be adapted and used to make them relevant to specific assessments through the development of a marking scheme for specific assessments.
•
Generic grade descriptors take the form of a grid with assessment criteria on one axis (e.g. relevance to question, structure and organisation, grounding in literature, use of evidence, application of theory, quality of argument, presentation, referencing etc.), and grade bands on the other.
•
Grades will be clearly delineated making use of the full marking range, with marking blocks for each 10% (0-9%, 10-19%, 20-29%....70%-79%, 80-89%, and 90-100%).
2
Bloxham, S. and Boyd, P. (2007) Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
These will take the following format: Assessment Criteria (to be defined)
Grade bands 90-100% 80-89% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 30-39% 20-29% 10-19% 0-9% •
Grade descriptors will incorporate descriptions that demonstrate what is qualitatively different between the different grades.
2.2 Marking Schemes Definitions: Marking schemes: A marking scheme for an assignment or examination combines the assessment criteria for the task with the appropriate standards (for example, from a set of grade descriptors) and provides the detail about how performance in each of the criteria will be graded. It is the view of the QAA (2006) that clear, public marking criteria and marking schemes are important in ensuring that marking is carried out fairly and consistently across all disciplines (see Bloxham and Boyd 2007). Assessment criteria: Assessment criteria are the aspects of an assignment or examination which the assessor will take into account when making a judgement. These are likely to be specific to individual tasks and might include such things as quality of argument, accuracy, use of evidence and presentation. Assessment criteria should flow from module and programme learning outcomes (see Bloxham and Boyd 2007). Guidelines: All assessments to have a marking scheme that contains: •
Marking schemes should combine the assessment criteria on one axis (e.g. relevance to question, structure and organisation, grounding in literature, use of evidence, application of theory, quality of argument, presentation, referencing etc.) and marking blocks on the other.
•
Marking schemes draw on the relevant generic grade descriptors (see above). There
should be consistency in the qualitative words used to describe expected standards in the different marking blocks, drawing from the relevant grade descriptors. •
Marking schemes incorporate descriptions that demonstrate what is qualitatively different between the different grades.
•
Grades are clearly delineated making use of the full marking range, with marking blocks for each 10% (0-9%, 10-19%, 20-29%....70%-79%, 80-89%, and 90-100%) or more marking blocks, if required to delineate further grade bands.
•
They should have been agreed with relevant external examiners.
These will take the following format: Assessment Criteria (to be defined)
Grade bands 90-100% 80-89% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 30-39% 20-29% 10-19% 0-9% •
They should have been agreed with relevant external examiners, and should be made available to students in the programme handbook.
2.3 Assessment briefs for coursework Guidelines: All coursework assessment briefs will contain: •
Title/overview
•
Learning outcomes addressed
•
Assessment tasks and instructions are clear and unambiguous
•
Assessment brief (what students are expected to do/task criteria)
•
Assessment criteria (aspects that will be taken into account when making a judgement), and/or qualities expected in a good assignment
•
Marking scheme (above) Word limits and penalties for course work are communicated
• •
Submission due date and return dates Alternative assessment arrangements for disabled students or students with
•
unforeseen medical circumstances are followed as set out in ARNA (Para 1.7.2 and Appendix II) They should have been agreed with relevant external examiners, and should be made available to students in the programme handbook, where feasible.
•
2.4 Assessment briefs for exams Additional Guidelines: •
Students will have access to past exam papers via the eLP from the past two years where available, unless exemption has been granted by the FSLE.
•
There should be a class briefing on the exam (e.g. in the last class session).
3. Formative preparation for assessments Definition and NU Assessment Principles “Effective feedback is the result of agreeing and communicating clear criteria before students complete the task” QAA Quality Code Chapter B3 NU Assessment and Feedback Principle 1: Help clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, standards). To what extent do students in your course have opportunities to engage with, clarify and understand goals, criteria and standards, before, during and after an assessment task?
Guidelines: •
Discussion of assessment briefs and active engagement with assessment criteria should take place within a formally scheduled time/class.
•
Students should be involved in activities that engage them in understanding judgements about quality, for example by using exemplars or indicative answer notes.
•
Assessment briefs should also be made available via the eLP site.
