Learning, Teaching and Assessment Procedures

Effective from 01/01/2025

Intent

These Procedures support the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Policy and underpin James Cook University’s (JCU; the University) approach to excellence, integrity, authenticity and respect by setting parameters for the quality of learning, teaching, and assessment so that students have every opportunity to achieve academic success.

These Procedures address the following Higher Education Standards Framework (HESF) Standards: 1.3, 1.4, 2.1.3, 2.2.1, 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3.

Scope

These Procedures apply to all JCU staff and stakeholders who manage students in partnership with JCU and students enrolled in subjects within JCU’s coursework programs including shorter-form credentials and enabling programs across all JCU campuses.

These Procedures do not apply to students admitted to Higher Degrees by Research (HDR) or to JCU students enrolled in subjects at other institutions.

Definitions

Terms mentioned in this document and not defined here are defined in the Policy Glossary.

Assessment - is intended to cover all assessment methods, including examinations.

Table of Contents

Core Principle 1

1.1 Student experience in learning and teaching

1.2 Student support

1.3 Diversity and inclusion

1.4 Flexibility

1.5 Student voice

Core Principle 2

2.1 Curriculum design

2.2 Skills development

2.3 Learning outcomes

2.4 Course and subject feedback and review

2.5 Learning Resources

Core Principle 3

3.1 Assessment requirements

3.2 Assessment methods (including examinations)

3.3 Special Consideration, deferred, supplementary, and special assessment (including examinations)

3.4 Feedback on assessment

3.5 Moderation

3.6 Grades and results

3.7 Review of grades and results

3.8 Retention of examination materials

Core Principle 4

4.1 Teaching Practices requirements

4.2 Learning and teaching environments

4.3 Consultation

4.4 Professional development

4.5 Teaching excellence

Core Principle 1

These procedures support Core Principle 1 of the Learning, Teaching, and Assessment Policy, which states: Student learning and success is built on their whole-of-university experience. JCU is committed to student engagement and success by working in partnership with students and responding to their voice.

Core Principle 1 supports JCU’s intent to provide supportive, inclusive and equitable teaching and learning environments that recognise student diversity and academic freedom, promote academic development, and motivate all students to achieve success. This core principle underpins JCU’s strategic priority to provide a transformative education.

Learning, teaching, and assessment activities and support services at JCU are designed and delivered so that students can:

• participate fully in scheduled learning experiences;
• take part in the wider intellectual life of the university, such as joining academic events, exhibitions, and seminars;
• expect a manageable academic workload;
• effectively communicate in the context of learning and the workplace;
• engage with place-based education in the diverse regions we serve;
• learn from subject matter experts (including industry professionals), high-profile researchers, and other stakeholders;
• take responsibility for their own learning; and
• access a range of timely support services and resources to help them achieve satisfactory academic progress.

1.1 Student experience and commitment in learning and teaching

1.1.1 Students’ transition into graduate employment is developed in courses, subjects, and extra-curricular activities which include explicit, staged development of transferable generic skills, discipline-specific knowledge and technical skills, and career management skills. This is enacted through authentic course design and contextualised course learning outcomes:

a. JCU provides students with resources that have a skills-focus and aligned to current employer/professional needs accessible through JCU’s Careers and Employability unit.

b. JCU provides students with opportunities to take part in informal learning through networking, collegial and team-building activities, and participation in communities, including online communities.

1.1.2 Students are expected to engage in authentic and contextualised course learning and teaching activities and must make themselves available for assessment and examinations.

1.1.3 Students have opportunities to provide feedback on their enrolled subjects and on their overall educational experience to measure satisfaction with learning and teaching, as outlined in the Student Evaluation of Subjects and Teaching Policy. Student feedback informs institutional monitoring, review, and improvement activities (see section 2.4).

1.2 Student support

1.2.1 The University provides appropriate, inclusive, and accessible support services to students to promote a positive and successful education experience. The support services available are communicated directly to students and staff and are also easily accessible through the JCU website. (See Support for Students Policy.)

1.2.2 Students, regardless of their location or mode of study, have access to an orientation experience that provides opportunities for successful transition into courses of study, including:

a. forming connections with fellow students and educators; and

b. information on available support and services and opportunities to engage in University life.

1.2.3 Students receive consistent access to virtual learning environments and learning resources, library collections and services, creative works, notes, laboratory/clinical/practical facilities, studio sessions, simulations, and software that are:

a. specified or recommended for a course of study;

b. directly related to course and subject learning outcomes; and

c. accessible, current, and relevant to career development.

1.2.4 Students refer to the Student Digital Experience Policy to fulfil the University’s expectations for engagement with virtual learning environments, including online learning and teaching. Additionally, students are supported to gain skills and confidence in using digital tools through:

a. orientation and training in University-wide and discipline-specific virtual environments;

b. LearnJCU training and support;

c. Learning Centre resources;

d. Library self-help resources; and

e. IT Help Desk for institutionally supported software and applications.

1.2.5 Students receive explicit learning and teaching information which uses commonly accepted terminology and language appropriate to the discipline. The information includes recommendations about how students can meet academic expectations and take responsibility for their own academic progress including:

a. before each study period, accessing course and subject learning outcomes, in accordance with the Course and Subject Handbook; and

b. at the commencement of, and throughout each study period, receiving clear instructions from their educators to access learning activities and assessment items in LearnJCU, as detailed in the Subject Information Procedure.

1.3 Diversity and inclusion

1.3.1 Students are offered a variety of resources, teaching methods, and flexible approaches to learning in recognition of their varied learning needs and acknowledging the diversity of their cultural and linguistic backgrounds.

1.3.2 All students, including those with a disability or a medical condition, are required to attain course learning outcomes and meet the stated Inherent Requirements of a course.

1.3.3 Students with a disability or a medical condition have access to support services in accordance with the Student Disability Policy.

1.4 Flexibility

1.4.1 JCU supports flexibility to facilitate student success, through:

a. use of technology to extend access to learning experiences for students with caring, work, and community commitments; and

b. a range of educator – student consultation and feedback opportunities.

