More about HKUST
Some courses, due to their nature or pedagogical needs, utilize students' in-class performance—such as class participation and group/individual presentations—as the major assessment component (weigh 30% or more of the final grade). While the marking/evaluation typically occur in class and presentations are often conducted across multiple sessions, how can sampling and second marking be performed?
What if the major assessments are based on an aggregation of assignments that students complete throughout the term? For example:
Do these cases meet the criteria for performing second marking on sampled assessment works?
If the sub-components under a major assessment component adopt the same rubrics, they will be considered a single assessment component, with assignments divided into smaller tasks that have different submission deadlines. In Case (a), if the two assignments are evaluated using the same rubrics and collectively account for 40%, both assignments will be reviewed by the second marker for the selected samples. In Case (b), where the assessment consists of eight different parts, the instructor may select two or three parts for review, provided that the chosen samples are representative and reflect the marking standards in alignment with the rubrics.
What if an assessment component is based on the aggregated scores of two markers? For example, in a course's "Final Project (30%)," the scores are derived from the instructor (15%) and a corporate client (15%). Is a further review by a third marker necessary?
If the scores provided by the two designated markers are based on the same set of works and rubrics, the assessment will be considered a single component. Second marking for eight sampled works will be required if the aggregated weighting amounts to 30% or more.
Does the second marker need to conduct a full marking for the samples? Must the first and second markers arrive at the same exact marks?
The primary role of a second marker is to assess whether the marks/grades awarded to the samples are appropriate and consistent with the grading rubrics, and whether the samples demonstrate a clear differentiation in student performance. Second markers have the flexibility to review the samples in a manner they find suitable and efficient, whether to conduct exact marking for the samples or employing other methods as they see fit, to help them determine the appropriateness of the assigned marks/grades. While the review focus is on the appropriateness of the assigned marks, it is not uncommon for the first and second markers to assign different marks, provided that the marks fall within the same performance category.
Does the second-marking policy apply to courses that use a non-letter grading scheme (e.g., DI/PA/F, HP/P/LP/U/Y, P/F)?
No. The policy only applies to taught courses (1000 to 5000 level) that adopt letter grading scheme, where the letter grades fall into the four performance categories (Excellent, Good, Satisfactory/Marginal and Fail) as defined by the Academic Regulations. However, departments are welcomed to take additional efforts to ensure assessment standards and consistency for courses not covered by the policy.
Can the Course/Section Instructor nominate someone external to HKUST as the second marker?
Under the policy, assessments initially marked by the Course/Section Instructor should be second marked by another faculty member nominated by the Course/Section Instructor. If no suitable faculty member at HKUST is available due to the specialised contents of the course, an external individual with relevant expertise may be considered. However, this person should have teaching experience in tertiary education setting and be familiar with the grading policies of HKUST.