What are the three Grading Standards?

Knowledge and understanding, Subject specific skills, Transferable skills

 

When do we start using these three Grading Standards?

The Grading Standards are to be used for students registered on Access to HE Diplomas from 1 August 2024.

 

What are the arrangements for continuing students who started their course before 1 August 2024?

Please contact your AVA for information about the grading arrangements for any continuing students you may have.

AVAs will have considered their own specific context to decide the most appropriate way forward, having considered a set of options circulated to AVAs by QAA.

 

Does the new Grading Scheme mean we have to change the way we assess or just the way we grade?

Assessment will continue to be based on a student meeting the Learning Outcomes of a unit, through meeting the requirements of the Assessment Criteria, therefore proving that the award of credit may be made by an AVA. Once a student has achieved the credits, and therefore has passed the unit, the Grading Standards are applied to show performance above that of a Pass.

 

Will I still be able to grade individual assignments in a multi-part assessment unit?

Grading only takes place at the level of a unit once a student has passed the whole unit. Three grade indicators will be given for the unit - one for each of the three Grading Standards - and the overall unit grade will be determined using the median of the three grade indicators.

 

What does it mean to 'apply all three equally to all graded units and across all assessments'?

With just three Grading Standards you will not have a choice of which you use as all three Grading Standards must be used across all assessments to get the grade for the unit.

 

In multi-part assessments, it is not permissible to choose, for example, Assignment 1 to assess Knowledge and Understanding, and Assignment 2 to assess Subject Specific Skills and Transferable Skills. Grading only takes place at the level of a unit and all three Grading Standards must be used across all assessments to get the grade for the unit. This will result in three grade indicators with the overall unit grade determined using the median of the three grade indicators.

 

Will I be able to continue to use existing assignments and assignment briefs?

86.4% of practitioners testing the Grading Scheme reported that the Grading Standards would allow for use of existing assignments. However, you may need to review your assignments to ensure students have the opportunity to meet the selected sub-components of the revised Grading Standards. The guidance you give to students in the assignment briefs will need to change in the light of the revised Grading Standards.

 

Are exams/time-constrained assignments still possible under the new Grading Standards?

Yes, exams (or time-constrained assignments) are still facilitated under the new Grading Standards. As with all assignments, you will need to choose appropriate sub-components of the Grading Standards for the type of assignment being set. As an example, for a unit that is assessed by a closed book exam, the sub-component 'adheres to academic conventions' is unlikely to be applicable as the student would not be referencing in this assignment.

 

What happens if a student hands in one assignment late in a multi-part assessment unit?

In this case, the whole unit will be capped at Pass because it is not possible to grade or cap an individual assessment. This applies only for students who hand in late and have not requested an extension or applied for extenuating circumstances.

 

Students may request an extension or apply for extenuating circumstances by following the relevant centre/provider process to avoid the penalty of capping at a Pass.

 

What happens if a student fails one assignment in a multi-part unit?

The student is entitled to the normal resubmission opportunities and if the (re-submitted) assignment meets the learning outcomes, this will be included in the evidence for assessment of the unit. In this case the unit will be eligible for grading and will not be capped at a Pass.

 

What feedback/feedforward can we give to students on individual assignments, and can we use the wording of the Grading Standards where a unit is assessed through multi-part assignments?

For units with multi-part assessments, the unit grade is determined once all pieces of assessment have been successfully submitted and no indicative grade information can be given on individual assignments.

 

Using the language of the Grading Standards to give feedback on individual assignments carries a risk that students will interpret these terms as having a direct relationship to an expected final-unit grade. This, in turn, could lead to the risk of challenge, or appeal, if a student perceives a final-unit grade to be at odds with the feedback on individual assignments.

 

QAA does not direct providers/centres in the type of language used for feedback and feedforward, although the awarding bodies (AVAs) may legitimately do so and therefore tutors are advised to follow the guidance from their AVA and/or provider/centre on this.

 

Tutors are adept at giving formative feedback throughout the Diploma, in a variety of forms and units, including non-graded units. Feedback and feedforward in multi-part assignment units should be considered as formative in purpose and to support students to improve and/or continue their level of performance within assessment tasks.

 

Providers/centres may find it useful to refer to information on the submission and feedback of drafts in Section C of the Grading Scheme Handbook when considering how to frame feedback and feedforward for multi-part assignments.

 

Some providers/centres are managing feedback and feedforward for multi-part assignment units through the use of a feedback proforma which lists the individual staged assignments (referred to in some instances as interim assessments). The proforma serves to build up a single picture for both tutor and student of the unit over time. The indicative grade is provided on the proforma only at the point where all assignments have been successfully completed.