1.4.2 Students are assured of equivalence in learning, teaching, and assessment within a subject, regardless of teaching mode and/or attendance mode, by:

a. providing a consistent virtual environment (LearnJCU) to access core learning materials and extending options through technologies where appropriate;

b. ensuring course and subject materials are organised and presented consistently to support ease of navigation for students. (See LearnJCU Content Management Procedure.);

c. ensuring subject learning outcomes, assessment methods, and assessment item weighting are the same regardless of location, attendance mode, and study period type; and

d. ensuring learning technologies and teaching approaches are selected to meet the course and subject learning outcomes, study period type, and attendance modes.

1.5 Student voice

1.5.1 JCU provides forums and groups for students to engage and interact with other students and staff and have a voice in decision-making. For example, all students have the opportunity to:

a. nominate to be a student member on the University Council, Academic Board and sub-committees of the Academic Board including Education Committee, Research Committee, Curriculum Committee and the Student Experience Advisory Committee);

b. attend the Academic Board’s annual 'meeting in the round' as an observer;

c. join peer-led study programs and initiatives; and

d. participate in College-based consultative groups.

Core Principle 2

These procedures support Core Principle 2 of the Learning, Teaching, and Assessment Policy, which states: Student learning is facilitated by a curriculum that is engaging and futures-orientated. Students are supported through an aligned curriculum with clear statements of intent and demonstrable learning outcomes that respond to professional and discipline requirements.

Curriculum design is aligned to JCU’s values and promotes student-centred and authentic learning, through contemporary disciplinary and interdisciplinary teaching approaches. Core Principle 2 enacts the JCU Model and the JCU Curriculum Framework to achieve the Corporate Strategy.

The procedures in Core Principle 2 ensure that the learning outcomes for Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) accredited qualifications are consistent with the level classification for that qualification in the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) (Higher Education Standards Framework (HESF) standard 1.5.3), by building students’ knowledge, skills, and the application of knowledge and skills.

2.1 Curriculum design

2.1.1 Curriculum design assures equivalent opportunities, student preparedness, and pathways for progression, in accordance with the University’s Coursework Approval, Accreditation and Review Policy, and the requirements of TEQSA and the AQF. Curriculum design is enacted by:

a. ensuring clear statements of, and alignment with JCU’s Strategic Priorities are considered in course and subject design;

b. providing students opportunities to develop capacities to navigate complexities of the interface between Indigenous people and Western disciplines, knowledge and practice, and cultivating experiences that foster inter-cultural learning, and sustainable and ethical practices that promote global connection;

c. incorporating current and relevant discipline-specific research in course and subject design;

d. enabling and encouraging student –student and student-educator interaction, collaboration and communication, enhanced by incorporating relevant educational technologies;

e. ensuring course and subject design is informed by Universal Design for Learning (UDL);

f. anticipating student diversity and the need for flexibility whilst maintaining academic standards;

g. identifying discipline-specific Inherent Requirements in the Course and Subject Handbook;

h. enabling students to demonstrate appropriate knowledge, skills, and application through aligned assessment (See Core Principle 3);

i. incorporating changes as a result of student feedback;

j. undertaking comprehensive course reviews as required by professional accreditation bodies, or at least every seven years in accordance with HESF, whichever is sooner. (See Comprehensive Course Review Procedure.);

k. collaborating with key stakeholders (industry representatives, professional bodies); and

l. ensuring the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technologies conforms to the JCU published position on GenAI, in recognition that GenAI tools will become an embedded part of future ways of working.

2.1.2 Curriculum is aligned with legislative requirements, such as the HESF and the AQF, and with discipline standards, Graduate Attributes, the JCU Model, JCU Curriculum Framework, JCU Blended Learning Procedures, and JCU strategic planning documents. Where applicable, the curriculum will also address the accreditation requirements or standards of accreditation mandated by regulatory bodies to allow registration to practice:

a. When undertaking course approvals and external professional accreditation, the Coursework Approval, Accreditation and Review Policy procedure stipulates the parameters for approval, review, and accreditation of curriculum.

b. Courses and subjects are designed to have an appropriate volume of learning. The volume of learning includes all teaching (online and on-campus), learning (self-directed, in-class, and WIL/placement) and assessment activities that are required to be undertaken by a typical student who is new to the subject content to achieve the course and subject learning outcomes. At JCU, the typical student workload is 40 hours per credit point (CP) (i.e., 120 hours per 3 CP subject) regardless of attendance mode or study period type.

c. Design of subjects that are entirely, or partly, comprised of student placement, is based on the amount of time required to achieve the expected subject learning outcomes, while considering student workload and professional accreditation expectations (where relevant).

2.1.3 Each undergraduate and postgraduate coursework course must have an expert and/or discipline consultative panel, comprising internal and external stakeholders, and the panel will consult/meet at least once per academic year to provide input on curriculum.

2.2 Skills development

2.2.1 Curriculum design enables authentic and experiential learning (that is, activities and assessment that reflect the world of work) by:

a. explicitly developing transferable generic skills (as identified in the Jobs and Skills Australia core competencies), discipline-specific knowledge and technical skills, and career management skills identified through consultation with careers and industry representatives;

b. incorporating opportunities for work integrated learning (WIL) (placements, simulated placements, fieldwork, internships) within the course, and appropriate skill development before, during, and after a student takes part in WIL; and

c. incorporating ethical decision-making examples and case-studies in curriculum.

2.2.2 Curriculum includes career management learning, and is designed to prepare students for the workplace and lifelong learning by considering:

a. the current and future needs of the region;

b. JCU’s Graduate Attributes statement;

c. domestic and international benchmarks;

d. input from subject matter experts;

e. current research and evidence-based practice;

f. opportunities for student mobility;

g. developments in practice, equipment and technology, including Artificial Intelligence;

h. opportunities for collaboration with peers;

i. the application of transferable generic skills, discipline-specific knowledge and technical skills, and career management skills in the context of the field(s) of education or disciplines involved;

j. learning and teaching approaches that develop intercultural competencies; and

k. employment trends, career development research and resources to ensure students are suitably prepared and skilled to participate in the workforce, including the development of transferable skills to operate successfully in a globalised world.

