University of Tasmania, Australia

UTAS Home | UTAS Staff | UTAS Contacts

Post-assessment moderation

UTAS Home › Faculty of Education › Faculty of Education › Learning and teaching › Policies and procedures › Moderation guidelines  › Post-assessment moderation

Unit Coordinators are responsible for planning the appropriate moderation of marking and results, with the main effort being put towards assessments that contribute to the final grade. In collaboration with their teaching team, the Unit Coordinator will ensure the clarity and communication of:

  • The marking rubrics
  • The marking arrangements
  • The forms of moderation to be employed
  • The sample to be reviewed i.e. the number, range and threshold (HD, Fails etc.)

Moderation generally involves reviewing (rather than marking) a sample of students’ marked work to determine whether the marking is consistent with the assessment criteria and undertaken at the appropriate standard.

Some moderation strategies:

  1. Marking should be undertaken wherever possible on assessment artefacts that are anonymous, i.e. the marker does not know the identity of the students whilst marking. This process is intended to ensure fairness in marking and reliability of marking.
  2. Second-marking or sampling should concentrate at the boundaries of grade classifications (i.e. near 50% or 80% etc.) and should involve approximately 15% of assessed student work, more than this amount if class sizes are small and less if class numbers are over 100).
  3. All Fail grades and HD grades should be independently marked by more than one marker, through a double-blind marking process.
  4. Double or team marking should be used for all dissertations and major projects or studio work.
  5. When all students complete the same assessment task, and numbers within the unit are manageable, one marker should mark all assessment artefacts. If this single marker is new to the task, the unit coordinator should independently re-mark a representative sample of submissions from across the grade range in order to confirm that the marker is marking according to the agreed standard. If anomalies are found, the Unit Coordinator should ensure that the work already marked is remarked to the agreed standards and that the first marker receives feedback about their marking in relation to the agreed standard.
  6. Panel marking involves independent but concurrent assessment by two or more markers and is used for oral presentations, performances and exhibitions. Comparability of assessment is enhanced when the composition of the panel the same for all students.
  7. Statistical analysis (means and standard deviations) of the distributions should be undertaken by the Unit Coordinator to identify anomalies and trends. This involves checking that different assessors have marked in accordance with the predetermined guidelines and if necessary adjusting marks where different markers have been shown to have employed different marking standards.
  8. External moderation through collaborative or cross-making with assessors from other universities assists in maintaining assessment standards.
  9. Unit coordinators can request that all markers of the same assignment attend a ‘comparability meeting’ in which each assessor brings samples of ‘draft marked’ assignments for comparison and discussion and final ‘tweaking’ of standards before finalising their results.