BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLANNING GUIDANCE FOR LEARNING AND TEACHING Version: 2.5 Produced by: Learning and Teaching Services representative on the

Business Continuity Operational Group Date Produced: 23 May 2011 Approved by: Quality and Scrutiny Sub-Committee Date of Approval: 3 October 2012 Updated: 15 January 2013 (appendix added to provide guidelines on

suspending or postponing teaching and learning) Circulated to FDLTs, FDOs and TPO –comments incorporated 21 Feb 2013. Comments from BCM Group meeting incorporated – 27 Feb 2013 15 October 2014 – contact details updated, additional comments about potential loss of assessments (lesson learned from fire at Glasgow School of Art & Design) and circulated to Pro-VC L&T and FDLTs

1 Introduction 1.1 This document is aimed at supporting Academic Departments and Professional Services at the University of Sheffield in planning for a disruption to learning and teaching using business continuity management (BCM). It provides information on business continuity planning in the University, highlights issues for consideration more locally and is written in the context of the University’s Business Continuity Management Policy and Framework (http://www.shef.ac.uk/incidents/businesscontinuity). 1.2 BCM planning is a process that enables the University “to proactively identify and plan to minimise the impact of risks that could affect its objectives, operations and infrastructure”. So business continuity is concerned with identifying potentially disruptive events and planning to avoid them, or trying to minimise their impact when they occur. Whilst BCM is not a legal duty, in view of the centrality of learning and teaching to the University’s business, planning for disruptive events is a business imperative. The University also has a duty of care and legal obligations to its staff, students and visitors. 1.3 Business Continuity Management covers planning for the whole range of disruptions, from minor incidents that can be addressed at a department level (such as a localised computer virus, minor power cut etc) to a major incident requiring the University to respond, by using the University’s Major Incident Plan. The Major Incident Plan (MIP) enables a University team to be set up - a Major Incident Team; they are formed in response to more serious or larger scale events, e.g. a national emergency, a major power cut, adverse weather affecting the campus etc. Departments may still need to implement business continuity plans for a major incident, but will need to liaise with the University’s Major Incident Team. It should be noted that minor incidents can sometimes become major incidents, so it is important that all incidents are notified to the appropriate people (see section 2.2). 1.4 This document suggests issues for departments to consider in relation to minor and major incidents. It is important to note that incidents are not restricted to those that impact

2

on the University campus. Off-campus incidents, such as those taking place during fieldwork, site visits or work placements require academic departments to consider the business continuity needs specific to this institution. 2 Communication and Decision-Making 2.1 Communication about incidents should be coordinated to ensure that there is no duplication of or conflict between actions, and that communication to students and staff is clear and consistent. It is particularly important that the University makes and communicates decisions that affect students in a consistent manner, in order to avoid confusion or unfairness between departments or degree programmes. 2.2 In the event of any incident – or a potential incident – which has the potential to cause disruption to the University’s business and lies outside the normal day-to-day running of the institution, it is important that the University’s Security Control Room is contacted (222 4444 for incidents or 4085 for routine enquiries). This will ensure that all incidents are notified to the appropriate people who can decide if wider coordination is needed. 2.3 In the event of a major incident, the University will set up a Major Incident Team. For incidents related to Learning &Teaching, the Major Incident Team will communicate with Heads of Department about the nature of the incident and any action required by means of the “Call Tree” on pg 6. Where a colleague is not able to fulfil their role in the Call Tree, communication will be directed to a deputy on the tier below. 2.4 The Major Incident Team may be subject to guidance by external agencies who are coordinating action at a wider scale. For example, Universities UK may issue national guidance on an issue affecting business continuity across the sector (eg strike action). 2.5 Departments should consider their mechanisms and arrangements for communicating about incidents to all students, staff and visitors. The most common methods of communication are email, web pages and social media; text messaging may also be an option. However departments should consider how they will communicate if the message is urgent and also if there were a breakdown in electronic communication. Alternatives include posting staff in key locations in the building to communicate verbally, or producing posters or leaflets. Any media enquiries should be referred to the media team (http://www.shef.ac.uk/news/contact-us ). If a University Major Incident Team is established, Heads of Department may need to liaise with them about communications and appropriate messages to be issued, to ensure consistency of messages. 2.6 In the event of an incident affecting more than one department, where a Major Incident Team has been established, communications will either be delivered centrally by the Major Incident Team (if established) or an individual on the “Call Tree”. If there is not a Major Incident Team formed but there is something affecting two or more departments then Heads of Department are should consult with the Department of Corporate affairs and/or other departments affected where feasible to ensure all communications are consistent. Any departmental communication which differs from the central message will need to be clear that it only applies locally and is specific to the department. 3 Timetable for Resumption of Learning and Teaching Activity 3.1 Given the strategic and reputational importance of resuming learning, teaching and assessment in the event of disruption, the Business Continuity Steering Group recommends the following timetable for reinstating normal activity unless a Major Incident Team advises otherwise (it is expected that reinstatement would occur as soon as possible, with the following being the expected maximum times):

3

Teaching and Learning During semester time, less than 1 week; out of semester time between 2-4 weeks.

Assessment (UG, PGT) During Exam periods, less than 1 day. Note that once an exam day is lost this would need to be rescheduled as part of the recovery procedures (see appendix 1 on assessment).

PGR Assessment Viva, less than 4 weeks. Departmental Exam Boards Less than 1 week for postponed Exam Boards,

less than 1 week for Exam Boards considering partial grades.

