---

Assessment Deadlines

The dates and times by which you should submit your work for assessment are given on Tabula. Please also see our schematic map of all student deadlines.

Work should be uploaded to Tabula by the date and time specified on the system and following the online instructions. Please note that since this is an electronic system, it is very accurate, so even if you submit your work just one second after the deadline, it will be marked as late and penalties will be imposed accordingly.

Make sure you allow yourself plenty of time to upload your work and try not to leave this until the deadline day itself. If you encounter any technical problems with your IT equipment or with uploading your work which mean that you are unable to meet the deadline, these cannot be accepted as a valid reason for late or non-submission and penalties will be imposed accordingly. Work submitted by any other means (e.g. emailed to the Office or a tutor) will not be accepted.

 

---

Extensions

Extensions to assessed work deadlines may be granted in exceptional and/or unforeseen circumstances (such as
ill health or family bereavement).

The Department expects students to plan their time carefully. It is reasonable to expect that minor disruptions will occur during the assessment period and it is your responsibility to allow for this in your work schedule. It is also reasonable to expect that the essay and exam period will be stressful and extensions requested on these grounds will not be approved.

Extensions will not be granted for computer failure, loss of work that has not been backed up, failure to submit the correct version of an essay, issues with transport, paid work or any other reason that the department considers bad time management.

Extension requests (apart from self-certifications) require written evidence that personal difficulties and/or illness have had a detrimental impact on an individual student’s capacity to study. This evidence must be attached to the extension request when it is submitted on Tabula.

Retrospective requests for extensions will not be granted. If serious circumstances prevent you from requesting an extension ahead of time, you should meet with your personal tutor to discuss an application to the Mitigating Circumstances Committee to be taken into consideration. This must be done as soon as possible.

There are different types of extension so please read the below carefully:

 

Self-Certification

All students are able to apply for two separate extension periods of 5 working days via the self-certification policy. These extensions will be granted without the need for evidence. Students should apply via Tabula no more than five days before the submission deadline for the assessed piece of work, or pieces if there is more than one deadline in the 5 working day period (students must specify ALL the assignments they are applying for self-certification for within the 5 day working period). Please check that your self-certification has been approved. Students may receive a message via the Self-Certification Portal on Tabula requesting further information from the Year Director before approval.

This step-by-step guide goes through the process of applying for a self-certification. You can also see the number of self-certifications you have remaining on Tabula.

Please note that you cannot use two self-certifications on the same assignment.

 

Specific Extensions

You may apply for a specific extension of 5 working days if you encounter exceptional or unforeseen circumstances. Students should apply via tabula at least two working days in advance of the published assessment deadline. Unlike self-certifications supporting evidence must be provided. You are eligible to apply for a specific extension even if you have self-certifications remaining.

Instructions for requesting a specific extension can be found here: https://warwick.ac.uk/services/its/servicessupport/web/tabula/manual/cm2/students/extension 

You will receive a response to your extension request via Tabula within 3 working days.

 

Exceptional Extensions

Further extensions (beyond a period of self-certification or a specific extension) may be granted only in exceptional circumstances. In these cases you must discuss your situation with your personal tutor and/or with Disability and Wellbeing Services. In addition to the supporting evidence you must upload an email from your personal tutor confirming you have discussed your circumstances with them. Extensions are not normally granted for more than 10 working days (which includes any period of self-certification or specific extension). 

Requests for exceptional extensions should be made via Tabula (remember to do this for each separate assessment, if you have multiple assessments due around the same time).

Instructions for requesting an exceptional extension can be found here: https://warwick.ac.uk/services/its/servicessupport/web/tabula/manual/cm2/students/extension 

You will receive a response to your extension request via Tabula within 3 working days.

 

Extensions for reasonable adjustments

If you have a disability or a chronic or long term health issue (including mental health issues) you may be eligible for reasonable adjustments which will grant you flexibility in deadlines. To qualify for this you must be assessed by Disability Services. Once assessed you will not need to upload further evidence. When applying for an extension on the grounds of reasonable adjustments please note 'reasonable adjustments' in the box provided. Extensions for reasonable adjustments are granted for 5 working days.

You will receive a response to your extension request via Tabula within 3 working days.

 

---

File Naming

While there is no "correct" way to name a file, we strongly urge you to adopt a robust convention for naming and organising your files before submitting work - this will help prevent you from accidentally submitting the wrong file. Submission of the wrong file will result in penalties (for more information please see below)

A meaningful filename would contain your student number, the module code, assignment name and an indication that it is the final version, for example:
1234567 - HI127 - Source Review - FINAL.pdf

It is essential that you do not include your own name in the document or file name.