 

How should the Grading Standards be presented in assignment briefs?

The choice of presentation of assignment briefs rests between AVAs and providers/centres. QAA would expect there to be checks in place to ensure there is no unexpected drift or omissions in the text of the Grading Standards. It is advisable, however, for the benefit of the student, that any guidance about 'and/or' options should be clearly iterated in the contextualisation section of the assignment brief and tutors need to have a clear rationale for their selection to be confident that a single unit grade can be arrived at, and justified, using different selections.

 

The Access to HE Grading Scheme Toolkit 2023: Converting Assignment Briefs includes examples of different ways of presenting the selection of sub-components made.

 

Word copies of the three Grading Standards have been made available to aid tutors in selecting and presenting their chosen sub-components within an assignment brief.

 

How easy or difficult is the new Grading Scheme to get to grips with?

76.5% of practitioners testing the Grading Scheme reported that they found the three Grading Standards easy or very easy to apply and 73.8% said they found it easy or very easy to distinguish between P, M and D. Others reported that, with practice it will become easy.

 

Can just three Grading Standards be used across all subject areas?

Yes, they can because each of the three Grading Standards were developed with practitioners to ensure a comprehensive set of sub-components which you can choose from to tailor the grading to specific subjects and to specific types of assessment.

 

The sub-components selected must be consistent when determining merit or distinction grades. This means it is not permitted for a student to be required to meet additional sub‑components to be granted a Distinction.

 

What help is there to support us through these changes?

AVAs will be updating their normal guidance for providers/centres and will be arranging training and information sessions. On the QAA website there are updated versions of the Grading Scheme handbook - the Tutors Quick Guide to Grading.  There is also a range of generic materials to support those using the Grading Scheme, such as a guide to transitioning assignment briefs, exemplar assignment briefs, and examples of feedback/feedforward to students taking multi-part assessments.

 

These support materials were developed to help address the queries raised by practitioners through testing. We shall continue to add to our FAQs throughout the year to ensure that further queries are responded to.

 

Will every Diploma impacted by this change need to be revalidated in advance of delivery in August 2024? 

Your AVA will have worked with you where revalidation was required. The process differs depending on whether your units and/or Diploma are AVA designed or provider/centre designed but, either way, your AVA will have worked with you to find the most efficient way to implement any change.

 

There will have been a process to ensure changes made to meet the revised grading scheme to units or assessments did not impact the overall quality and academic integrity of the named Diploma.

 

What constitutes 'generally' and 'consistently', specifically in relation to assessments which contain a series of shorter individual questions?

The context of both the subject discipline and the individual assignment(s) must be taken into consideration in determining this. The information in the Grading Scheme Toolkit, particularly the examples in Integrated Assessments: A Brief Guide, and Grading Scheme Glossary will be helpful in deciding how 'generally' and 'consistently' could be applied to your subject area under the Grading Standards.

 

You may wish to work with your team, AVA and external moderator to agree an approach that works across your Access to HE provision. As with all revised qualifications and/or grading schemes, standardisation and sharing examples of work will be key to getting this right for your provision.

 

Can thresholds be applied to determine 'generally' or 'consistently' specifically within assessments which contain a series of shorter individual questions?

No, numerical marking is not permitted within the Grading Scheme and tutors should not use thresholds as a proxy for numerical marking. The Learning Outcomes for the whole unit must be met in full and thereafter the Grading Standards are used to differentiate performance above that of a Pass.

Grading Standard 1: Knowledge and understanding | Grading Standard 2: Subject-specific skills | Grading Standard 3: Transferable skills

GRADING STANDARD 1: KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING

 

Can you confirm that the use of OR in the wording of Grading Standard 1a is correct, as it differs from the wording used in the old grade descriptors?

The grade descriptors allowed for the combination of breath AND depth in order to achieve a distinction grade. The 2023 Grading Standards are distinct from this in that combining breadth AND depth does not culminate in the award of a distinction grade as both can be assessed independently.

A student who meets all learning outcomes will achieve a pass grade. A student who achieves a merit grade is deemed to have generally demonstrated breadth OR depth. A student who achieves a distinction is deemed to have consistently demonstrated breadth OR depth.

In setting a task, tutors may require a response that demonstrates breadth only, or depth only. They can also state that a response can demonstrate either breadth OR depth, leaving the choice to the learner. However, where breadth is used as grading criteria, it must be used to determine both merit and distinction grades. Similarly, if tutors select depth as the grading criteria this must be used to determine both merit and distinction grades. It is not permissible, for example, to ask for breadth to determine a merit grade and to ask for breadth AND depth to determine a distinction grade (or vice versa).