•
Where appropriate, students may be involved in decisions about assessment criteria, for example in some cases it may be possible for students to be involved in writing criteria (see NU Recommended Good Assessment Practices 1: Provide opportunities, where appropriate, for student choice in the topic, method, criteria, weighting or timing of assessments: To what extent do students have input into and choice in the topics, methods, criteria, weighting and/or timing of learning and assessment tasks in your course?)
•
Where appropriate (for example final major projects, dissertations), students may be given the opportunity to make a formative submission where feedback is provided.
4.
Providing feedback on assessed work
Definition and Guidelines: NU Assessment Principle 3: Provide high quality feedback and opportunities that enable learners to close the gap between current and desired performance. What kinds of feedback do you provide – in what ways does it help students evaluate their levels of achievement, and does it include ‘feed forward’ that can be used before the final hand in date? To what extent is feedback attended to and acted upon by students in your module, and if so, in what ways? NU Assessment Principle 6: Encourage interaction and dialogue around learning and assessment (peer and teacher-student). What opportunities are there for feedback dialogue (peer and/or tutor- student) around learning and assessment tasks in your module/programme? Students should be able to identify from the feedback how they have performed in relation to assessment criteria and grades, identifying both strengths and areas for improvement which helps them improve their performance in future assessments (e.g. by providing qualitative comments against each criterion and an identification of performance on the marking scheme – see examples).
4.1. Individual feedback on assessments Guidelines: Assessments feedback sheets should contain: •
Feedback against each assessment criteria, and the quality of the performance in relation to the marking scheme (for example, by providing space for qualitative comments in relation to each assessment criteria, together with an identification of how students have performed on an attached marking scheme – see example 1).
•
Assessment criteria that are aligned with the learning outcomes for the module.
•
Space for general qualitative comments, at the bottom of the sheet under specific headings, for example strengths, weaknesses and areas for improvement.
4.2. Generic Feedback on Assessments Guidelines: •
There should be a formally scheduled time/class to discuss feedback on each assessment, where feasible. This may take the form of generic feedback to the cohort as a whole, peer feedback and/or self assessment.
•
Generic feedback should be provided for the cohort as a whole, where feasible, highlighting key strengths, and areas for improvement. This should be made available (e.g. via the eLP or class email) in advance of individualised return of work.
4.3 Feedback on Examinations Information to follow
4.4 Feedback timelines
Individual feedback on assignments will be given within 20 working days.
5. Approval of work set for assessment purposes (under construction)
6. Establishing levels of learning It is important that learning outcomes, grade descriptors and assessment tasks are at the right level. Developing distinct criteria that are understandable to academics and students is a challenging task. The following guidelines are models for academics to choose from, which are intended to support this.
A
Bloom’s taxonomy
This is probably the best known way of describing the qualities of student performance in assessment. While the categories do not map exactly onto levels, it is expected that higher levels will involve more learning outcomes and assessment tasks requiring the more complex activities. They can also represent qualitative differences in students’ engagement with knowledge.
Lower level
Knowledge Comprehension Application Analysis
Synthesis
Higher level
Evaluation
recall, define, repeat, record, list, name, relate, underline translate, restate, discuss, describe, recognise, explain, express, identify, locate, report, review, tell interpret, apply, employ use, demonstrate, dramatise, practice, illustrate, operate, schedule, sketch distinguish, analyse, differentiate, appraise, calculate, experiment, test, compare, contrast, criticise, diagram, inspect, debate, question, relate, solve, examine, categorise compose, plan, propose, design, formulate, arrange, assemble, collect, construct, create, set up, organise, manage, prepare, connect concepts judge, appraise, evaluate, rate, compare, revise, assess, estimate, predict, develop an argument
This web link below gives a good short explanation of Bloom’s Taxonomy http://www.coun.uvic.ca/learning/exams/blooms-taxonomy.html
B
The ICE Model
See the ICE Model and an Essays Exercise Application in practice at Northumbria. The ICE model of qualitative learning assessment (Wilson 1996, Fostaty, Young and Wilson 2000) describes learning as a process of growth from novice toward expert. It is based on a cognitive development theory similar to the well known SOLO Taxonomy developed by Biggs (see below). A good thing about the ICE model is that it is easier to remember than the details of SOLO and the terms and it provides a useful way in which staff and students can talk about the qualities of assessment performance.