Central processing and Faculty approval of results, awards and progression (UG, PGT)

For UG - during key periods at the end of the Autumn and Spring semesters, and end of the August resit period, within 1 day. For PGT – during key period in early November, within 3 days. However, this is highly dependent on any time lost and disruption due to Examinations and Assessment and to Departmental Exam Boards above and availability of Taught Programmes Office staff.

Student Recruitment During Clearing less than 1 day, other times less than 2 weeks

Student Registration During Intro Week less than 1 day. Any activity lost during Intro Week needs to be rescheduled or otherwise replaced. Outside Intro Week, less than 2 weeks.

Award Ceremonies Within 1 day. Any ceremonies lost will need to be rescheduled as part of the recovery process [to be confirmed by Events Office]

Central University Services for L&T e.g. timetabling, IT support, property maintenance, security, cleaning, portering.

To meet needs as identified above.

4 Issues to Consider in Business Continuity Planning for L&T The following section raises issues for Departments to consider as part of their business continuity planning arrangements: 4.1 Critical Learning and Teaching Activities 4.1.1 As part of business continuity planning, departments need to identify time critical or urgent activities which require priority in the event of an incident. Time critical activities are identified based on an assessment of the impact of not performing them, and how quickly they would need to be recovered. Some time critical activities occur during particular periods in the annual calendar, such as Intro Week or Exam weeks or at other assessment sessions planned by departments. It should be noted that incidents may also occur whilst students are off-campus (field classes or work placements), and departments will need to produce a contact list to communicate incidents back to staff in Sheffield, including notifying the Security Control Room of what has happened. In addition, particular student groups may need to be dealt with more urgently than others: PGR students have a more flexible calendar than UG and PGT; final year students often have priority, or certain groups of students may have been directly affected by an incident. For further information about BCM and assessment, see appendices 1 and 2.

4

Action: Departments and Professional Services identify and prioritise time critical activities requiring action, and critical periods in the annual calendar. Identify which student groups are most affected, and arrangements for communicating about incidents (particular care should be taken of arrangements for overseas students and any students under 18 years old). 4.1.2 Where an incident results in students missing a time-critical activity, such as registration, the University and/or the Department will need to formulate an alternative approach, and provide information for both students and staff. It may also be necessary to consider what information, if any should be provided to parents and the media. Students may need to be directed to central University services such as Student Services or Accommodation and Commercial Services (ACS). Action: Departments and Professional Services plan how time-critical activities will be replaced, and how this will be communicated to students and staff. 4.1.3 Decisions about the rearrangement of teaching are best taken at local level. However the following point towards areas for consideration to assist with planning for disruptions:

(i) The impact of staff absence on teaching can be lessened if departments identify where colleagues can provide cover for each other’s teaching, avoiding the cancellation of classes. Action: Identify which teaching can be covered by colleagues, and how they would access the necessary material.

(ii) Where staff are absent, it may be possible to provide electronic and other alternatives to some lectures and classes in the form of slide files or lecture notes on MOLE, or Echo360 lecture recordings, provided that the provision for the use of ICT is already set up in the department. Departments could consider teaching students at a distance via technologies such as Google Hangouts and Skype. Note that this is reliant on the ICT infrastructure being available and able to cope with the traffic. (see section on Professional Services below). Action: Identify which teaching could continue by using ICT-based alternatives. Is there any ICT-based provision which is worth establishing as preparation for an incident?

(iii) Classes may need to be postponed once a proportion of students are absent. Thresholds are recommended to be between 30% and 50%. Action: Departments should identify a threshold for student numbers for postponing classes in the event of an incident. Where this falls outside the 30-50% range they should discuss this with their Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching before finalising their plans. This will depend on the importance of the session (i.e. are the learning outcomes critical and are there any further opportunities for students to undertake the learning experience). Departments will also need to consider whether or not it is necessary to repeat the session for those who missed it, or if there are alternative means for the students to gain the learning experience.

4.1.4 Where classes are postponed, departments will need to react flexibly to ensure that

the variety of issues raised are addressed. Different modes of teaching require consideration, for example: (i) Lecture based modules: the cancellation or postponement of lectures may mean

that subsequent seminars or tutorials will need to be rescheduled. (ii) Field work, lab classes and clinical teaching: arrangements may need to be made

to replace these modes of teaching with equivalent activities, such as library-based study

(iii) Groupwork: students may face difficulty in completing groupwork on time. (iv) Placements: arrangements for students to work outside the University may be

affected by incidents either within the University or in other institutions.

5

(v) Professional projects (e.g. Architecture studios): ongoing feedback on projects may not be available.

(vi) Formative feedback: where feedback is scheduled to be used by students to prepare further assessed activity, these may need to be postponed.

