Guidelines for grading at the Faculty of Humanities

Adopted by the Dean for Studies on 14 December 2004, pursuant to Section 6 of the Regulations governing studies and examinations at the University of Oslo. Revised 09.03.05, 21.06. 05, 07.02.06, 04.05.06, 02.10.08, 22.11.12, 12.05.17, 19.09.18, 09.05.19.

I. Preparations for grading

1. Responsibilities of the department management

In the following, it is not clarified who is responsible for the various items. It is the responsibility of the department management to ensure that preparations are made, but the departments are free to organise this as they find it administratively and academically appropriate.

a) Responsibility for a meeting on grading policy

At least once a year, a grading policy meeting or a meeting in which grading is included on the agenda shall be held (for example, an external grading supervisor (tilsynssensor) meeting or planning meeting for the current semester¡¯s examinations and grading policy), with all the teachers in the subject, to discuss, among other things,

• the previous semester's appeal statistics: Are there many appeals for a particular course? What is the outcome of the re-grading, for example, is there a large gap between the original and reassessed grades?
• previous semester¡¯s grade statistics
• grade distribution over time for the courses: Could the examination questions have resulted in a better grade spread? Should one change the grading scale?
• grading at other institutions that offer the subject (as is evident, for example, from the UHR¡¯s grade reports)
• discussion of the subject¡¯s courses in external grading supervisor (tilsynssensor) reports and reports from external examiners who evaluate the assessment and the assessment scheme

b) Responsibility to examiners

All examiners must receive a national or subject-specific (in norwegian) qualitative description of the grades, grading guidelines and information on the use of the grading scales as stated in Section IV below.

The second examiner (medsensor) scheme shall be used, and the training of new teachers shall be carried out as described in Section III.2.

Examination candidates shall be anonymised to the extent that this is academically or practically possible. When anonymisation is not possible, for example, for courses with few candidates or for semester papers/portfolios, one can allow a colleague other than the teacher of the course to be the examiner or allow a second examiner (medsensor) to read more written answers than specified under III.2.a.

2. Responsibilities of the teacher with responsibility for the course

Course description

The teacher with responsibility for the course is responsible for preparing draft texts for the Course content and Learning outcome sections of the course description. The department must have their own routines for how such drafts are further reviewed by colleagues in the subject and by the administration. It must be ensured that the final texts are in accordance with the requirements for how these sections (in norwegian) of the course descriptions shall be filled in, so that the academic requirements and the level are reflected for both the students and the examiners.

Examination question papers and grading guidelines

The teacher with responsibility for the course shall prepare draft examination question papers and grading guidelines. Grading guidelines are mandatory for all courses, including oral examinations and Master¡¯s theses. Grading guidelines are prepared as described on the Grading Guidelines website. All examination question papers and grading guidelines shall be assessed by others before they are given to the students. The department must therefore have routines that ensure that the draft examination question paper and grading guidelines are quality assured by colleagues in the subject and the administration. The department head of studies determines whether this shall be carried out by the teaching coordinator, external grading supervisor (tilsynssensor), additional internal or external examiners, a teacher group or a teacher colleague.

Examination question papers for written examinations and home examinations shall always be submitted to the study administration by the deadlines set by the department.

For courses that involve multiple examiners, each responsible for their own group, the teacher with responsibility for the course will arrange a meeting, in which the examiners jointly assess the grading of individual papers and possibly adjust the grading guidelines, before the examination results are finalised and made public. It is especially important to find the right level for grades A, C and the boundary between E and F (or Pass/Fail).

II. Examiners

1. Requirements for the examiner¡¯s qualifications and impartiality

Any examiner that is involved in grading the student¡¯s achievement must:

• have at least achieved the same degree that the examination they are grading, is a part of,
• or, in special cases, be qualified through work experience,
• and not be impartial (in norwegian) in relation to any of the examination candidates.