ICE is an acronym for Ideas/Items, Connections and Extensions
Ideas (or Items)
These represent the building blocks of learning. They can be: discrete ‘chunks’ of information; facts, definitions, vocabulary, steps in a process; discrete skills. Students who have approached an assessment task by focussing on recall and repetition of information from books or from lectures will probably produce responses at the Ideas level.
Connections
a) Subject connection Connections at the subject or topic level can be seen when students make appropriate links between ideas (or chunks of information). They can explain a process, or describe a relationship such as cause-and-effect, or show how separate aspects of a topic or concept fit into a ‘big picture’. b) Personal or broader connections Connections at this level show that a student is relating new knowledge to what they already know. Connections might be made to other topics or concepts addressed within the programme last year or in other modules currently being studied). Other types of connections might be made to the student’s personal or professional experiences.
Extensions
This is about the re-working of a student’s knowledge and understanding to accommodate new ideas, concepts and connections. It can be a shift in the way of seeing things. Students may be able to use their extended understanding in novel and creative ways. They may make extended connections to very different domains of their knowledge, skills and experiences. Students address ‘So what?’ Questions – by extrapolating, predicting outcomes or working out implications.
Using the ICE Model
University staff have found the ICE model useful in a variety of ways. It can help when: • Marking students' work. The general framework that ICE provides can be especially helpful for staff new to marking student work •
Designing a specific assessment task
•
Setting assessment criteria and standards
•
Developing a scheme to describe how requirements for academic work change as students progress (e.g. Year 1 to Year 3)
•
Communicating requirements, criteria and/or standards to students (e.g. what makes a good/less effective answer?)
References: Fostaty Young, S. (2005) Teaching, Learning & Assessment in HE: using ICE to improve student learning. Paper presented at the Improving Student Learning Symposium, London, 5-7 Sep 2005. Fostaty Young, S. & Wilson, R. J. (2000) Assessment and learning: the ICE approach Winnipeg. Portage & Main Press Wilson, R J (1996) Assessing students in classrooms and in schools. Scarborough and Ontario: Allyn & Bacon
C
The SOLO taxonomy
The SOLO taxonomy was developed by John Biggs (2011). He takes into account quantitative differences, for example, using the term ‘unistructural’ when something really is missing in a student’s submission. There are then two categories of submission that are distinguished by qualitative differences. 1. Prestructural Misses the point 2. Unistructural Only one aspect, perhaps fulfilling part of task 3. Multistructural Knowledge-telling, various aspects, but not really answering question, no structure and coherence Quantitative
Qualitative 4. Relational Integrated, explanation or argument, makes sense, brings together different aspects 5. Extended abstract Goes beyond what has been given, high level of abstraction, broadened to new domain or context
D
External Reference points
1. Relevant Subject Benchmarks http://www.qaa.ac.uk/AssuringStandardsAndQuality/subject-guidance/Pages/Subjectbenchmark-statements.aspx Benchmarks are available at Honours level for many subjects and at Masters level for a smaller number 2. Relevant Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies standards (PSRBs)
The QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ)
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Pages/The-framework- for-highereducation-qualifications-in-England-Wales-and-Northern-Ireland.aspx
This describes 5 HE levels as below. Typical higher education qualifications within each level Doctoral degrees (e.g., PhD/DPhil (including new-route PhD), EdD, DBA, DClinPsy)**
FHEQ level*
Corresponding FQ-EHEA cycle
8
Third cycle (end of cycle) qualifications Second cycle (end of cycle) qualifications
Master's degrees (e.g., MPhil, MLitt, MRes, MA, MSc) Integrated master's degrees*** (e.g., MEng, MChem, MPhys, MPharm) Postgraduate diplomas
7
Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE)**** Postgraduate certificates First cycle (end of cycle) qualifications
Bachelor's degrees with honours (e.g., BA/BSc Hons) Bachelor's degrees Professional Graduate Certificate in Education (PGCE)****
6
Graduate diplomas Graduate certificates Foundation Degrees (e.g., FdA, FdSc) Diplomas of Higher Education (DipHE)
5
Higher National Diplomas (HND) Higher National Certificates (HNC)*****
Short cycle (within or linked to the first cycle) qualifications
4
Certificates of Higher Education (CertHE)
Framework for Higher Education Qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, August 2008
The Qualification Descriptors contained in Section 4 of the FHEQ document describe the attributes and skills that should be demonstrated by a student at each qualification level http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/FHEQ08.pdf
Extracts from this section are below, describing levels 4-8, which are useful in defining learning outcomes and grade descriptors at these different levels:
Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 4: Certificate of Higher Education
The descriptor provided for this level of the FHEQ is for any Certificate of Higher Education which should meet the descriptor in full. This qualification descriptor can also be used as a reference point for other level 4 qualifications. Certificates of Higher Education are awarded to students who have demonstrated: • knowledge of the underlying concepts and principles associated with their area(s) of study, and an ability to evaluate and interpret these within the context of that area of study • an ability to present, evaluate and interpret qualitative and quantitative data, in order to develop lines of argument and make sound judgements in accordance with basic theories and concepts of their subject(s) of study. Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to: • evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems related to their area(s) of study and/or work • communicate the results of their study/work accurately and reliably, and with structured and coherent arguments • undertake further training and develop new skills within a structured and managed environment. And holders will have: • the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of some personal responsibility.
Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 5: Foundation Degree
The descriptor provided for this level of the FHEQ is for any Foundation Degree which should meet the descriptor in full. This qualification descriptor can also be used as a reference point for other level 5 qualifications, including Diplomas of Higher Education, Higher National Diplomas, etc. Foundation Degrees are awarded to students who have demonstrated: • knowledge and critical understanding of the well-established principles of their area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have developed ability to apply underlying concepts and principles outside the context in which they were first studied, including, where appropriate, the application of those principles in an employment context • knowledge of the main methods of enquiry in the subject(s) relevant to the named award, and ability to evaluate critically the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems in the field of study • an understanding of the limits of their knowledge, and how this influences analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge. Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to: • use a range of established techniques to initiate and undertake critical analysis of information, and to propose solutions to problems arising from that analysis • effectively communicate information, arguments and analysis in a variety of forms to specialist and non-specialist audiences, and deploy key techniques of the discipline effectively • undertake further training, develop existing skills and acquire new competences that will enable them to assume significant responsibility within organisations.
And holders will have: • the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of personal responsibility and decision-making.
Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 6: Bachelor's degree with honours
The descriptor provided for this level of the FHEQ is for any bachelor's degree with honours which should meet the descriptor in full. This qualification descriptor can also be used as a reference point for other level 6 qualifications, including bachelor's degrees, graduate diplomas etc. Bachelor's degrees with honours are awarded to students who have demonstrated: • a systematic understanding of key aspects of their field of study, including acquisition of coherent and detailed knowledge, at least some of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of defined aspects of a discipline • an ability to deploy accurately established techniques of analysis and enquiry within a discipline • conceptual understanding that enables the student: • to devise and sustain arguments, and/or to solve problems, using ideas and techniques, some of which are at the forefront of a discipline • to describe and comment upon particular aspects of current research, or equivalent advanced scholarship, in the discipline an appreciation of the uncertainty, ambiguity and limits of knowledge • the ability to manage their own learning, and to make use of scholarly reviews and primary source (for example, refereed research articles and/or original materials appropriate to the discipline). Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to: • apply the methods and techniques that they have learned to review, consolidate, extend and apply their knowledge and understanding, and to initiate and carry out projects • critically evaluate arguments, assumptions, abstract concepts and data (that may be incomplete), to make judgements, and to frame appropriate questions to achieve a solution or identify a range of solutions - to a problem • communicate information, ideas, problems and solutions to both specialist and non- specialist audiences. And holders will have: • the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring: • the exercise of initiative and personal responsibility decision-making in complex and unpredictable contexts • the learning ability needed to undertake appropriate further training of a professional or equivalent nature.
Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 7: Master's degree
The descriptor provided for this level of the framework is for any master's degree which should meet the descriptor in full. This qualification descriptor can also be used as a reference point for other level 7 qualifications, including postgraduate certificates and postgraduate diplomas.