Action: Departments need to consider BCM across all modes of teaching. 4.1.5 Where teaching is not possible at the timetabled time and venue, Room Bookings, if requested, will reschedule existing teaching in an alternative location where possible. Teaching should not be cancelled unless there is no alternative e.g. consideration could be given to delivering a class using the ICT methods mentioned under 4.1.3. If there is no alternative venue, other arrangements will need to be planned in conjunction with Room Bookings, who should be notified of the need for rescheduled classes as soon as possible. Departments may be able to identify suitable times that can be used, including reading weeks, the final week of the semester, and vacation weeks. Alternatively, delaying or rearranging reading weeks may assist in rescheduling teaching. It should be noted that during an incident, Room Bookings may be under pressure to reschedule or manage changes for a number of departments, so departments are asked to be understanding. Action: Identify time available to reschedule postponed classes. 4.2 Critical Assessment Activities 4.2.1 Business continuity for assessment activities, including exams, is particularly important to the quality of teaching and learning at the University. Principles of quality assurance, validity and reliability are all crucial to the reputation of a University of Sheffield degree. BCM for assessment takes place in the context of the University’s Regulations (see http://www.shef.ac.uk/calendar/index.html). Departments should also note the timescales for the resumption of assessment under section 3.1. 4.2.2 Where a disruption impacts upon deadlines for coursework, departments will need to reschedule. Departments should liaise with the Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching for advice and coordination (FDOs may also need to be included), given the need for equity across all students and the risk that students will face undue pressure from ‘bunched’ deadlines. This may particularly affect dual honours students unless coordinated between departments. On occasion, deadlines may be extended into the period following exams. Incidents may impact upon the University’s learning and teaching infrastructure, including study spaces, the library lending system and the ICT infrastructure (including MOLE). These may also affect assessment deadlines, which in turn may impact on departments' ability to meet central deadlines set by the Taught Programmes Office for the upload of UG and PGT results, awards and progression recommendations onto the central student record system. 4.2.3 Departments should also consider the impact of the potential loss of assessment artefacts following submission by students. For example drawings or other pieces of work which are not stored electronically might be damaged in the event of fire or flood [note: the University is considering advice/ requirements in this area]. 4.2.4 Appendix 1 provides detailed consideration and information for departments in addressing issues of BCM for assessment. Action: Departments identify time critical/urgent assessment activities (both coursework and exams), and decide on responsibility for all areas of business continuity associated with assessment. 4.3 Professional Services Support for L&T 4.3.1 Professional Services provide both teaching (eg ELTC, Library) and support which is central to teaching, learning and assessment, such as IT provision for MOLE, library resources, the administration of exams, the processing of results and awards, and portering,

6

cleaning and maintenance services. Professional Services will need departmental Business Continuity plans that include provision to recover from an incident affecting teaching, as appropriate to the service. Professional Services’ plans should take into consideration professional service needs identified by academic departments in their business continuity plans. 4.3.2 In the event of an incident, the professional services implementing their Business Continuity plan will communicate directly to academic departments and other professional services about the impact of the incident. Where a department has a minor incident, it may need to communicate directly with Professional Services. 5. Engaging Staff in Business Continuity Management 5.1 Communication with University staff about Business Continuity planning is central to the effective maintenance or resumption of business following an incident. It is important that staff are aware of the plan for their department, and of their role. This section provides advice to departments on engaging staff in Business Continuity planning. 5.2 Heads of Department have overarching responsibility for Business Continuity within Departments. However, effective Business Continuity planning will need to involve a wider team, who are able to draw upon their experience to identify risks to Business Continuity, and plan actions which will enable a department to maintain or resume business. The team will also need to identify key staff responsible for implementing the Business Continuity plan, including contingencies in the event that key individuals are unable to play their role. (note - All staff including academic, secretarial, administrative, technical and ancillary staff may need to be involved and informed of the process). 5.3 The Departmental Business Continuity plan can be communicated to the wider staff body, for example through a Departmental meeting. This raises awareness of Business Continuity as an issue, and provides an opportunity for critical assessment of risks and plans, drawing upon the wider experience and insight of departmental staff. 5.4 It is important that any issues identified in the Business Continuity planning process are reported to the University’s Business Continuity Operational Group. This will assist insight into the risks to business across the institution, and to ensure that BCM takes account of the wide variety in departmental contexts. 5.5 The Departmental Business Continuity plan should be reviewed as a minimum on an annual basis, or when there are substantial changes to the department. 6 Contacts Contact for Business Continuity planning in Learning and Teaching: Susan Gill, Learning and Teaching Services (s.j.gill@shef, ext 20410) University Business Continuity Manager Jennie Douglas, CiCS (j.m.douglas@shef, 23078) Faculty of Arts and Humanities: Valerie Cotter (v.c.coter@shef, ext 29703) Faculty of Engineering: Jo Marriott (jo.marriot@shef , ext 29734) Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health: Kevin Corke (k.p.corke@shef , ext 22232) Faculty of Science: John Beresford (j.k.beresford@shef , ext 24373)

7

Faculty of Social Science: Nancy Stuart (n.stuart@shef , ext 29783)

8

Business Continuity Call Tree for Major Incident Impacting Upon Learning and

Teaching

Where a member is not able to fulfil their role on the call out tree, communication will be directed to their deputy on the next tier below, for example, if the Pro Vice Chancellor for Learning and Teaching is not available, a Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching will be contacted instead.

9

Appendix 1 GUIDANCE ON SUSPENDING OR POSTPONING LEARNING AND TEACHING ACTIVITIES Learning and teaching activities include lectures, tutorials, seminars, laboratories, and other teaching activities, assessment, PGR assessment, submission of exam results, Examination Boards, central processing and Faculty approval of results, awards and progression (UG and PGT), student recruitment, student registration, award ceremonies and any other services for learning and teaching(e.g. timetabling, IT support, property maintenance, security, cleaning, portering). Decisions on suspending or postponing activities should consider whether buildings are open and adequately staffed (including porters), and whether it is safe for people (staff and students) to be on campus.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT TO SUSPEND OR POSTPONE LEARNING AND TEACHING? The decision to suspend or postpone learning and teaching activities can be made by two routes: 1. The Major Incident Team for major incidents

If the scale of the event is impacting University wide and a Major Incident Team are established they can take a decision to suspend or postpone learning and teaching activities. This is based on the following principles: If the major incident is likely to have a substantial impact on learning and teaching, a

representative of Learning and Teaching should usually be a member of the Team (the

Pro Vice Chancellor for Learning and Teaching or an FDLT) so they can agree this

decision.