Note that the choices of sub-components from list GS1(b) must also be consistent across merit and distinction.

*Grades may not be assigned until all learning outcomes and the assessment criteria for a unit have been achieved.

When using Grading Standard 1a in multi-part assignments, would it be appropriate for one assignment to be used to demonstrate breadth and another to demonstrate depth?

Yes, it could be. QAA does not prescribe assessments and considers that the interpretation of the revised Grading Scheme should not prohibit the use of appropriate types of assessment. Appropriate assessment can be achieved in a number of ways under the Grading Standards.

An example of the type of (existing) multi-part assessment that this might apply to is where Assignment 1 is a multiple-choice assessment to cover the breadth of a unit and Assignment 2 is a more in-depth analysis of a specific aspect of the unit. In this example, the choice of breadth OR depth can be left open to allow for this sort of flexibility in multi-part assignments.

I want students to be able to show both breadth and depth overall, can this be used to determine the level of grade when using Grading Standard 1a?

No, it is not permissible, for example, to use breadth OR depth to determine a merit grade and use breadth AND depth used to determine a distinction grade.

Tutors will identify which of breadth OR depth they are using to grade each unit. They will then grade using professional judgement based on the type of task(s) and the evidence presented against the criteria of generally or consistently and very good or excellent.

In setting tasks, tutors may require a response that demonstrates breadth only, or depth only. They can also state that a response can demonstrate either breadth OR depth, leaving the choice to the learner. However, where breadth is used as grading criteria, it must be used to determine both merit and distinction grades. Similarly, if tutors select depth as the grading criteria, this must be used to determine both merit and distinction grades. It is not permissible, for example, to ask for breadth to determine a merit grade and to ask for breadth AND depth to determine a distinction grade (or vice versa).

The selection of the sub-components must be appropriate to the task(s) being set and allow the marker to grade using professional judgement based on the type of task and the evidence presented.

When using Grading Standard 1a, how can breadth OR depth be determined flexibly for single-part assignments?

There are examples in single assessments where the choice of breadth OR depth can be determined by the students. For example, in essay assignments both approaches may be considered to be equally valid. In this instance, the assessment parameters (that is, the breadth OR depth) would not be determined before an assessment was completed. The choice of breadth OR depth can be left open to allow for flexibility for the student in single part assignments. In any circumstance, the assignment brief needs to be clear in terms of expectations and limitations - flexibility can be tremendously empowering for students, but also confusing and daunting.

However, where breadth is used as grading criteria, it must be used to determine both merit and distinction grades. Similarly, if tutors select depth as the grading criteria, this must be used to determine both merit and distinction grades. It is not permissible, for example, to ask for breadth to determine a merit grade and to ask for breadth AND depth to determine a distinction grade (or vice versa).

Back to top

GRADING STANDARD 2 - SUBJECT-SPECIFIC SKILLS 

Grading Standard 2a requires that the student, student’s work or performance 'demonstrates an ability in selecting and using skills as required by the unit'. Often in assignments a tutor will decide which skills students need to demonstrate, so how could a brief be written which enables students to be graded on their ability to select a skill?

 

The question highlights two approaches to assessment for skills development:

1       The tutor identifies the skills they wish to develop across a cohort and sets a specific task that directs all students to evidence their skills development in completion of that task.

2       The tutor sets a flexible task that encourages students to take ownership of their own skills development; they are directed to identify and evidence skills that are relevant to their own professional development.

In both of these approaches, the assignment brief must be explicit and specific in terms of the learning outcomes to be achieved. However, in achieving the learning outcome(s) students may identify, utilise and evidence different skills. Students may also submit different artefacts in response to a brief - for example, a media student might choose to create a short film or a magazine dependent on their interpretation of an audience’s needs. GS2(a) affords flexibility in that it requires that learners demonstrate ‘an ability in selecting and using skills as required by the unit’. In any circumstance, the assignment brief needs to be clear in terms of expectations and limitations - flexibility can be tremendously empowering for students, but also confusing and daunting. A good assignment brief might also create opportunities for students to articulate and evidence their thought process - for example, through reflection and self-evaluation where they have been given autonomy to make key decisions themselves (and this might then be reflected with GS3 - transferable skills).

The criteria against which learners’ work are to be assessed must also be clearly articulated in the assignment brief. Sub-components GS2(b) describe techniques - ways of doing things - that are to be applied to the skills under scrutiny. A minimum of two and maximum of four sub-components must be used. So, to return to the example of our media student, in order to achieve a merit, they would need to submit an audience-appropriate artefact (film, print or audio) that generally demonstrates skills appropriate to their selected medium AND very good levels of (for instance) accuracy, creativity, focus and insight. In order to achieve a distinction, the learner would need to submit an audience-appropriate artefact that consistently demonstrates skills appropriate to their selected medium AND very good levels of accuracy, creativity, focus and insight.