 

---

Penalties

Penalties for Late Submission or Non-Submission of Written Assessed Work

Deadlines for the submission of work are available on Tabula. According to University rules, late submission of an assessed essay will, unless an extension has been approved, result in a penalty deduction from your mark for the work of 5 marks per day. Weekends (Saturday and Sunday) and bank holidays are NOT included when calculating penalties for late submission. There is no upper limit to the total penalty for late submission. If, for medical or other compelling reasons, you require an extension on an assessed essay or dissertation please see the extension policy.

Please note that late submissions will not be accepted for 7 day take-home assessments, and these assignments are not eligible for self-certifications or extensions. Any late submissions will receive a mark of 0. Further information about 7 day take-home assessments can be found here.

 

Penalties for Non-Submission/Attendance of Assessed Presentations/Group Projects

If students are unable to attend a scheduled presentation they will receive a mark of 0 (in the same way as if they missed a scheduled examination). If they have mitigation for illness or other circumstances then they should submit this as soon as possible (see section of the handbook on mitigation policy). The mitigation panel which reports to the examination board may a) allow a further first attempt (usually an essay is substituted for the presentation/group project) b) allow a resit where the work is capped at 40%) c) in exceptional circumstances waive the need to take the component (usually only if the assessment component is worth less than 3 CATS).

 

Word Length and Penalties for Over Length Work

Essays and dissertations that are above the word limit will be deducted as follows:

• 9,000 word dissertation: 1 mark off for each 100 words (or part thereof) over 9,000 words
• Any plan or essay up to 4,500 words: 1 mark off for each 50 words (or part thereof) over the specified limit

The word limits are strict upper limits, and marks will be deducted if the assessment is over-length. Footnotes, bibliography and possible appendices are not included in this word-count. The title page is not included in the word-count, but titles and subtitles in the text are. You do not need an abstract or content-list, but if you do include these, they are counted in the word-count.

"1 mark off" means one mark on the 100-point scale, not one mark on the 20-point scale. For example, an essay that receives an initial mark of 68, and is 90 words over the limit, will have two marks taken off, giving a final mark of 66.

You will not penalised for producing under-length work, provided quality is not sacrificed to brevity. Learning to write to a limit is one of the skills the degree is designed to encourage you to cultivate.

 

---

Submission of Wrong File

Occasionally, a student will accidentally upload an incorrect file. The department allows a window of 2 working days after the deadline in which students who realise that they have uploaded an incorrect file can contact the department and have the incorrect file deleted and be allowed to upload the correct file.

It is the student’s responsibility to check Tabula and ensure that they have uploaded the correct file for all of their summative assessments.

If a student discovers that they have uploaded an incorrect file for a summative assessment they must email the History Office within 2 days of the original submission, stating they wish their initial submission to be deleted from Tabula.

Students must then submit the correct file on Tabula once an initial submission has been deleted by the office.

There will be a penalty of 5 marks per working day applied to the submission.

Once the 2 working day window has passed, students who re-submit the correct file for the respective assignment before marking closes will receive a capped mark of 40%; if the mistake is not rectified before marking closes, the mark will be 0%. This policy does NOT apply to 7-day take home assessments.

Please note that it is the student's responsibility to check that a correct file has been uploaded not the marker.

---

Marking

20 Point Marking Scale

The University uses the '20 Point Marking Scale', which directly maps to the different degree classification, and it is now used to mark all undergraduate work. Some work may receive an overall mark that is a composite of several marks from the 20 Point Marking Scale.

Classification is a complex matter, requiring skill and judgement on the part of markers, and no brief list can hope to capture all the considerations that may come into play. There is no requirement that a piece of work would have to meet every one of the specified criteria in order to obtain a mark in the relevant class. Equally, when work displays characteristics from more than one class, a judgement must be made of the overall quality. In some respects expectations differ between essays, oral contribution, presentations, applied tasks, and exam answers. Presentation, style, grammar and spelling are important aspects of the ability to communicate ideas with clarity.

For details of how the 20 Point Marking Scale works, including the descriptors, please see here: https://warwick.ac.uk/services/aro/dar/quality/categories/examinations/marking/ug2017/ 

 

History Specific Marking Descriptors

More detailed marking descriptors for history assignments can be found below. You will find the general descriptors for written work (essays, exams, dissertations etc.) and for seminar contribution where that is assessed. Tutors will provide specific marking criteria for other types of assessment where appropriate. Please contact your module convenor if you are unclear about how an assignment will be marked.

Please note: The descriptors below implicitly cover good academic practice and the avoidance of academic
misconduct.