If there is NOT a Learning and Teaching Representative on the Team, it is recommended

that the Major Incident Team make a recommendation to them (using the call tree

provided) so this can be endorsed.

If the Major Incident Team are unable to contact an appropriate Learning and Teaching

representative as outlined above, they may contact UEB (in their capacity of Senior

Management Team in the Major Incident Plan) for endorsement.

Or as a last resort, if the situation requires an urgent decision and

consultation/endorsement is not available, the Major Incident Team can make the decision

without this endorsement. In this situation the Major Incident Team will need to consider

how to communicate this message as quickly and widely as possible.

2. The Department in consultation with the Faculty Director of Learning and

Teaching

In these circumstances, the relevant Head of Department would need to seek approval from their FDLT, in consultation with the Pro Vice Chancellor for Learning and Teaching as appropriate.

WHAT CONSIDERATIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN IN DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT TO SUSPEND OR POSTPONE LEARNING AND TEACHING?

10

The overriding consideration in deciding whether to postpone or cancel learning and

teaching must relate to whether it is safe for people to be on campus. There should always

be consideration given to alternative ways of delivering learning and teaching before taking a

decision to suspend or postpone activities, some of these considerations are noted below:

Is accommodation available to teach students safely?

o If the timetabled accommodation is not available Departments should contact

Room Bookings to see if alternatives are available.

o Are buildings open and adequately staffed with porters and other support staff to

maintain a safe environment?

Can the teaching be delivered by an alternative route e.g. using ICT methods?

o Does the department have plans in place to enable the delivery of remote learning

and teaching and are the relevant IT systems operational to enable this.

Are staff available to teach?

o Departmental Business Continuity plans should identify wherever possible staff

who can cover colleagues classes.

Are students able to attend?

o If a large number of students have been affected by an incident, there may need to

be a decision about the appropriateness of continuing learning and teaching. If it

is decided to continue, departments need to consider how those unable to attend

would be able to catch up on missing activities to ensure that they can meet the

learning outcomes of their programmes of study to inform this decision, especially

if their absence could be for an extended period.

o Consider special groups of students e.g. a major incident in another country might

impact on students from that area, and activities in which they are involved

WHAT ACTIONS NEED TO BE TAKEN TO SUSPEND OR POSTPONE LEARNING AND TEACHING ACTIVITIES? 1. Major Incident Team Decision to suspend or postpone

The Major Incident Team may use the procedure noted below for the local decision to

suspend or postpone learning and teaching. However the Major Incident Team may

also decide it is more appropriate to issue a message to all staff and students,

especially where the decision is taken urgently.

The appropriate methods will be agreed by the Major Incident Team at the time, and

may depend on the incident that is affecting the University, for example, if there was a

power outage, electronic communications may not be appropriate.

2. Local Decision to suspend or postpone Departmental BC plans should identify how to communicate with staff and students;

the process identified can also be used to inform them of suspended or postponed

teaching. This may be by e-mail, text, posters, social media, web sites or other means

- and may require a number of these methods to ensure that as many people as

possible are informed.

The same processes for communicating with staff and students should be used to

inform them when and where further information will be available about resuming

teaching activities.

11

PROCESS FOR SUSPENDING OR POSTPONING LEARNING AND TEACHING

ACTIVITIES

Where possible (and if they are not already members of the Team) the Major Incident

Team should contact either the Pro-Vice Chancellor for Learning and Teaching or in

her absence one of the Faculty Directors for Learning and Teaching. (as per the call

tree on page 7)

The Major Incident Team should provide the recommendation for suspending or

postponing learning and teaching and the following information:

o Nature of the incident

o Locations impacted

o Any other information available such as the length of time this may continue

for

The Major Incident Team will liaise with the contact to decide the most appropriate

media for informing staff and students about suspensions or postponements (the

Communications Representative on the Major Incident Team should be able to

provide advice/suggestions).

Departments are responsible for making arrangements to redress any suspended or

postponed learning and teaching, and course work or other non-examination

assessments, and PGR vivas.

Registry are responsible for liaising with Departments to redress any suspended or

postponed examinations

Departments are responsible for submitting any missing assessment results in

consultation with Taught Programmes Office

Taught Programmes Office are responsible for processing marks submitted

Departments are responsible for rescheduling examination boards in consultation

with Taught Programmes Office.

Admissions are responsible for addressing any postponed recruitment activities.

Registry are responsible for rescheduling any postponed registration.

The Events Team are responsible for rescheduling any Awards Ceremonies.

CONTACTS FOR UNIVERSITY DECISIONS ABOUT LEARNING AND TEACHING Lead decision: PVC for Learning and

Teaching

Professor Anne Peat

In Professor White’s absence contact one of the Faculty Directors of Learning and Teaching (FDLT): FDLT Science Professor Alistair Warren

FDLT Engineering Dr Rachel Horn

FDLT Arts and Humanities Dr Bob Johnston

FDLT Social Sciences Professor Jackie Marsh

12

FDLT Medicine, Dentistry and Health Dr Mike Jennings

WHAT OTHER ACTIONS NEED TO BE TAKEN?

