UEA Policy and Guidance on Re-marking requests - 2023/24


Student requests for a remark

1.1    Where a summative assignment, presentation, oral examination or a written examination has been Blind  double marked, a student cannot request a remark or appeal the mark. However, a student with concerns about the conduct of the marking process may submit an Academic Complaint setting out those concerns.
1.2    Where (except in the case of OSCEs, OSPEs and written examinations see 1.6 below) a summative assignment, presentation or oral examination has been Second marked a student may request a remark within 10 working days of publication of the mark on eVision.
1.3    A student requesting a remark will need to provide justification that either:
•    the mark is not consistent with the feedback given or;
•    the feedback suggests that part of the student’s submission has not been considered or;
•    the assessment criteria have not been applied appropriately.
1.4    Students are required to discuss their mark with the marker before asking for a re-mark. If this is not possible for reasons beyond the student’s control, they should meet with their Adviser. In exceptional circumstances a student may meet with an alternative member of staff such as the School’s Senior Adviser or the Programme Director for Professional Doctorate programmes. 
1.5    Students are required to submit a re-mark request form clearly indicating how their request meets one or more of the criteria outlined in 1.3 above.
1.6    Where a written examination, an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) or an Objective Structured Practical Examination (OSPE) has been double marked, or has moderated in another way, students may not apply for a remark but may submit an Academic Appeal.


Re-marking request procedures 

    Procedure for requesting a re-mark
2.1    For Undergraduate and Postgraduate Taught students requests for work to be re-marked should be submitted to the Learning and Teaching Service using the form LTS005 Request for re-marking of work which has not been blind double marked. The piece of marked work should also be submitted at the same time. A clean copy of the work is only required if it was not originally submitted electronically. For Professional Doctorate students, requests for work to be remarked should be submitted to the Professional Doctorate Team in the PGR Service using the form PGR005. 
2.2    A student submitting a request must clearly state on the re-marking request form (henceforth referred to as “the Form”), why, having received an explanation of the mark from the original marker, or from their Adviser in cases where it has not been possible to meet with the original marker, they feel they have grounds for making the request based on the criteria outlined in 1.3 above.
2.3    The relevant Learning and Teaching Service (LTS) Team Leader or Postgraduate Research Service (PGR) Office will consider the re-mark request. They will consider whether the Form has been properly and fully completed. If the student has indicated clearly which of the three allowable grounds they are applying against, and have provided evidence to substantiate their application accordingly, the application will be processed accordingly.
2.4    Prior to submitting a request for work to be re-marked, LTS, PGR or academic staff as appropriate, should strongly recommend that the student seeks guidance and support from the Student Union Advice Centre in completing their request. Although staff can advise students on the procedure for requesting a re-mark, they cannot advise on the completion of the form itself.


Requirement for students to discuss the original mark with the first marker

3.1    Students are expected to indicate on the Form that they have met in person, or via other means such as on TEAMS, with the original marker prior to submitting a re-mark request. In cases where this is not possible, for example because the marker is ill, absent from the University, or no longer employed by UEA, the student should meet with their Adviser (or, in exceptional circumstances, with another member of the School such as the School’s Senior Adviser or PGR Programme Director) before submitting a re-mark request.
3.2    Where a re-mark request is deemed by the LTS Team Leader or PGR Officer to be incomplete or where there is insufficient explanation or evidence provided in the Form, the application will be referred back to the student for revision.
3.3    A revised Form should be submitted by 6pm on the third working day following initial submission.
3.4    If, on re-submission, the LTS Team Leader or PGR Officer is satisfied that the Form has been properly completed, the re-mark process will be initiated. They will contact the Module Organiser to identify an appropriate second marker.
3.5    If the LTS Team Leader or PGR Officer is still not satisfied that the Form is complete, it will be referred to the School Director of Teaching and Learning in the School in which the module is based for a final decision as to whether the request should be processed and the re-mark process initiated accordingly. For Professional Doctorate programmes, this will be discussed with the Programme Leads. 
3.6    If rejected by the School Director of Learning and Teaching, the original mark will stand. However, the student may still submit an Academic Complaint if they feel there were procedural irregularities associated with the conduct of the assessment, including the marking or moderation process.