2.3 Learning outcomes

2.3.1 Course and subject design:

a. has clear, valid and demonstrable learning outcomes. (See Writing Learning Outcomes.);

b. has both discipline-related and generic learning outcomes that include the specific knowledge and skills, and their application, which characterise the field of education and/or disciplines involved;

c. fosters progressive and clear achievement of learning outcomes and enables the achievement of course learning outcomes and subject learning outcomes regardless of subject attendance mode or study period type.

2.3.2 The design process:

a. complies with the requirements of HESF and the AQF;

b. maps the relationship between course and subject learning outcomes and assessment, within and across the subjects in a course, in order to assure the veracity of course learning outcomes;

c. incorporates a variety of assessment methods that uphold academic integrity, and equitable assessment items which respond to diverse student backgrounds;

d. selects the results system appropriate to the knowledge, skills and application requirements, discipline standards, and/or accreditation requirements;

e. includes ways to develop and assure the knowledge, skills and application required for employment (see also 2.2.2) and further study, related to the course of study, including those required to be eligible to seek registration to practice, where applicable;

f. includes direct and explicit reference to the JCU Model and Curriculum Framework; and

g. considers the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (particularly SDG 3, 4, 8, 13, and 16).

2.3.3 Course and subject learning outcomes express what students are expected to achieve, and how they are expected to demonstrate that achievement on completion of the subject (in the case of subject learning outcomes) or the course (in the case of course learning outcomes). With the exception of student placements, fieldwork, and projects, five or fewer subject learning outcomes are required for a three-credit point subject in all coursework.

2.4 Course and subject feedback and review

2.4.1 The course and subject feedback process for educators involves:

a. reviewing and considering any national higher education performance data (such as Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching (QILT) and International Student Barometer) surveys annually; and

b. engaging with learning analytics data and review of student feedback.

2.4.2 Subject Coordinators undertake a triennial peer review of a subject that includes YourJCU student feedback, learning analytics data, assessment plans, moderation processes and grading practices. Course Coordinators collate, review and action the reports to monitor course quality and identify curriculum improvements and enhancements. On an annual basis, Subject Coordinators must:

a. conduct a review of student feedback;

b. monitor and consider student survey and learning analytics data to improve current and future subject content;

c. utilise elements of the 4Q Model of Evaluation peer review and self-reflection (see also 4Q Reflective Resource for Subject Coordinators); and

d. communicate the actions taken in response to subject review to other staff and students. (See Subject Information Procedure.

2.4.3 Course Performance Reports (CPRs) are submitted annually by Course Coordinators (except in a year where a Comprehensive Course Review is undertaken) and are reviewed by the College Dean. (See Course Performance Reports Procedures.)

2.4.4 In addition to the annual CPR process, a Comprehensive Course Review must be undertaken every 5-7 years for the purpose of internal re-accreditation, in accordance with the Comprehensive Course Review Procedure.

2.5 Learning Resources

2.5.1 Educators should, where possible, prioritise the use of Open Educational Resources (OERs) for prescribed textbooks or other prescribed learning materials as an equity measure to reduce the potential/actual cost barrier to student engagement.

Core Principle 3

These procedures support Core Principle 3 of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Policy which states: Student learning is facilitated by assessment that is valid, fair, authentic, developmental, transparent, and varied across subjects and disciplines. Aligned and authentic assessment that upholds academic integrity enables students to demonstrate appropriate knowledge, skills and application.

Assessment frames student learning and provides evidence of achievement. Assessment design and learning and teaching activities have an overt alignment to subject knowledge and skills, and their application, to assure standards.

Core Principle 3 is aligned with the assessment ‘for’ learning and assessment ‘of’ learning approaches, and prioritises technologically-enabled and practice-based methods that permit future career and academic opportunities outlined in the JCU Curriculum Framework and the Transformative Education goal. Assessment approaches and methods assure integrity of achievement and student identity verification.

Students have the right to equity and fairness when undertaking the assessment components of their studies. The Learning, Teaching and Assessment Policy and its Procedures align with the University’s policies and procedures for Coursework Academic Integrity, Subject  Information, Special Consideration, and Student Disability.

3.1 Assessment requirements

3.1.1 Students are responsible for ensuring the authenticity and originality of all assessment materials submitted, in accordance with the Coursework Academic Integrity Policy and the Student Code of Conduct. Instances of suspected academic misconduct are investigated in accordance with the student Academic Misconduct Procedure.

3.1.2 Artificial intelligence tools must only be used in learning experiences and assessment items as prescribed in the Subject and in accordance with Coursework Academic Integrity Policy. Aassessment information provided to students must include clear details on the use of GenAI in accordance with the Subject Information Procedure.

3.1.3 Assessment methods within each subject must be the same regardless of attendance mode, campus, and study period type, and must have the same subject learning outcomes, weightings, and workload in each academic calendar year. (See section 3.2 Assessment Methods and the Subject Information Procedure.)

Any variation in assessment (from that which is published in the Curriculum Management System [CMS] and StudyFinder) must:

a. remain consistent with the subject learning outcomes;

b. be communicated to students through LearnJCU; and

c. be authorised through relevant College/Division processes and endorsed by the Academic Head.

• For variations prior to the commencement of the study period, the variation must be documented in the Subject Outline(s) and communicated in the learning management system (LMS; LearnJCU).
• For variations to assessment where the subject has commenced in the study period, students must be consulted, and where there is no dissent, changes must be communicated via the LMS (LearnJCU).

3.1.4 Learning outcomes and assessment are aligned, with clear assessment descriptions, and rubrics that define the expected standards for students to achieve specific grades on criterion-referenced assessment items. (See Subject Information Procedure.)