Immaterial of who has made the decision to suspend or postpone learning and

teaching activities Departments business continuity plans should address how they

will resume teaching and learning within 1 week during term time and within 2-4

weeks out of term/ semester time. This may include

o Different methods of delivery

o Rescheduling classes

13

Appendix 2: GUIDANCE FOR DEPARTMENTS ON STUDENT ASSESSMENT 1. Introduction 1.1 Student assessment is a critical part of the student experience and not performing this could seriously damage the University’s reputation. This appendix aims to assist in business continuity planning for managing any disruption to assessment arising during and/or following an incident. It also explains procedures for notification of the results of assessment if, despite every effort, the process has been unable to proceed as normal. This information is relevant to all student assessment, whether held in Semester 1 or 2, UG, PGT or PGR. 1.2 It is possible that an incident may mean that some module grades or marks for some module components are not available when departmental Examination Boards are due to meet. This guidance sets out the broad framework within which Boards should consider outcomes in this event, and aims to provide colleagues with a basis on which to take decisions that will ensure consistency of treatment for students while maintaining academic standards. Accurate records of the incident and what was said to students, staff and the media should be kept and made available at the examination boards.

2. General Principles

2.1 The guidance which follows is based on the following principles:

(a) The academic judgement of the Examiners remains paramount.

(b) Academic standards will be maintained.

(c) The provisions of the University’s General Regulations remain in force.

(d) The departmental Examination Board is not empowered to recommend any award without sufficient evidence of attainment to at least the lowest level required for the award of that qualification. However, Boards should seek, on the basis of the guidance provided below and the University Regulations, to recommend the most detailed outcome possible (e.g. a classified honours degree, incorporate any caveats into the HEAR).

(e) No student will be required to undertake any assessment or examination task beyond the normal end of the examination period for their degree programme, unless this is essential to meet the requirements of professional accreditation and/or fitness to practise.

(f) Unless notified otherwise, students and staff must assume that any examinations that they are due to take will be held as usual. See section 3 below regarding responsibility for communication of changes to exams. In the event that an examination is cancelled, unless notified otherwise students must be present at the examination venue at the appropriate start time in order to receive official notification of cancellation and to sign a certificate of attendance, as evidence of their intention to sit the examination. This will also enable departments to accurately reflect and record correct HEFCE completion codes against student module information on the central student records system (which is critical for the annual HESA data survey).

(g) Unless notified otherwise, students should submit any assignments or other coursework on time, regardless of any possible delays in marking. However departments will need to consider the impact of any incident on the completion of coursework, and communicate changes to submission dates as soon as possible to any students affected. Departments should also consider the impact of loss of assessment materials and make contingencies to avoid loss of work submitted.

(i) Issues relating to PGR students will be handled on a case by case basis. The assessment of PGR students should be rescheduled as rapidly as possible following an

14

incident (under Section 3 above, this should normally be less than 4 weeks), using the original examiners unless this greatly affects the timing of the viva.

3. Conduct of Invigilated Examinations 3.1 Exams will be run unless it is deemed unreasonable to do so. It is the academic

department's decision to cancel or postpone the examination; though in the event of a major incident the Major Incident Team may cancel examinations or offer advice. The Examinations Team (which forms part of Registry Services, in the Student Services Department) have business continuity plans in place to provide replacement invigilators should an incident impact on the ability of planned invigilators to attend an exam. The Examinations Team also holds contact information for Departmental Exams Officers and their Deputies, who are available during the Exams period for contact. The Examinations Team may liaise with individual Departmental Exams Officers in the event of a minor incident, or may assist a Major Incident Team in communication in the event of an incident which impacts upon exams. Any changes should also be communicated to the Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching.

3.2 If an incident results in Departments determining that they are unable to follow existing procedure, whereby a member of staff should be present at the start of each examination in order to deal with any problems or queries that may arise, any issues raised will be recorded in an Incident Report Form. This will be provided to the Departmental Exams Officer by the Examinations Office.

3.2 If an incident results in Departments determining that they are unable to collect examination scripts as normal, the Examinations Team will retain scripts. The release of examination scripts from the Examinations Office will require a signature from the relevant department to confirm that arrangements for the storage of scripts and the return of the marks for consideration by the departmental examination board have been securely put in place. In the event that examination scripts are lost the Department must give consideration to the need for students to retake the examination or make alternative considerations in liaison with the external examiner.

3.3 If an Exam is postponed, the department should liaise with the Examinations team to make alternative arrangements as required.

4. Non-Invigilated Assessment

4.1 In the event of an incident, Heads of Department are asked to undertake an audit of non-invigilated assessment in order to establish which marking has been or will be undertaken, and to seek to establish alternative arrangements where this is not the case.

4.2 Provisions for the grading of modules with incomplete assessment are given below.

5. Communication with Students

5.1 It is essential that students are informed of changes to assessment and any amended procedures on a timely basis.

5.2 If an incident occurs in advance of an assessment:

Academic departments should consult with the Examinations team about postponing or cancelling an exam. The Examinations Team will inform all necessary Professional Services including the Security Control Room (if the exam was scheduled to take place on campus). The department should liaise with the Examinations Team to make alternative arrangements as required. The Examinations Team will contact students to provide up-to-date information. Departments are advised to reinforce the relevant message to students by contacting them directly and keeping them informed of developments.

15

During a major incident which impacts on exams the Major Incident Team may circulate communications or guidance regarding exams. This may include a general email to students explaining that they should assume that exams are proceeding as normal unless they receive a message otherwise. This information will be available on the University’s website and by other forms of communication deemed appropriate such as social media sites, notices around campus etc. Departments are asked to encourage students to check their email, SMS messages and the website regularly for the latest position and updates. The department will remain responsible for communicating with students about local arrangements unless directed otherwise by the Major Incident Team. The department may be able to direct students towards University communications. SSiD will also direct students to University communication.