2. Various examiner roles

• An ordinary examiner is an examiner who grades in accordance with Section III.1. below.
• A second examiner (medsensor) is appointed for all courses, and grades in accordance with Section III.2. below. The department determines whether appointments are made for each course, course group or subject area. The department also decides whether the second examiner shall be external or internal. The external grading supervisor (tilsynssensor) may be used as a second examiner if a special agreement is made.
• An extra examiner (oppmann) is used for grading Master¡¯s theses and for re-grading and is an internal or external examiner appointed by the department in individual cases in the event of a disagreement between two ordinary examiners when there are no special guidelines for dealing with such a disagreement. Such an extra examiner is given an explanation from each of the commission members and acts as a mediator. If agreement is still not achieved, the extra examiner will make the final decision on the grade. When an extra examiner is used, the grading deadline does not start to run again.
• An external examiner who evaluates the grading and examination scheme is part of the quality assurance system. They are external ordinary examiners, but they also submit a report to the department about their impressions from the grading.
• An appeal examiner only receives
  • examination answer paper
  • examination question paper
  • grading guidelines
  • course description
  • syllabus list
  • appeal record

The appeal examiner shall not receive any information about the ordinary grading, nor the explanation from the ordinary examiner or the candidate¡¯s appeal (cf. Section 5-3 (4) of the Act relating to universities and university colleges (in norwegian) regarding so-called ¡°blind grading¡±). The appeal examiner shall not have contact with the course teacher or initial examiner.

---------------------------

• An external grading supervisor (tilsynssensor) does not grade examination answers, but supervises grading in the subject. There is a special website for external grading supervisors (in norwegian) .

3. Examiners are internal or external

• All examiners must satisfy the qualification and impartiality requirements under II 1.
• An external examiner
  • is not employed by the University of Oslo in any position category in any unit or affiliated with the institution as a part-time teacher in the same semester as the course was offered and the examination takes place, but there is no disqualification period after such employment/affiliation.
  • may have been a guest lecturer or the like in a limited scope at the University of Oslo.
  • may be a teacher who has retired or been given emeritus status.
• An internal examiner
• is employed by the University of Oslo or affiliated with the institution as a part-time teacher.

III. Number of examiners for grading

1. Ordinarily, one internal or external examiner, as well as a second examiner (medsensor) is used, with the following exceptions laid down by law or regulations:

a. Oral, non-verifiable examinations: Two examiners are used since students cannot appeal the grade (cf. Section 6-2 (2) of the Regulations governing studies and examinations at the University of Oslo). The examiners must agree without involving others. There are no requirements regarding whether the examiner is external or internal.

b. Master¡¯s theses: At least two examiners shall be used, and at least one of them shall be external (cf. Section 3-9 (2) of the Act relating to universities and university colleges (in norwegian)). In the event of a disagreement on the grade, an extra examiner shall be used (see Section II 2). The same requirements that apply to an ordinary examiner also apply to an extra examiner (see Section II 1). Note that the candidate¡¯s supervisor cannot be an examiner or extra examiner. The commission shall give students a written explanation of the grade for their Master¡¯s thesis. The explanation shall clarify the principles on which the assessment and the assessment of the candidate¡¯s achievement are based.

c. Appeals: Two new examiners are used, and at least one shall be external (cf. Section 3-9 (5) of the Act relating to universities and university colleges (in norwegian)). In the event of a disagreement on the grade, the final decision shall be made by the external examiner. In the event of a disagreement between two external examiners, an extra examiner shall be used, who will receive an explanation from each examination committee member and make the final decision on the grade.

d. New assessment in the event of a significant grade discrepancy (third grading): The rules can be found on the University of Oslo¡¯s website (in norwegian). At the Faculty of Humanities, it is normal for the ordinary examiner and one of the appeal examiners to constitute the commission. One of them must be external. Already at their appointment as an ordinary examiner and appeal examiner, respectively, they must be advised that they must participate in a new assessment if there is a significant grade discrepancy (i.e. two or more grades) between the ordinary grade and reassessed grade.