3.1.5 Every subject learning outcome must be assured through assessment:

a. Assessment items and associated rubrics including criteria and/or scales must align with subject learning outcomes, which in turn must align with course learning outcomes.

b. Every assessment item, including pre-census early assessment, must be aligned to at least one subject learning outcome.

c. The alignment between assessments and subject learning outcomes is published in the Subject Outline.

d. All assessment of learning is stipulated in the Subject Outline.

e. There is a maximum of four weighted assessment items per 3CP subject, which must include a low-stakes pre-census assessment item. An exception may be subjects with participation-based assessment methods, or must-pass professional and/or technical competency assessments, where additional items are permitted based on College approval and are stipulated in the Subject Outline. Assessment items can include various assessment tasks (or allied parts) designed to manage student workload in terms of assessment weighting, scheduling, and time commitment, and staff workload for marking and timely feedback.

f. Shorter-form credentials must be assessed commensurate to the volume of learning, with no more than three weighted assessment items and in accordance with the Shorter Form Credentials Procedure.

g)    Staff must assess English language and numeracy proficiency as appropriate to the course of study, and direct students to support services where required to ensure attainment of course and subject learning outcomes. (See English Language and Numeracy Policy.)

h)    Demonstration of professional and/or technical competencies and transferable skills can be required in addition to graded assessment to assure learning outcomes, and students are informed of this before the start of each subject in the Subject Outline. These may be referred to as must-pass, or subject passing requirements.

3.1.6 Assessment weighting rules:

a. Each assessment item is assigned a weighting (with a maximum of four assessment items per 3CP subject)

b. Weighting of assessment is commensurate with the knowledge, skills, and their application, required for a particular item, the level code of the subject, the specified subject learning outcomes, and the selected results system, with expected workload considered (see Section 2.3.2).

c. Where a subject has an examination assessment due or scheduled in the Examination Period, any other assessment item due for submission within the final semester teaching weeks (i.e., approximately the final 25% of the study period teaching days):

• 7 University working days (UWD) (for a 7-week block)
• 12 UWD (for a 10-week trimester)
• 15 UWD (for a 13-week semester)

must carry no more than 25% weighting, in recognition of the student workload (see clause 3.1.10) and feedback requirements (see clause 3.4.2).

d. No assessment item may be weighted greater than 70% (including a multi-method assessment item), with the exception of a placement, a research component, or a designated project.

e. There must be no more than 50% of assessment weighting allocated for group work, unless there is scope for individual differentiation in components of the overall assessment grade awarded to group members.

f. In cases where oral or performance presentations are assessed and weighted more than 20% in a subject, educators must provide a means by which a review of assessment is possible, such as a video recording.

g. The total weighting allocated to peer or participation-based assessment in a subject must not exceed 20%.

h. In cases where a must-pass or professional/technical competency assessment item is required, a 0% weighting can be utilised.

3.1.7 Reasonable adjustments to assessment are provided in accordance with the Student Disability Policy and associated Procedures. Reasonable adjustments do not alter the need for students to demonstrate the course learning outcomes and Inherent Requirements.

3.1.8 Pre-census assessment with feedback prior to census date must be provided and used to monitor student preparedness and progress against subject learning outcomes and to identify additional support requirements.

a. Pre-census assessment will reflect the level code of the subject and may link to previously completed scaffolded subjects in specifying learning expectations.

b. Pre-census assessment item is not compulsory for students undertaking research and projects; however, students must receive developmental feedback on their progress in this time-period.

c. Pre-census assessment is scheduled within:

• 7 UWD (for a 7-week block)
• 12 UWD (10-week trimester)
• 15 UWD (13-week semester)

(equating to the first 25% of study period teaching days).

d. The mandatory pre-census assessment item must be weighted 5% or greater, or, for subjects where the subject has a result type of satisfactory/unsatisfactory, the item may be graded satisfactory/unsatisfactory.

e. Pre-census assessment cannot be designated as a must-pass assessment item.

3.1.9 Assessment marking:

a. Grades are used for marking using the JCU Results codes, and can be added to with marks (numbers), or + or -, if appropriate, as included in the Subject Outline.

b. Educators must not practice ‘negative marking’ of any assessment item, specifically the deduction of marks for any wrong answer or no answer/blank answer.

c. Assessment can be graded as Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory if all students are required to meet a stated level of competence.

d. A uniform formula of penalties is imposed for submission of an assessment item after the due date. This formula is 5% of the total possible marks for the assessment item per day including part-days, weekends, and public holidays. For example, if an assessment item is worth 80 marks and the student receives a mark of 60/80 and the assessment is late by 5 days, the student will receive a result of 40/80; i.e., for every day late, the student loses 4 marks (5% of the total marks is deducted for each day late).

e. In the case of assessment graded as Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory, consequences for late submission must be communicated in the assessment description.

f. Attendance may be a must-pass assessment with a 0% weighting, while participation must be a graded assessment. In accordance with 3.1.5, attendance requirements are provided in the Subject Outline and records must be kept for subjects which have mandated attendance.

3.1.10 Due dates for non-examination assessment are not permitted during study break, public holidays lecture recess or Centrally Administered End of Study Period Examinations.

3.1.11 For specific circumstances not covered by clause 3.1 of this Procedure, the relevant Dean has the delegated authority to make or override an assessment decision, and in such cases, retain a record including reasons at college level.

3.1.12 An extension to an assessment item is an adjustment to the due date. An extension is granted due to approved Special Circumstances (see Special Consideration Procedure).

3.1.13 Assessment items and materials not returned to students during a study period (e.g., examinations, clinical records) must be kept by the Subject Coordinator in a secure repository for two years.

3.2 Assessment methods (including examinations)

3.2.1 Assessment methods are purposeful and varied, and selected from the Assessment Methods List to reflect the subject learning outcomes, discipline and student needs, levels of engagement, and developmental, programmatic, or cumulative approaches.

a. Descriptions of assessment items in the Subject Outline must include the assessment method.

b. For a multi-method assessment item (e.g., portfolio), the description must combine two or more allied methods, e.g., written and performance/practice/product, to form a cohesive assessment item.

c. Performance/practice/product assessment methods may include non-weighted competency-based assessment components.

d. Where a method other than that from the Assessment Methods List is selected, a description must specify the context-specific method.

e. Oral assessment or examination may be used to assure technical competency, professional skills, and/or the necessary knowledge, skills and application, or to assure the authenticity of written assessment.

3.2.2 The assessment methods in each subject must be balanced with respect to the number and volume of assessment items and learning activities, and must ensure that students have appropriate opportunities for feedback on their assessment items to inform subsequent assessment items.

a)    The Course Coordinator holds responsibility to map the year level assessment to ensure reasonable and balanced workloads for students and educators.

b)    The typical student workload of 40 hours per credit point (CP) (including assessment, self-directed learning and group learning) must be used to inform assessment planning.

c)    Staff marking workload guidelines are mandated by the College workload model as a component of the JCU Enterprise Agreement.