5.3 If an incident coincides with students’ arrival at or presence in an examination hall, the Department will communicate with the Examinations Team, who will provide information to the invigilators and students. Where the Chief Invigilator is aware of an incident, he or she will need to take action, and should always report the incident to the Security Control Room immediately. Where safe to do so, the Chief Invigilator will ask students to complete an attendance slip. The Chief Invigilator will refer students to the department concerned for further information. Departments will need to ensure that they are in a position to provide advice to students about amendments to their assessment.

5.4 Once the Examinations Team has made arrangements for rearranged exams, it is their responsibility to communicate these arrangements to students.

5.5 Departments should also communicate to students about any changes to the marking process. This may include information about any changes to the timescale for marking, who is marking their assessed work, how the department is ensuring that assessment is fair and reliable, and how students will be awarded a degree classification (see below for further information about these issues).

6. Guidance on Assessment For All Undergraduate Years

6.1 Marking – additional support

6.1.1 Where students have completed examinations or non-invigilated assessed work, but staff are not available to undertake marking because of an incident, departments should explore alternative means of marking the work in order that grades and credits can be awarded.

6.1.2 There should be a nominated Internal Examiner for each module. The University Ordinances define this role as taking responsibility for ensuring that the assessment process is conducted with accuracy, fairness and consistency, and that assessment has been moderated appropriately. The University Ordinances prescribe that only members of the University’s teaching staff are eligible to undertake the role of internal examiner.

6.1.3 Post-doctoral research associates may act as an Internal Examiner at Level 1 only. PGR students or hourly-paid tutors may not act as Internal Examiner, but may participate in the assessment process, provided that they receive adequate preparation, support and guidance from the Internal Examiner. Existing University guidance (see section 2.3 of “Guidance for Departments on the Internal Moderation of Summative Assessment Tasks and Assessed Work”) provides examples of specific arrangements that should be made for moderation of work that is first marked by those who may be less familiar with the assessment process.

6.1.4 As part of Business Continuity planning, Departments should identify staff, PGR students and hourly-paid tutors who could participate in assessment if required,

16

and how they will receive adequate preparation, support and guidance. Departments making special arrangements to introduce additional marking support should seek advice and approval for these arrangements from a Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching. It is important that these arrangements are communicated to students, to ensure the reputation of the University in conducting a fair and reliable assessment.

6.2 Moderation

6.2.1 The University guidance for departments on internal moderation of assessed work is framed around general principles that meet the QAA’s requirements to protect academic standards. The University defines moderation as ‘a range of activities which provide confirmation that, at all stages, summative assessment (i.e. on which the award of credit is based) has been conducted with accuracy, consistency and fairness.’ It permits departmental discretion in the methods of moderation, appropriate to the type of assessment and subject pedagogy. However, it is expected that ‘the process of summative assessment should involve internal moderation wherever practical, to ensure that the initial judgements/marks have been arrived at accurately, consistently and fairly in accordance with the assessment criteria/marking scheme.’

6.2.2 It is therefore essential that, if alternative arrangements for moderation are put in place, departments can still assure themselves, and students, that the outcome will be consistent, fair and accurate. Particular attention should be given to the need for sufficiently robust moderation in cases where marking has been undertaken by an individual not directly involved with the material under consideration.

6.2.3 Departments should already have a documented policy and procedures for internal moderation, which should have been provided to all staff involved in the assessment process and notified to students via departmental student handbooks. Departments should therefore consider what they currently state to students regarding internal moderation procedures and evaluate whether, as a result of an incident, it is still deliverable. If departments are not able to operate their usual procedures, as outlined in their handbooks, they should consult their Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching on any changes that are made to procedures. Changes should be communicated to students by the department.

6.3 Awarding module grades and credits based on incomplete assessment

6.3.1 In the case of some incidents, departments may need to consider awarding module grades where some component marks are missing. The guiding principle is that this can normally occur only where there is sufficient evidence of a student’s performance from other marked assessment (e.g. coursework, or the result of an oral presentation on a project or dissertation), in the context of the key learning outcomes for the module, to determine a grade on this basis. The approach should be consistent with that used for aegrotat cases as described in the University's General Regulations where examiners need to be "satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the candidate would have passed the examination".

6.3.2 In such circumstances any requirements for a mark to have been achieved in each component of the assessment would be waived (exceptions will exist in some subjects for professional accreditation reasons). If extrapolated grades are returned, then it must be understood that they will be used by the Examination Board as the basis for progression/classification decisions (although the Board will be alerted to the presence of such marks). Proposed special arrangements to determine module grades (and thus award credits) should be agreed in

17

consultation with the Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching in advance of the departmental Examination Board meeting.

6.4 Departmental Examination Boards - Constitution

6.4.1 Following an incident, Departments should, wherever possible, continue to adopt the principles set out in the University’s Guidance on the Management of Departmental Examination Boards, including the guidance on establishing a quorum.

6.4.2 Where it is likely that a Board will meet, but with some members absent, the Board will make use of Departmental information on personal cases on students’ records. It is essential that Departments have a system in place to ensure that this information is available. The arrangements in place to ensure this is available need to have due regarding to data protection, information security etc.

6.4.3 In order for a meeting of a Departmental Examination Board to proceed, it must be quorate. The general principle for determining the quorum is that all relevant external examiners and internal examiners are present (those appropriate to the business being considered, which would usually include the Internal Examiner or leader of all contributing modules as well as Directors of Teaching and Year Tutors/Level Co-ordinators, and representatives from other departments which contribute modules integral to specific degree programmes). An appropriate senior member of staff should take the Chair. Where the impact of an incident causes a Departmental Examination Board to be non-quorate, the Department should consult with the Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching about appropriate alternatives. The Department may also need to liaise with the professional body on any requirements of professional accreditation.

