A reminder – Unit Moderation Guidelines for Unit Convenors for S2 2015

Dear Unit Convenors

For Session 2 2015, we have added a focus on managing the risk of academic dishonesty in the Convenor’s Report (see revised Convenor_Report template and Sample_Convenor_Report ).

A Google drive document is available for each Department which incorporates all the required information – here is the link.


The Convenor’s Report focuses on three questions :

  • What moderation took place in the Assessment Tasks?
  • What moderation took place when consolidating the final grades?
  • How was the risk of academic dishonesty managed?

Particular attention needs to be given to units where:

  • The grade distribution is inconsistent with previous offerings;
  • The distribution is atypical, including (but not limited to) high rates of failures, HD or incompletes, and bulges (especially at the credit level).

Such units should be discussed in detail at the Department meeting and, unless the Department is satisfied with the explanations of the distribution, the unit will be returned for further moderation. Where a unit is returned for moderation, students should be given an incomplete grade until moderation is completed to the satisfaction of the Head of Department (or nominee).

Department meetings will also discuss any units where the risk of academic dishonesty was not adequately managed and solutions for future offerings should be identified.

Please contact me with any queries about the examinations process.

Mitch Parsell, AD Learning & Teaching


2 thoughts on “A reminder – Unit Moderation Guidelines for Unit Convenors for S2 2015”

  1. With respect to the return for further moderation to the “satisfaction of the Head of Dept” – it should be made clear that further moderation doesn’t necessarily mean a change to the grade distribution – it could mean further justification for the grade distribution to stand as recommended by the UC.

    Couldn’t it? Or are we changing distributions to fit with earlier cohorts who might have had quite different profiles, considering that a number of students were admitted this year with ATARs significantly below those of previous years?

  2. The further moderation could well result in the exact same results coming back if the justification is adequate. Important point – thanks Cathy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.