3.2.3 The approach to group work assessment must be clearly communicated to students (see Subject Information Procedure.):

a. Group work must utilise one of the two following marking approaches:

• assessed by giving the same mark for each group member, or
• assessed by a combination of a whole group component and an individual component.

b. Students must be provided with plans for alternative individual assessment (that considers student workload) where a Subject Coordinator has agreed that a group is disbanded, ceased, or group membership has changed.

3.2.4 The approach for honours project/thesis and postgraduate coursework research assessment must be clearly communicated to students. (See Subject Information Procedure.)

a. All students are required to give an oral presentation on their research/project to the staff and other students in their discipline or area.

b. A minimum of two people must examine the oral presentation and final thesis. Examination of the oral presentation and thesis by the supervisor(s) is not permitted. Supervisors are required to report on the student's candidacy.

c. Disciplines must use assessment criteria for grading honours and postgraduate theses with the criteria published in the Subject Outlines and/or Honours handbook.

d. Disciplines must use a Moderation Plan approved by the Academic Head to deal with disparate thesis marks, with the process published in the Subject Outlines and/or Honours handbook.

e. Honours or postgraduate coursework research thesis word length should reflect the proportion of the course it comprises. As a guide, this would be 1,000 to 1,250 words per credit point (CP): i.e., six CP represents 6,000 to 7,500 words; 12 credit points, 12,000 to 15,000 words; 15 credit points, 15,000 to 18,750; and 18 credit points, 18,000 to 22,500 words.

3.2.5 All students and staff must comply with the Examinations Procedure for Students and the Examinations Procedure for Staff.

3.3 Special Consideration, deferred, supplementary and special assessment (including examinations)

3.3.1 All students must make themselves available for assessments and examinations at the scheduled times and may apply for Special Consideration if affected by Special Circumstances. This applies to all methods and modes of assessment. (See Special Consideration Procedure.)

3.3.2 A deferred assessment (including an examination) is a delay (postponement) to the start date of an assessment item. A deferral may be awarded due to:

a. the cancellation of an assessment item by the University, for example disruption by natural disasters, or government restrictions. The student does not have to apply if all students were affected;

b. staff illness or accident preventing an assessment (including an examination) from taking place. The student does not have to apply in this instance; or

c. a decision declared by the Dean or Chairperson, Academic Board relative to the circumstance and study period.

For Special Circumstances not covered in clauses 3.3.2 students must apply for Special Consideration following the Special Consideration Procedure.

3.3.3 The Academic Head is responsible for approving the supplementary assessment (including examination) for a subject. Where a supplementary assessment is permitted it must be equitably and fairly applied, and the availability of a supplementary assessment must be stated in the Subject Outline. Where applicable:

a. the availability of a supplementary assessment must align to the result type assigned to the subject.

b. a College Assessment Committee, College Dean or Chair of an appeal committee, may decide to grant a supplementary assessment or examination for a student to determine whether the student has achieved the subject learning outcomes and/or requirements to pass the subject. The College Dean may also grant a supplementary assessment or examination after considering assessment results and moderation processes.

c. the supplementary assessment or examination must assess the subject learning outcomes and/or the assessment requirements necessary to pass the subject that the student has not yet evidenced.

d. the supplementary assessment or examination must be peer-checked and approved by the Academic Head.

e. a non-examination supplementary assessment must be due no earlier than five UWD after the results release date.

f. a supplementary examination must be scheduled in the published supplementary/deferred examination period (in accordance with clause 3.3.3i), or organised by the College and by mutual agreement / arrangement with the Exams team if outside the published dates. A supplementary examination can be granted for the following reasons:

• when a student did not pass the final examination and achieved a cumulative subject score of 45-49% for the subject, and has met all other requirements to pass the subject; or
• if the exam is a must pass assessment item and the student failed the exam but achieved the passing score for the subject; or
• as a result of an application for Special Consideration; or
• as an outcome of a review or appeal, a special examination request, or an academic misconduct investigation; or
• in accordance with the supplementary examination progression requirements stipulated in the Subject Outline; or
• as a result of a recommendation of a Subject Coordinator.

g. A non-examination supplementary assessment may be granted for the following reasons:

• When the subject does not have a final examination and the student achieved a cumulative subject score of 45-49%; or
• if a student passes the final examination, and the student achieved an accumulative subject score of 45-49%; or
• when a student passes the final examination and achieves the passing accumulative score for the subject, but has not passed all ‘must pass’ assessment items in the subject; or
• when the subject has a pass/fail result system and the student has not passed one ‘must pass’ assessment item in the subject; or
• as a result of an application for Special Consideration; or
• as an outcome of a review or appeal, a special examination request, or an academic misconduct investigation.

h. An interim subject result of FSE ­­­­­–Fail (supplementary examination granted) – shall be awarded for a supplementary examination, and an interim subject result of FSA –Fail (supplementary assessment granted) – shall be awarded for a supplementary assessment.

i. Where an FSE result has been awarded, Student Services will schedule the Supplementary Examination in the prescribed Supplementary Examination period and will notify the student by email of the examination timetable no later than five UWD after the result release date or update of interim subject result.

j. Where an FSA result has been awarded the College must notify the student of the requirements of the supplementary assessment no later than five UWD after the result release date or update of interim subject result;

k. Where an FSA result has been awarded the student must pass the supplementary assessment or examination in order to pass the subject.

l. If the student passes the supplementary assessment/examination a SP (pass after sitting a supplementary examination or supplementary assessment) or SS (satisfactory after sitting a supplementary examination or supplementary assessment) subject result is awarded

m. If the student does not sit the supplementary examination, does not submit the supplementary assessment by the due date, or does not pass the supplementary examination/supplementary assessment, a subject result of F (Fail) or U (Unsatisfactory) is awarded.

