Assessment Policies and Procedures


Learning assessment methods are provided on the CEI website at  Learning Assessments | HKUST CEI | Center for Education Innovation.

The University has agreed on basic policies for the management of student assessment:

Assessment of students should be transparent:
  1. Adopt criterion-referenced assessment (CRA) and assign grades that reflect students' achievement of course ILOs.
  2. Faculty responsible for the course should announce the course grading scheme to the class in the first week of lectures. It is good practice to include the scheme in the course outline/syllabus with a brief mapping of how each assessment task of the course is aligned with the course ILOs.
  3. Final grades given for a course may be based on student performance in a variety of assessments, e.g. tests, essays, reports, assignments, presentations, classroom participation, and laboratory exercises, as well as on a final examination. It is helpful to students, and good practice, to specify the nature, number, and timing of the assessments and the percentage contribution of each assessment to the overall course grade.
  4. In assigning the overall course grade the method of determining the grade should be transparent. Clear documentation should be retained on how the overall grade has been derived.
  5. To ensure clear communication with students on essential course information including aspects mentioned in (i) to (iv), the course syllabus should be devised to present course ILOs, assessment components, grading rubrics, and relevant policies like the use of Generative AI tools and the rules of academic integrity clearly and make it accessible to students at the start of the course via Canvas or other appropriate platform.  The University has devised a standardized syllabus template for adoption by undergraduate courses.
Assessment of students should be fair and accurate:
  1. Course grades should be determined on the basis of the work done by students during the term and up to the point of grade posting.
  2. Final examinations should NOT be scheduled within the weeks assigned for lectures or the study break but in the Examination Period at the end of the Term.
  3. To avoid any possible claim of prejudice or bias, the University encourages faculty to grade tests and final examinations “blind” to students’ names, e.g. by assigning students with candidate numbers, where practicable.  
  4. A post-assessment moderation system is introduced for graded courses.  For assessments in a course that contribute 30% or more towards the final course grade of course with class sizes of at least 20, samples of students’ work should be second-marked by a faculty member following the University guidelines.
  5. Faculty responsible for the course should, by all possible means, ensure the accuracy of the reported marks and grades on the grade reporting system for which the data input is free of clerical or administrative error.
Timely and constructive feedback to students:
  1. Provide timely and constructive formative feedback to students on their performance as an important part of the student learning process: feedback within ten working days (i.e. two weeks excluding public holidays) of the submission of an in-course assessment is a good rule-of-thumb and good practice.
  2. For a consistent approach to the handling of marks for individual summative assessments, the University has formulated the “Procedures for Returning Marks and Disseminating Results”.  Course instructors should record all individual assessment marks within the Canvas grade book, and release the marks along with any feedback mentioned in (xi) via Canvas within ten working days (i.e. two weeks excluding public holidays) of assessment submission.