Notices

Calendar

9 November, Saturday. Michaelmas Term divides.

29 November, Friday. End of third quarter of Michaelmas Term.

30 November, Saturday. Congregation of the Regent House at 10 a.m.

Joint Report of the Council and the General Board on the review of examination regulations following the marking and assessment boycott: Notice in response to Discussion remarks*

The Council has received the remarks made at the Discussion on 8 October concerning the above Report (Reporter: 6750, 2023–24, p. 806; 6755, 2024–25, p. 46). It has consulted with the General Board in preparing this response.

This Report represents the conclusion of Phase 1 of a review. The Council thanks the speakers for their contributions, which will be shared with the Task and Finish Group undertaking the review, given that several comments refer to the Group’s work in Phase 2. The Council believes that it shares with all three speakers a desire for greater clarity in the Ordinances governing examination and assessment.

Mr Knight refers to a new measure proposed in the Report that would enable Examiners to include candidates declared to have deserved honours on the class-list, to be classed later. He asks for a clarification about the way in which the Examiners are expected to use this authority. The General Board has confirmed that the Examiners’ decision would be based on a ‘strict computation’ (to use Mr Knight’s words) of the marks available rather than academic judgement, i.e. each candidate would need to have received sufficient marks from marked papers to have reached the threshold for a pass and therefore achieved the honours standard, with only the class remaining to be determined.1

The Council can confirm, in response to Mr Knight’s question, that in circumstances similar to the 2023 marking and assessment boycott (MAB), where students were unable to graduate, similar arrangements would be made, including the option for such students to attend a ceremony celebrating the end of their studies. The Council notes Mr Knight’s comments on messages sent to students during the MAB, and on the operational arrangements that underlie effective assessments and the Framework for Assessment, and his acknowledgement of the ongoing work in these areas, but agrees that it is important to get these right. It has referred his comments to Education Services for consideration in consultation with Internal Communications.

Dr Astle notes that this review was prompted by the Acting Vice-Chancellor’s decision (in his role as Chair of the Council) to give notice of a reportable event to the Office for Students (OfS) concerning condition of registration E2 (good governance) in May 2023, following the rejection by the Regent House of short-term measures proposed by the Council to mitigate the impact of the MAB on students during the 2023 summer examination season.2 Dr Astle queries the authority of the Acting Vice-Chancellor to ‘offer up a review intended to prevent the repetition of a lawful decision of the Regent House’. Dr Astle also comments on the introduction of the phrase ‘to protect the interests of students’ in the proposed changes to the regulations. The Acting Vice-Chancellor, in giving notice to the OfS in May 2023, did not question the authority of the Regent House to reject the mitigations proposed. However, the rejection of them did call into question the ability of the University’s existing governance arrangements to secure the interests of students in those circumstances, suggesting that a review was necessary.

Dr Astle suggests that the proposal to introduce new Regulation 7 and part of new Regulation 6 in the Ordinance for the Approval of Class-lists should be the subject of a Regent House ballot because they cover the same ground as some of the mitigations rejected by the Regent House in 2023. Members of the Regent House can, of course, decide for themselves whether they wish to call a ballot on these proposals, but the Council has decided not to do so. The Council understood that the main concerns raised by the Regent House in 2023 were about the maintenance of academic standards. The Task and Finish Group, when making the recommendations embodied in this Report, took great care to balance the need to mitigate the impact of serious disruption of the examination process on students with the maintenance of academic standards, whilst respecting the right to take industrial action. These provisions are different from those presented for approval in 2023. They are now expressly subject to the maintenance of academic standards and the protection of the interests of students, whereas previously they relied on the General Board’s general responsibility under Statute A V 1 for setting and maintaining the academic and educational policy of the University.

If industrial action has not affected students’ ability to be assessed properly (as in the case of the scenarios covered by Regulations 6 and 7), the University ought to consider changes to its Ordinances to confirm their ability to graduate, simply on the grounds of fairness to those students. There is also a second reason for the University considering such changes: it may be in breach of its conditions of registration with the OfS if it does not do so. Professor Evans observes that the concern raised by this notification of a reportable event will remain in the OfS’s records. The OfS has certainly taken an active interest in the progress of this review.

Professor Evans asks whether decisions taken by the Commissary under Statute A IX 1(b) should be published, in full or in part, where they have been relied on as authority for proposing a constitutional change. The Council agrees that this is a question that should be followed up. It has asked the Registrary to consult the Acting Commissary on this point.

Finally, the Council has received a proposal from a member of the Regent House suggesting a further amendment to the Ordinance for the Approval of Class-Lists (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 258). The Council is willing to revise the Report’s recommendations to make a further change to provide certainty. New Regulation 4, as set out in paragraph A(b) of Annex B of the Report, therefore now reads as follows (changes to the text highlighted in bold).

4. Where any Examiner fails to attend a meeting referred to in Regulation 1(a) or 1(b) without such absence being excused in advance by either the General Board or the Vice-Chancellor under Regulation 1, those present may, if they consider it appropriate to do so, proceed with the meeting, but the Chair of Examiners must immediately thereafter seek the General Board’s approval for the absence under Regulation 1. If the General Board does not grant such approval, the final approval of the class-list under Regulation 3 shall be invalid and the process for the approval of the class-list for the examination in question shall start again as set out in Regulations 1 to 4.

The Council is submitting a Grace (Grace 1, p. 106) for the approval of the recommendations of this Report, as amended by this Notice.

6 November 2024

6 November 2024*