3.3.4 A special assessment (including examination) is permitted in all courses and subjects. Where applicable:

a. a College Dean or Chair of an appeal committee may grant a special assessment or examination for a student to determine whether the student has achieved the subject learning outcomes and/or requirements to pass the subject. The College Dean may also grant a special assessment or examination after considering assessment results and moderation processes.

b. the special assessment or examination must assess the subject learning outcomes and/or the assessment requirements necessary to pass the subject that the student has not yet evidenced.

c. the special assessment or examination must be peer checked and approved by the Academic Head.

d. a special examination must be scheduled as soon as practicable once awarded, organised by the College. A special assessment must be due no earlier than five University working days after the result release date.

e. a special examination or assessment can be granted for the following reasons:

• as a result of an application for Special Consideration; or
• as an outcome of a review or appeal, or an academic misconduct investigation; or
• as a result of the College Dean’s determination that the student should be re-assessed in the subject due to concerns relating to competency, equity or fairness.

f. an interim subject result of SPA (special assessment granted) shall be awarded for a special assessment, and an interim subject result of SPE (special examination granted) shall be awarded for a special examination.

g. if the student passes the special assessment/examination a result will be applied in accordance with the Subject Outline specifications to pass the subject and any conditions nominated in the outcome letter for misconduct and/or review/appeal.

h. if the student does not sit the special examination or does not submit the special assessment by the due date or does not pass the special examination/special assessment, a result will be applied in accordance with the Subject Outline specifications to pass the subject and any conditions nominated in the outcome letter for misconduct and/or review/appeal.

3.4 Feedback on assessment

3.4.1 Feedback on examinations must be consistent with the criteria or scales outlined in rubrics published in the Subject Outline.

a. Feedback including grades or marks on examinations undertaken during an examination period are accessible either:

• in the LMS (LearnJCU Grade Centre) after the results release date; or
• upon formal request by a student, after the results release date (see section 3.9.4).

b. Written or verbal feedback on automated tests is only required if it is formally requested by a student.

3.4.2 Feedback on assessment items (excluding examinations held in the Centrally Administered End of Study Period Examinations period) including grades or marks is provided in a timely manner.

a. All feedback is clear, explanatory, diagnostic, and focuses on students improving their practice to achieve the learning outcomes.

b. Students must receive feedback on an assessment item (which has been submitted on time) before the next related/cumulative assessment item is due.

c. Timeframes for feedback including grades or marks on individual assessment items are relative to the length of the study period:

• within seven UWD of the submission date for a 7-week block;
• within 10 UWD of the submission date for a 10-week trimester;
• within 15 UWD of the submission date for a 13-week semester; and
• before end of study period moderation and certification of results.

3.4.3 Feedback on assessment items (including examinations) that have been approved for an extension of time are dealt with by the Subject Coordinator on a case-by-case basis.

3.4.4  Feedback may be delivered in a variety of forms which can include face-to-face, in hard copy, electronically, through self-assessment, peer-review, or as part of a group review.

3.4.5  Support is offered through central units to students who are at risk of not achieving, or have not achieved, academic progression requirements to assist those students to meet their course requirements. (See Academic Progression Policy, Unsatisfactory Academic Performance Procedure and Support for Students Policy.)

3.5 Moderation

3.5.1 Subject Coordinators must:

a. review and report on the subject assessment moderation process at College Assessment Committee meetings;

b. implement moderation processes of pre-marking and/or during marking, and/or post- marking to assure validity and reliability of the assessment item;

c. select the sample for moderation: individual assessment items, or whole-of-subject assessment; and

d. implement subject-level moderation processes that consist of an analysis of top grades, borderline pass/fail grades, and a selection of mid-range grades;

3.5.2 Assessment moderation methods include: pre-determined criterion-based standards/rubrics, comprehensive marking guides, peer review of assessment, cohort statistical comparison, double marking, exchange marking, blind marking, and confirmatory review.

3.5.3 Subject coordinators must ensure consensus moderation of final results at College assessment meetings as this is essential in the certification process. This includes consistent and fair moderation of assessments (including examinations) for students who applied for Special Consideration. (See Section 3.4.)

3.5.4 Where major differences emerge in the grading of the same assessment item, the Subject Coordinator determines strategies to resolve the final grade by convening a moderation panel or using an external examiner. Where moderation outcomes are irreconcilable, matters will be referred to the Academic Head to determine the grade.

3.6 Grades and results

3.6.1 Assessment grading rules:

a. Students are given the grade that their work deserves, based on a clear set of criteria or scales outlined in rubrics. Numbers may be used to augment the grade.

b. Assessment grades are appropriate to the level code of the subject, the course and subject learning outcomes, and subject result system.

c. Assessment is graded fairly and consistently. Educators are permitted to use computer-aided marking to grade assessment (for example, machine-readable multiple-choice quiz sheets, online automated marking).

d. Artificial intelligence must not be used to grade assessment.

3.6.2 Staff must inform students of their grade and/or mark for each weighted assessment item in a subject via the LMS (LearnJCU Grade Centre). Timeframes for notification are outlined in 3.4.1 and 3.4.2.

3.6.3 Subject results approved by the Subject Coordinator must undergo final ratification for each study period. No single grade or mark represents a final result in a subject. (See Subject Information Procedure.

3.6.4 Subject results are released via e-Student and only to those with the legitimate rights of access, in accordance with the Information Privacy Policy.

3.6.5 Amendments to student grades/marks:

a. Where a student has received an assessment mark before a College Assessment Committee Meeting has confirmed the subject result then the Subject Coordinator can amend the mark in the LMS (LearnJCU Grade Centre).

b. Assessment items or subject results finalised after the results release date of the subject result must be made in accordance with the Finalisation and Publication of Student Results Procedure.

3.7 Review of grades and results

3.7.1 Students have a right to access copies of examination responses and other assessment materials that have not been returned to them during the period and such materials must be retained by the University for this purpose. Subject Coordinators must retain these assessment materials in a secure repository for 2 years (see clause 3.1.13).

3.7.2 The release of assessment materials (including examination papers) must not prejudice future assessment items, for example if an examination question is used repeatedly. In such cases, a student can arrange with the Subject Coordinator to read their examination responses in the presence of the Subject Coordinator or their nominee.