Master's degrees are awarded to students who have demonstrated: • a systematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of their academic discipline, field of study or area of professional practice • a comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to their own research or advanced scholarship • originality in the application of knowledge, together with a practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline • conceptual understanding that enables the student: o to evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline o to evaluate methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where appropriate, to propose new hypotheses. Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to: • deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, make sound judgements in the absence of complete data, and communicate their conclusions clearly to specialist and nonspecialist audiences • demonstrate self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems, and act autonomously in planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level • continue to advance their knowledge and understanding, and to develop new skills to a high level. And holders will have: • the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring: o the exercise of initiative and personal responsibility o decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations o the independent learning ability required for continuing professional development.
Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 8: Doctoral degree
The descriptor provided for this level of the FHEQ is for any doctoral degree which should meet the descriptor in full. This qualification descriptor can also be used as a reference point for other level 8 qualifications. Doctoral degrees are awarded to students who have demonstrated: • the creation and interpretation of new knowledge, through original research or other advanced scholarship, of a quality to satisfy peer review, extend the forefront of the discipline, and merit publication • a systematic acquisition and understanding of a substantial body of knowledge which is at the forefront of an academic discipline or area of professional practice • the general ability to conceptualise, design and implement a project for the generation of new knowledge, applications or understanding at the forefront of the discipline, and to adjust the project design in the light of unforeseen problems • a detailed understanding of applicable techniques for research and advanced academic enquiry. Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to: • make informed judgements on complex issues in specialist fields, often in the absence of complete data, and be able to communicate their ideas and conclusions clearly and effectively to specialist and non-specialist audiences • continue to undertake pure and/or applied research and development at an advanced level, contributing substantially to the development of new techniques, ideas or approaches.
And holders will have: • the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of personal responsibility and largely autonomous initiative in complex and unpredictable situations, in professional or equivalent environments. 3. Higher Education Credit Framework for England This results from the work of the Credit Issues Development Group, which includes QAA and other HE bodies. The credit is separate from the FHEQ because it is not a formal part of the QAA academic infrastructure; however, it closely aligns with the credit framework long in existence at Northumbria. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/england/credit/creditframework.asp The above document (Appendix B) recommends the general use of the set of Level Descriptors originally developed by NICATS, the Northern Ireland credit body: Learning accredited at this level will reflect the ability to: Level 8 •
make a significant and original contribution to a specialised field of inquiry, demonstrating a command of methodological issues and engaging in critical dialogue with peers and accepting full accountability for outcomes
Level 7 •
display mastery of a complex and specialised area of knowledge and skills, employing advanced skills to conduct research, or advanced technical or professional activity, accepting accountability for related decision making, including use of supervision
Level 6 •
critically review, consolidate and extend a systematic and coherent body of knowledge, utilising specialised skills across an area of study; critically evaluate concepts and evidence from a range of sources; transfer and apply diagnostic and creative skills and exercise significant judgement in a range of situations; and accept accountability for determining and achieving personal and/or group outcomes
Level 5 •
generate ideas through the analysis of concepts at an abstract level with a command of specialised skills and the formulation of responses to well-defined and abstract problems; analyse and evaluate information; exercise significant judgement across a broad range of functions; and accept responsibility for determining and achieving personal and/or group outcomes
Level 4 •
develop a rigorous approach to the acquisition of a broad knowledge base; employ a range of specialised skills; evaluate information, using it to plan and develop investigative strategies and to determine solutions to a variety of unpredictable problems; and operate in a range of varied and specific contexts, taking responsibility for the nature and quality of outputs.
Framework for Qualifications for the European Higher Education Area (FQ-EHEA): This is likely to be of increasing performance as the Bologna process progresses and attempt is made to ensure comparability between qualifications across the European HE area (this extends beyond the EU). Level here is defined in terms of EHEA cycles (short, first, second, third). The FHEQ (see above) already maps to these levels. The full framework can be found at http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Docs/00Main_doc/050218_QF_EHEA.pdf A mapping of Northumbria awards to EHEA cycles is contained in our Diploma Supplement, issued to all graduates, see http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/central/ar/qualitysupport/student/ For information on approved Northumbria awards at each level and how they map to the FHEQ and the corresponding cycle of the FQ-EHEA, see the Modular Framework for Northumbria Awards http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/central/ar/qualitysupport/approval/framework/
References Biggs, J and Tang, C. (2011) Teaching for Quality Learning at University (Fourth Edition), SRHE/McGraw-Hill. Bloxham, S., and Boyd, P. (2007) Developing effective assessment in higher education, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