QAA wishes to encourage innovation and flexibility in assessment, particularly with regard to inclusive practice, through the implementation of the Grading Standards.

Back to top

GRADING STANDARD 3 - TRANSFERABLE SKILLS

When using Grading Standard 3a, is it appropriate in multi-part assignments for one assignment to be used to demonstrate communication and another to demonstrate presentation?

Yes, where appropriate, it is permissible for one assignment within a multi-part assignment to be used to grade communication and another to be used to grade presentation skills.

Communication and presentation have different meanings in different subject disciplines and in different types of assignments. For example, communication in visual arts has a different meaning and manifestation to that in performing arts; the presentation of a set of accounts may follow a particular format but would not necessarily require an oral presentation; communication in a group work task is different to the communication of experimental results.

The key issue for Grading Standard 3a (as with all the Grading Standards) is that it is appropriately set in the context of the subject discipline and the type of assignment(s) being set.

Do presentation skills, as a specific sub-set of communication skills, need to be assessed by an oral presentation when using Grading Standard 3a?

No, the inclusion of the term's presentation skills within GS3a covers a range of presentation types and is not limited to an oral presentation.

Tutors should ensure that the selection of the sub-components is appropriate to the assessment being set and allow the marker to grade using professional judgement based on the type of assessment and the evidence presented, while applying the criteria (generally or consistently, and, very good or excellent) to assign the overall grade.

Tutors must make it clear within the contextualisation section of the assignment brief what the expectation is of the student in each of the assignment tasks and tutors must be able to apply and justify an overall unit grade without grading the individual assignment tasks separately.

Grading Standard 3a includes an option for the student, student’s work or performance to demonstrate 'very good/excellent communication and/or presentation skills evidenced by the use and/or selection of a range of elements' including digital software. Would a scientific calculator be classed as digital software?

AVAs and tutors may agree that scientific calculators may be classed as digital software. Care would need to be applied to ensure that parity of opportunity was available to all students. For example, some individuals may not have access to calculators with the same level of sophistication as others.

Please note that GS3(a) relates to communication and/or presentation skills. Some sophisticated calculators can depict graphs, for instance, and therefore could be considered a tool for communication and presentation. However, for the most part, we foresee calculators being used for skills such as calculation, computation and analysis. These would likely fit with GS2 (subject-specific skills) rather than GS3 which focuses on communication, presentation, autonomy, and academic and professional convention.

When using Grading Standard 3b, what is the difference between autonomy and independence, and why are both terms used?

Because we recognise that within different subject disciplines different terms will be used, both terms are included ('and/or') to allow for tutors to interpret the requirement broadly and in line with their application in specific subject disciplines.

Tutors are reminded that:

• the selection of the sub-components must be appropriate to the assessment being set and allow the marker to grade using professional judgement based on the type of assessment and the evidence presented, while applying the criteria of generally or consistently, and, very good or excellent, to assign the overall grade
• they must make it clear within the contextualisation section of the assignment brief what the expectation is of the student in each of the assignment tasks and they must be able to apply and justify an overall unit grade without grading the individual assignment tasks separately
• they also need to be able to provide a rationale, and justifiable response if challenged in moderation or by a student for the grades awarded.

In considering the application of GS3b for research projects, autonomy could be identified through student selection and direction of a research topic and associated 'higher-level' activity for the research question, while independence could be identified through students completing the research question as set, without requiring input from staff other than the normal review points for such a project.

When using Grading Standard 3c, can tutors select and apply the 'and/or' options to individual assignments within a unit?

Yes, tutors can select and apply the 'and/or' options to individual assignments within a unit (that is, they do not have to use the same selection for all assignments within a unit.)

The wording of the Grading Standard should be left as it is (in full) in that part of the assignment brief. However, tutors should make it clear in the contextualisation section what they are looking for and should coherently describe the options they have selected so that students are clear what is expected of them.

Do tutors have to apply the same selection to all assignments within a unit when using Grading Standard 3c?

Tutors may select and apply the 'and/or' options to individual assignments within a unit. For example, academic conventions referencing in a multi-part assignment where one of the assignment tasks is a closed book examination, would not apply but it may well apply to a second different assignment task. This should mean that tutors are not constrained in assessment practice, thereby reducing the need for existing assignments to be rewritten.

The wording of the Grading Standard should be left as it is (in full) in that part of the assignment brief, and tutors should make it clear in the contextualisation section what they are looking for and should coherently describe the options they have selected so that students are clear what is expected of them.

Back to top