Confirmation from the original marker that they have discussed the awarded mark with the student

4.1    The original marker should confirm, by signing the Form or by responding to an email from the relevant member of LTS staff, that they have discussed the mark with the student face-to-face and that they have made efforts to clarify why the mark in question was awarded and to address the student’s concerns.
In cases where the student has not – due to circumstances beyond their control - been able to meet with the original marker, they should meet with their Adviser. The student’s Adviser, in such cases, should sign the Form or confirm via email that they have discussed the mark with the student. In exceptional circumstances a student may meet with an alternative member of staff such as the School’s Senior Adviser or Programme Director for Professional Doctorate programmes. 
4.2    The re-mark request will not be processed until the original marker (or the student’s Adviser in accordance with 4.1 above) has signed and returned the Form, or confirmed in writing by email, that the meeting has taken place.


Re-marking the work and processing the mark

5.1    Once a second marker has been identified  by the Module Organiser, LTS or PGR will send a copy of the Form and a clean copy of the student’s work, or a recording of the presentation/oral examination to the second marker electronically. The copy of any written assignment sent will be the original submission as lodged in eVision or Blackboard or a scanned version of the work if it was submitted in hard copy.
5.2    The second marker will be asked to re-mark the work in three working days after receiving it. Once re-marked, the second marker will return the completed re-mark request Form, duly signed, with the second mark clearly indicated. The second marker’s feedback on the script should be included in the relevant section of the Form.
5.3    A copy of the completed Form, with the first mark, second mark and final agreed mark (see the method for reaching a final mark below), together with feedback from the second marker should then be forwarded to both the Module Organiser and the student. A copy will be retained in the student’s file.
5.4    The outcome of the re-marking request will be recorded by the relevant LTS or PGR team.
5.5    The re-marking process should normally be completed within 10 working days of a student completing a re-marking request Form after they have met with the original marker.


Process where there are differences between marks awarded by the first and second markers

6. In cases where there are differences between the mark awarded by the first and second markers the procedure will be as follows:
a)    If the mark of the second marker is within 4% points of the original mark (either higher or lower) and within the same classification band, then no adjustment of the mark will be made; e.g. 1st mark is 63%, 2nd mark is 67% = no adjustment;
b)    If the mark of the second marker is within 4% points of the original mark (either higher or lower) but in a different classification band, then the mark will be adjusted to the entry point of the upper classification band; e.g. 1st mark is 59%, 2nd mark is 62%, adjusted mark = 60%. This equally applies where the marks straddle the pass/fail boundary; e.g. 1st mark is 37%, 2nd mark is 41%, then adjusted mark = 40%;
c)    If the mark of the 2nd marker is more than 4% points but less than 11% points (either higher or lower) from the original mark, then the mark will be adjusted to reflect the mid-point between these two marks; e.g. if 1st  mark is 60%, and 2nd mark is 68%, adjusted mark = 64%. Marks can go up or down; e.g. if the 1st mark is 56% and the 2nd mark is 50%, the adjusted mark = 53%. In some cases where marks straddle the pass/fail boundary, an adjusted mark may result in a formerly passing mark becoming a fail mark; e.g. 1st mark is 43% and 2nd mark is 35%, adjusted mark = 39%;
d)    In cases where the difference between 1st and 2nd markers is more than 10% points (e.g. 1st mark 60%, 2nd mark 72%), this discrepancy will be flagged for the Teaching Director in the School concerned, who will be required to adjudicate and consider any implications with regard to consistency of marking in the School. The Teaching Director’s adjudicated mark will stand as the final mark.


Marker’s meeting with a student to discuss a mark

7. A mark cannot be changed as the result of the discussion between the student querying a mark and the original marker (as outlined in section 3) unless it becomes apparent that either there has been a transcription error (see section 8 below) or if the marker has accidentally missed a section of the work so that not all pages of the work were marked. In all other cases the student must submit a re-marking request if they feel they have grounds based on the criteria outlined in 1.3 above.


Transcription errors

8. Where a student is concerned that there has been an error in the transcription of a mark from a piece of coursework to the mark appearing on eVision, they should contact the LTS team which owns the module so that this can be investigated. PGR students should contact the Professional Doctorate Team.