6.5 Departmental Examination Boards - Conduct of business

6.5.5 Where all results for a student are available, the Board should proceed as normal. Normal procedures for the consideration of cases affected by special circumstances should also be followed.

6.5.6 Where a student has completed all the required assessment, but only partial results are currently available because as a result of an incident marking has not been undertaken or marks have been withheld, the Board should proceed in accordance with the following guidance:

(a) At the start of the meeting the Board should confirm any core modules or other elements of assessment for which results must be available to enable decisions to be made on progression or degree classification for each programme, e.g. a final year project or dissertation.

(b) The Board should be alerted to cases where module grades have themselves been based on incomplete assessment and, if these are in core modules as defined above, whether an extrapolated mark precludes decisions on progression or degree classification at this stage. This will require notification of the procedures previously agreed with the Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching.

6.5.7 The Board should also be alerted to any issues raised in the examination hall.

6.5.8 Where missing results relate to parts of the programme contributing to professional accreditation, the advice of the relevant professional body must be sought. Departments should explore with the relevant professional body ways of satisfying the requirements that are as fair as possible to students.

18

6.5.9 Guidance is provided below on the decision processes to be followed for progression or, for final years, degree classification.

6.5.10 Normal procedures require that an adequate record is kept of the Board’s meeting. In particular, the outcomes of discussions relating to any special cases, including those involving missing results, should be unambiguously recorded.

6.6. External examiners

6.6.1 The University’s Code of Practice for External Examiners states that External Examiners should be present at all examiners’ meetings at which significant decisions are taken in regard to the award of degrees. External examiners are also required to endorse the outcomes of assessments to which their appointment relates, and the signature of an external examiner must be appended to the final list of degree results. If an external examiner is not available to undertake these duties as a result of an incident, then the Department can consider whether it is feasible or appropriate for the External Examiner to take part in the meeting from a distance (eg by webcam or telephone), or to appoint a replacement in the time available, or to postpone the dates on which they are expected to attend. Note that further guidance on action should an external examiner be unable to attend a meeting is available in the “Code of Practice for External Examiners of Taught Programmes of Study” (http://www.shef.ac.uk/lets/design/evaltq/eeinfo). Further advice on external examiners is available from Learning and Teaching Services.

7. Progression Between Levels

7.1 Progression from Level 1 to Level 2

7.1.1 Where full sets of marks are available, the normal thresholds for progression as set out in the General Regulations for First Degrees and the Examination Conventions for Undergraduate Programmes will apply.

7.1.2 Where marks are not available because of an incident, progression should be permitted based on existing evidence of performance, provided that there is no evidence that the student was likely to fail the year, or had not attempted the assessment. The approach should be consistent with that used for aegrotat cases as described in the University's General Regulations where examiners need to be "satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the candidate would have passed the examination".

7.1.3 Subject to the normal regulations/conventions governing conceded passes, all students with one failed module plus missing marks arising from an incident should resit if feasible. Such students should assume that the August resit examination period will operate as normal, unless notified otherwise by the Examinations Team.

7.1.4 Departments should ensure that appropriate arrangements are made for students to undertake assessments at a later date where this is required for professional accreditation.

7.2 Progression from Level 2 to Level 3 (and 3 to 4 in the case of integrated Masters

programmes)

7.2.1 Where full sets of grades are available, either as normal or as extrapolated grades, the normal thresholds for progression as set out in the General Regulations for First Degrees and the Examination Conventions for Undergraduate Programmes will apply.

19

7.2.2 Where grades are not available because of an incident, but will be at a later date once marking has been undertaken, a provisional decision should be made. The General Regulations for First Degrees and the Examination Conventions for Undergraduate Programmes should be followed. Any deferred decision should be communicated to students.

7.2.3 Where grades are not available and this will remain the case (no examination having been set and insufficient coursework for module marks to be extrapolated), a candidate should be permitted to proceed (including to a Year Abroad), within the General Regulations for First Degrees. In such cases, Examination Boards in the following year must give particular attention to the incidence of ‘missing grades’ from the previous year recorded in the previous year’s exam board, in degree classification or progression decisions, particularly where Levels 2 and 3 are equally weighted. However, where it is clear from the grades that are available that a student would have failed the year (as they would not have achieved sufficient credits even if all the modules with missing grades were considered as passes) then permission to proceed should not be granted.

7.2.4 Departments should ensure that appropriate arrangements are made for students to undertake assessments at a later date where this is required for professional accreditation. It may be necessary to seek advice from the professional body on their requirements for the resit.

8. Degree Classification

8.1. General points

8.1.1 Following an incident, Graduation ceremonies are expected to resume within one day, and any postponed ceremonies to take place within [Note: this information to be provided by the Events Team].

8.1.2 Departmental Examination Boards are therefore expected to meet as scheduled where possible. If an incident requires Examination Boards to reschedule, this should be communicated to the Taught Programmes Office and the Events team.

8.1.3 Where it is not possible to classify all students at the initial meeting due to insufficient results being available, Boards should reconvene at the earliest opportunity once results become available.

8.2 Classification decisions

8.2.1 Where full sets of grades are available, either as normal or as extrapolated grades, the normal thresholds for the award of degrees as set out in the General Regulations for First Degrees will apply, which are in some cases supplemented by programme-specific regulations or other conventions.