2. To ensure the quality of the grading and a common understanding of how the grading scale is used, the Faculty of Humanities has decided that

a. a second examiner (medsensor)  for grading shall receive:

1) for all courses where the letter grading system is used: all examination answer papers that the examiner has graded E or F and at least two other answers, preferably answers that the examiner has found difficult to grade. If the fail percentage is high, a selection of examination answer papers graded F will be submitted. If no answers are graded E, all the answers graded D will be sent. The second examiner may also receive examples of answers that the ordinary examiner would give an A, B and/or C. If the number of examination answer papers is 10 or less, the second examiner will receive them all.
2) for all courses with a dichotomous grading scale: all the examination answer papers that the ordinary examiner has graded as Fail, all answers graded as Pass that the examiner believes to be close to Fail, as well as at least two other answers, preferably answers that the examiner has found difficult to grade. If the fail percentage is high, a selection of answers graded as Fail will be submitted.
3) all the examination answer papers in a course if the department so determines in special cases.

In the event of a disagreement on the grade between the ordinary and second examiner (medsensor), the final decision shall be made by the ordinary examiner.

b. no teacher who acts as an examiner for the first time shall grade alone. In the event of such first-time grading, the teacher shall grade all examination answer papers together with a more experienced examiner. A second examiner (medsensor) is also used in accordance with Section 2.a. in such cases.

3. Overview of who decides what in the event of a disagreement between examiners

IV. Grading and use of the grading scales

The examiners in each subject must have a common understanding of how the grading scale shall be used, read about the grading meeting under I 1. This means that the academic environments must work to ensure a consensus on what is required to achieve a particular letter grade and what is required to pass courses that use a dichotomous pass/fail grading scale. This is especially important to prevent inflation in the top grades. This work can also take place in cooperation with the corresponding academic environments at other educational institutions.

a) Grading

Grading measures the level of the learning outcome achieved and is based on

• national or subject-specific (in norwegian) qualitative description of the grades seen in relation to the academic level (0xxx, 1xxx, 2xxx, 3xxx or 4xxx levels)
• grading guidelines
• requirements for what the candidates should know when they have passed the course, expressed in the course description under Learning outcomes

The failing grades F or Fail are given to anyone who does not meet the minimum requirements to pass, regardless of how many students submit such an examination answer paper.

b) Dichotomous grading scale: pass/fail

When the dichotomous pass/fail grading scale is used, pass is given to anyone who satisfies the absolute requirements stated in the grading guidelines and course description. This means that the boundary between pass and fail is established with reference to quality standards that ¨C on an independent basis ¨C distinguish what can be approved and what cannot be approved, for example, as a basis for further study. The boundary between pass and fail shall not be linked to the boundary between some grades in the letter grading scale.

c) Graduated grading scale: letter grades 

When letter grades are used, the candidates shall be evaluated against all the grades on the scale based on a qualitative description of the grades, also for Master¡¯s theses, to distinguish good from less good achievement and differentiate between the students.

The graduated grading scale is an absolute scale in which everyone who satisfies the requirements for a grade in the qualitative description of the grades shall receive this grade. No examiner shall consider the normal distribution or Gauss curve when grading an individual course or class. For example, grade A shall be given for any achievement that is outstanding and clearly demonstrates excellence by the candidate showing very good judgement and a high degree of independent thinking ¨C regardless of how many there are in an individual class.

The grades in courses with many students will over time be distributed in accordance with the normal distribution curve if they have been set correctly and the examination question papers have been formulated so that the examination candidates can be distributed across the entire scale. If over time the grade statistics show that disproportionately many candidates are given an A or B, one should consider converting to a dichotomous grading scale or making the examination papers more difficult, so that the really good students can excel and get the recognition they deserve.

d) Grading and suspected cheating

If the examination commission suspects cheating (in norwegian), no grade, nor F/Fail shall be given. If cheating is suspected, this must be reported to the department, which will consider whether a case of suspicion of cheating should be raised. If no such case is raised the suspicion of cheating is dropped and the examination answer must be graded in the normal way. Even if no case is raised, the grade for the answer may still be docked for lack of judgment, lack of independence, the amount of copying, etc. (for example, based on a summary of an Urkund report). Suspicion of cheating shall not be presented to the student in a possible explanation or in any other way.