3.7.3 Students may request a review of any assessment item (including examinations) within 10 UWD of the grade or mark for that assessment item being published in the LMS (LearnJCU Grade Centre).

a. To request a review of an assessment item, the student must check the stated assessment information in the Subject Outline and email the Subject Coordinator to request feedback about their performance for the assessment item.

b. The Subject Coordinator must respond with five UWD of receiving the request for review.

c. If unresolved, within five UWD of the student’s notification, the Subject Coordinator must provide a substantial case in writing to the Academic Head to show how the grade or mark awarded reflects the student’s performance with respect to the published assessment criteria for that assessment. Where the Academic Head is also the Subject Coordinator, the initial application for a review is directed to the relevant Dean.

d. In considering a request for a review of an individual assessment item the Academic Head must be mindful of equity matters relating to other students in the subject. A decision to accept a late application for review of an examination mark or grade is made by the Academic Head.

e. The Academic Head will review the information provided by the student and make a determination within seven UWD of receiving the request from the student.

• Where a request for a review of an assessment item can result in a re-mark of the assessment and that request is granted, the Academic Head nominates an alternative qualified person to grade or mark a blind copy of the assessment item. That review of assessment must occur within seven UWD of the decision to grant the review.
• In all cases where a review and re-mark is granted, (at the discretion of the Academic Head) the revised grade or mark will replace the original grade or mark in the calculation of the final result, including in instances where the grade decreases.

f. The Academic Head will provide a written response, and information regarding the student’s right to an appeal at the completion of the subject, to the student and the relevant College or Divisional office for record-keeping purposes.

3.7.4 A student who has requested access to assessment materials under clause 3.7.1 and who has been denied access by the University may appeal against the decision under the Student Review and Appeals Policy.

3.8 Retention of examination materials

3.8.1 Examination responses and other assessment materials submitted by students must be stored securely (electronic or physical) for a period of two years.

Core Principle 4

These procedures and rules support Core Principle 4 of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Policy which states: Student learning is facilitated by teaching that is inspiring, motivating, technologically-enabled and enhanced, and research-informed. Teaching develops and draws on a repertoire of approaches and technologies that respond to students’ needs, changing contexts and settings.

At JCU, our learning and teaching activities are intentionally designed to foster progressive and coherent achievement of expected learning outcomes throughout a student’s course of study (HESF, 3.1.3) regardless of subject attendance mode and study period type (e.g., trimester, block). JCU uses the term ‘educator’ to encompass all learning and teaching contexts/communities including academic roles, research supervision, and clinical, laboratory, workshop, studio, field and work-based teaching, industry, and advisory and team-based contributions.

Teaching practices at JCU:

• encourage and enable students to take responsibility for their own learning;
• build student research capacity;
• motivate and challenge students;
• model and encourage an inclusive, student-centred approach to learning; including adhering to the JCU Education Standards;
• are evidence-based;
• incorporate active and authentic learning experiences (for all attendance modes) that are responsive to changing technologies (such as Artificial Intelligence and educational and workplace technologies) and attendance modes;
• value and embrace the diversity of students;
• support academic interactions among students outside of formal teaching;
• are connected to place and community, and are culturally informed; and
• align with the values and strategic priorities of the JCU Corporate Strategy.

4.1 Teaching Practices requirements

4.1.1 Teaching practices incorporate:

a. authentic (real-world) learning, practices, and experiences;

b. the application of current research and creative outputs in the planning and development of teaching materials; and

c. contemporary teaching practices that support student learning, for example UDL, flexible modalities, student-centred enquiry, place-based learning.

4.1.2 Teaching practice meets the development and performance outcomes described in the Academic Performance and Development Framework for the relevant staff classification and performance is monitored through the Performance, Development and Planning Procedure.

4.1.3 Institutional systems and data are used to inform teaching practice and to enhance the quality of future learning opportunities. Such data are gathered and used ethically and in accordance with the Information Privacy Policy.

4.1.4 Subject Coordinators provide leadership for all staff teaching within the subject, including sessional, professional/technical staff, and external placement and project supervisors across all campuses.

4.1.5 All educators, including students employed to undertake teaching (e.g., Higher Degree by Research (HDR) candidates) will have a qualification in a relevant discipline at least one AQF qualification level higher than is awarded for the course of study being taught, or equivalent relevant academic or professional or practice-based experience and expertise. Educators who teach specialised components of a course of study, such as experienced practitioners and educators undergoing training, who may not fully meet the standard for knowledge, skills, and qualification or experience required for teaching or supervision must have their teaching guided and overseen by staff who meet the standard. It is the responsibility of the relevant College Dean or Academic Head to ensure qualifications are confirmed.

4.1.6 College Deans are responsible for ensuring that:

a. a student is not employed to teach or participate in the assessment of a subject in which they are enrolled; and

b. in a case where a student is employed in a teaching role and where they have equivalent professional experience but do not hold a formal qualification at least one higher AQF level than the subject being taught, the College Dean must provide details of the selection, training, supervision, and moderation practices that ensure standards are met and confidentiality is maintained. These details must be presented to the relevant College Assessment Committee meeting.

4.2 Learning and teaching environments

4.2.1 Learning and teaching environments (physical and virtual) meet discipline needs, are well maintained, and facilitate active learning and learning through collaboration:

a. Physical spaces comply with the Space Allocation and Management Policy.

b. Virtual learning environments meet Australian and International Accessibility Standards (e.g., WCAG 2.2, EN 301 549, DDA).

c. Educators are provided with resources and professional development to develop capabilities to ensure engagement in intentional, technology-enhanced learning design and teaching practices in both physical and virtual learning environments.

d. Proposals for new or changed physical and/or virtual learning environments must proceed according to relevant policies. (See clause 4.2.3a and the Space Allocation and Management Policy.)

4.2.2 Learning and teaching environments (physical and digital) are student-centred and accessible:

a. Learning activities and teaching strategies are informed by UDL.

b. A variety of high-quality learning and teaching practices are used to create engaging and interactive on-campus and online learning environments that support transition and the development of learning communities for all students. Staff are supported to design, create, embed, manage and evaluate sustainable, ethical and innovative learning and teaching practices to meet and redefine current and future needs through ongoing professional development.

c. Digital technologies are utilised by staff to provide innovative and interactive learning experiences. Staff are supported to design, create, embed, manage, and evaluate sustainable, ethical, and innovative digital solutions to meet and redefine current and future needs through ongoing professional development.

d. Professional, industry, clinical and work-integrated learning practices and experiences are incorporated into the curriculum and teaching practice.

e. Institutional systems, policies, procedures, and data are used to inform, create, and monitor student-centred face-to-face and online learning environments across all attendance modes.