8.2.2 Where a full set of grades is not available, either because marking has not taken place, because the proportion of existing coursework does not meet the threshold required to award a grade, because an examination has been cancelled, or because of previously failed modules, the Board may recommend the award of a classified degree where the General Regulations for First Degrees allows.

8.2.3 Where missing grades will be available at a future date once marking has taken place, the recommended degree classification will be provisional, and will be reviewed in the light of the missing grades once these are available. Where the effect of the missing grades indicates the award of a class of degree higher than that provisionally awarded, action will be taken to amend the original classification and issue a replacement certificate. Where the effect of the missing grades

20

indicates the award of a class of degree lower than that originally recommended, no further action will be taken. Students to whom an initial provisional classification applies will be provided with a written statement as to their position, for purposes of employment or further study.

8.2.4 Provisional degree classifications must be clearly recorded as such by departments.

8.2.5 Where the Board is not able to classify the degree, even on a provisional basis, provided that there is no evidence from attendance or other indicators that the candidate was likely to fail and/or had not attempted assessment, the Board should recommend the provisional award of an unclassified degree, with a view to classifying the degree once the missing results become available. This will allow the student to graduate. If the position remains unclear once the missing results have been taken into account (for example because the grades obtained are not sufficiently high, or include fail grades), the Board should refer the case to the Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching for consideration on an ad hominem basis by a University-wide review panel.

8.2.6 It is possible that the Board’s decisions on any given cohort of students will include some recommendations for the award of classified Honours degrees (including provisional classifications), some for the award of provisional unclassified degrees, and some where a decision cannot be reached and cases are being referred for University-wide consideration. This is an acceptable interim outcome in the context of an incident affecting assessment.

9. Transcripts

9.1 Where the impact of an incident means that information is insufficient for a degree to be awarded, a transcript showing the most up-to-date information on ratified assessment results will be made available to students on request from the Student Services Information Desk (SSiD).

10. PGT and PGR Students

10.1 PGT students

10.1.1 Whilst the above guidance relates specifically to undergraduate students, the principles on which it is based apply also to PGT students. This includes classification of Masters degree results into fail, pass, merit or distinction.

10.1.2 In cases where programme regulations require formal permission to be granted to proceed to the dissertation stage of a Masters programme, and where sets of grades are incomplete, progression should be permitted based on existing evidence of performance, provided that there is no evidence that the student was likely to fail the Diploma stage of the programme, or had not attempted the assessment.

10.2 PGR students

10.2.1 Queries concerning PGR students should be addressed to the Faculty Research Degree Support Team in Research and Innovations Services, and will be handled on a case by case basis.

Contact: http://www.shef.ac.uk/ris/pgr/contacts.html

21

11. Further Information

11.1 Guidance on invigilated examinations and the collection of scripts

Jo Hardy (ext 21283, email j.hardy@shef)

Janet Telford (ext 21282, email J.Telford@shef)

11.2 General guidance

Faculty of Arts & Humanities: Richard Ward (ext 21358; email r.b.ward@shef ), Angela Marron (21751, a.marron@shef )

Faculty of Engineering: Andrea Bath (21365, a.j.bath@shef ), Clare Young (c.j.young@shef)

Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health: Sarah Huntley (21352, s.l.huntley@shef ), Angela Gascoyne (21366, a.gascoyne@shef )

Faculty of Science: Marie Evans (21746 m.evans@shef ), Katharine Lingard (21203, k.lingard@shef )

Faculty of Social Sciences: Claire Allam (20407 c.allam@shef ), Nicola Orridge (21748, n.orridge@shef), Tracy Mayes (21355 t.mayes@shef )

The above LeTS Faculty contacts will also act as a first point of contact for matters which require the attention of a Faculty Director of Learning and Teaching.

11.3 Guidance relating to individual student cases

Faculty of Arts & Humanities: Marie Boam (21289, M.Boam@sheff), Karen Shippam (21411, K.Shippam@shef)

Faculty of Engineering: Stephanie Betts (21274 S.Betts@sheffield.ac.uk)

Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health: Stephanie Betts (21274, S.Betts@sheffield.ac.uk), Rachel Bunker (21326, r.bunker@shef)

Faculty of Science: Stephanie Betts (21274, S.Betts@sheffield.ac.uk)

Faculty of Social Sciences*: Marie Boam (21289, M.Boam@sheff), Karen Shippam (21411, K.Shippam@shef)

*School of Education and The Institute of Lifelong Learning: Stephanie Betts (21274, S.Betts@sheffield.ac.uk), Jane Wilkinson (21325, l.j.wilkinson@shef)

12. Links to Related Documents

General Regulations for First Degrees http://www.shef.ac.uk/calendar/index.html

General Regulations for Higher Degrees http://www.shef.ac.uk/calendar/index.html

Examination and Assessment Resources for Staff http://www.shef.ac.uk/exams/

Examination Conventions for Modular Undergraduate Programmes http://www.shef.ac.uk/ssid/exams/ugexams

Examination Conventions for Modular Taught Postgraduate Degrees http://www.shef.ac.uk/ssid/exams/pgexconv

22

Examination Conventions for Undergraduate Non-Modular Programmes of Study in the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/ssid/exams/ugconmed

Guidance for Departments on the Moderation of Assessment http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/lets/pp/assessment/marking

Examination Conventions http://www.shef.ac.uk/ssid/exams/ugexams

Code of Practice for External Examiners of Taught Programmes of Study http://www.shef.ac.uk/lets/pp/assessment/external

Guidance from Human Resources on incidents http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/hr/guidance/adverseconditions