4.2.3 The effectiveness of learning technologies and physical learning environments are reviewed triennially by the College or discipline in collaboration with the Dean, Centre for Education and Enhancement; College Associate Deans, Learning and Teaching; Technology Solutions Directorate; and Estate Directorate as follows:

a. Current research, scholarship and best practice is applied in reviewing learning technologies and making recommendations for change, enhancement, or innovation via the Learning Enhancement and Innovation Group (LEIG);

b. Multiple sources of data are used to monitor students’ digital engagement to improve technology enhanced learning (TEL) approaches;

c. Multiple sources of data are used to monitor students’ use of physical learning spaces to improve usage and build community;

d. Review considers the current and future needs of students and systems; and

e. Advice from the LEIG is provided to the relevant management and/or governance bodies.

4.2.4 Terms used to describe learning activities (for all attendance modes) are detailed on the Teaching Activities list.

4.3 Consultation

4.3.1 Consultation arrangements must be communicated to students in Subject Information (see Subject Information Procedures).

Process for consultation with students:

a. Educators and other stakeholders engaged in learning and teaching activities must be available for student consultation (face-to-face or online) at set times or by appointment during each study period, and when teaching is conducted outside a study period.

b. Educators also consult with students using other forms of communication such as email, LearnJCU, and other forums such as additional revision or feedback sessions.

c. The subject’s LearnJCU site is used for centralised communications and announcements to the subject cohort.

d. Provisions for consultation during a study vacation, the associated examination period, and during the release of results for that study period, are arranged with students before completion of the formal study period and/or placements.

e. Educators must keep records (electronic or physical) of student consultations for a minimum of two years.

4.4 Professional development

4.4.1 Professional reflective practice informs effective teaching and assessment practices and involves systematic and critical evaluation of practices through various methods including:

a. formal surveys, feedback and reviews;

b. informal feedback;

c. institutional data;

d. placement and fieldwork; and/or

e. stakeholder evaluations.

See also Academic Promotion Procedure, 4Q Model of Evaluation, and 4Q Reflective Resource for Subject Coordinators.

4.4.2 Educators commencing at JCU must undertake the mandatory induction to learning and teaching. Induction includes online modules, virtual, and face-to-face professional development sessions. Completion of induction is recorded in accordance with the Mandatory Training Policy and All Staff Mandatory Training Procedure.

4.4.3 Sessional staff inductions to learning and teaching at JCU are provided online. Records are provided to Academy Division Operations. It is recommended that sessional staff undertake sessional staff induction every three years (at the discretion of the Academic Head).

4.4.4 JCU provides resources and/or workshops to enhance the quality of teaching and assessment including resources to assist educators in the development of digital capabilities and technology-enhanced learning design (see workshops and events).

4.4.5 The Peer Review of Teaching process is used in promotion, recognition/awards, and professional development plans (PDP) to provide a collaborative approach to reviewing and renewing teaching practice. Educators must engage in peer review of teaching activities as both reviewer and reviewee at least once every three years.

4.5 Teaching excellence

4.5.1 Excellence in teaching, including commitment to inclusion and equity, scholarship of learning and teaching (SoLT), and integrating digital technologies to enhance student learning, is valued and recognised in the following ways:

a. Excellence is recognised through JCU Awards and Citations and applicants are supported in their applications by Associate Deans, Learning and Teaching.

b.  Educators are encouraged and supported to engage in SoLT through professional learning opportunities.

Related policy instruments

Academic Misconduct Procedure

Academic Progression Policy

Academic and Statutory Decisions Review and Appeal Procedure

Bullying, Discrimination, Harassment, and Sexual Misconduct Policy

Comprehensive Course Review Procedure

Course Performance Reports Procedures

Coursework Academic Integrity Policy

Coursework Approval, Accreditation and Review Policy

Defence Force, National Service and Elite Athlete Friendly University Procedure

EduTrust (JCUS)

English Language and Numeracy Policy

Examination Procedures for Students

Examination Procedures for Staff

Learning, Teaching and Assessment Policy

MBBS Assessment Guidelines

Shorter Form Credentials Procedure

SkillsFuture Singapore (JCUS)

Special Consideration Procedure

Student Review and Appeals Policy

Student Complaints Policy

Student Digital Experience Policy

Student Disability Policy

Student Evaluation of Subjects and Teaching Policy

Student Retention Policy

Subject Information Procedure

Unsatisfactory Academic Performance Procedure

Withdrawal from Subjects without Financial and Academic Penalty Procedure

Australian Qualifications Framework, 2nd Edition, 2013 (see also Review of the Australian Qualifications Framework Final Report 2019)

Disability Discrimination Act – Education Standards 2005

TEQSA Guidance Note: Diversity and Equity 1.2, October 2017

Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021.

Reference points for CP1: HESF Domain 1 Student Participation and Attainment, plus HESF 2.3.2, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, HESF 4.3, the JCU Corporate Strategy Discrimination Guidelines, the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF), the AQF Report 2019, and the TEQSA Guidance Note: Diversity and Equity.

Reference points for CP2: The Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF), AQF Council, Volume of Learning: An Explanation, 2019 Review. HESF Domain 1 and 3.1, HESF 5.3. JCU Academic Plan 2018-2022, p.18.

Reference points for CP 3: HESF 1.4 Learning Outcomes and Assessment, Domain 3, (3.3.1 and 3.3.2), Domain 5 (5.3), TEQSA, the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF), and the JCU Curriculum Framework. Reference points for CP4: HESF Domain 3 Teaching. HESF 2.2 Diversity and Equity. HESF 2.1.3, HESF 5.3.6 and 5.3.7. APDF learning and teaching domain.

Administration

NOTE:  Printed copies of this procedure are uncontrolled, and currency can only be assured at the time of printing.

Approval Details

Revision History