Written Work (essays, exams, dissertations)

First Class (70+)

• Persuasive and direct answer to the question, establishing the wider significance of the issues concerned.
• Comprehensive coverage of the relevant material; accuracy in the details.
• A direct and coherent argument, well supported by relevant evidence.
• Critical analysis of relevant concepts, theoretical or historiographical perspectives or methodological issues.
• Fluent and engaging writing style; persuasive presentation and structuring of arguments.
• Work which, in addition, displays evidence of creativity, originality, sophistication and freshness of arguments will be awarded marks of 75+.

Upper Second (60-69)

• Direct answer to the question, establishing the wider significance of the issues concerned.
• Adequate coverage of the relevant material, accuracy in the details.
• Skillful mobilisation of evidence in relation to the argument being presented.
• Narrative and description taking second place to analysis.
• Competent manipulation of relevant concepts, theoretical or historiographical perspectives or methodological issues.
• Fluent writing style; effective presentation and structuring of arguments.

Lower Second (50-59)

• Basically satisfactory answer to the question.
• Limited coverage of relevant material; some inaccuracy in the detail.
• Some attempt to mobilise evidence in relation to the argument being presented.
• Analysis taking second place to narrative and description.
• Limited understanding of relevant concepts, theoretical or historiographical perspectives or methodological issues.
• Adequate writing style, presentation and structuring of arguments.

Third (40–49)

• Barely satisfactory answer to the question.
• Inadequate coverage of relevant material; major inaccuracies in the detail.
• No understanding of relevant concepts, theoretical or historiographical perspectives or methodological issues.
• Poor presentation and structuring of arguments.

Fail (less than 40)
One or more of the following:

• Serious misunderstanding of the question.
• Failure to provide any answer to the question.
• Failure to show knowledge of relevant material.
• Seriously muddled presentation and structuring of arguments.

 

Seminar Contribution

What is being assessed:

• Oral Communication: clarity of expression; persuasiveness; respectfulness and inclusivity; asking useful/probing questions; contributions that extend the discussion.
• Knowledge and Understanding: evidence of preparation of core and/or wider reading; demonstrates comprehension of the readings and/or seminar questions
• Methodological Approaches: ability to discern, explain, or engage with historiographical or methodological issues raised by the readings and/or seminar questions
• Analysis: engagement with and evaluation of readings; focus on meaning rather than description; evidence and argument-driven responses to seminar questions

Class	Scale	Mark	Generic Descriptor (20 point scale)	Seminar Contribution Descriptor
First	Excellent 1st	100	Work of original and exceptional quality which in the examiners’ judgement merits special recognition by the award of the highest possible mark.	The student engages in both large and small group discussions [and, if applicable, online] with exceptionally clearly expressed oral contributions that demonstrate excellent understanding of the readings and the wider significance of the seminar questions. The student is able to critically engage with historiographical and methodological issues raised by the reading or seminar questions. The student provides well-evidenced and persuasive arguments in response to questions or source analysis, and makes sophisticated and original contributions to knowledge. The student asks questions, or makes contributions, that extend the discussion and may be of professional standard. In discussion with others, the student takes on a leadership role with regard to respectfulness and inclusivity. [If applicable, the student is able to critically reflect on, and critically evaluate, their seminar performance]
		94	Exceptional work of the highest quality, demonstrating excellent knowledge and understanding, analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills. At final-year level: work may achieve or be close to publishable standard.
	High 1st	88	Very high quality work demonstrating excellent knowledge and understanding, analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills. Work which may extend existing debates or interpretations.	The student engages in both large and small group discussions [and, if applicable, online] with very clearly expressed oral contributions that demonstrate excellent understanding of the readings and the wider significance of the seminar questions. The student is able to engage with historiographical and methodological issues raised by the reading or seminar questions. The student provides well-evidenced and persuasive arguments in response to questions or source analysis. The student asks questions, or makes contributions, that extend the discussion. In discussion with others, the student demonstrates a high level of respectfulness and inclusivity. [If applicable, the student is able to critically reflect on and accurately evaluate their seminar performance]
	Upper Mid 1st	82
	Lower Mid 1st	78
	Low 1st	74
Upper Second (2.1)	High 2.1	68	High quality work demonstrating good knowledge and understanding, analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills.	The student engages in both large and small group discussions [and, if applicable, online] with clearly expressed oral contributions that demonstrate understanding of the reading and the seminar questions. The student is able to identify, and may be able to explain, historiographical and/or methodological issues raised by the reading or seminar questions. The student provides evidenced arguments in response to questions or source analysis. The student may make contributions that extend the discussion. In discussion with others, the student demonstrates a good level of respectfulness and inclusivity. [If applicable, the student is able to reflect on and accurately evaluate their seminar performance]
	Mid 2.1	65
	Low 2.1	62
Lower Second	High 2.2	58	Competent work, demonstrating reasonable knowledge and understanding, some analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills.	The student may engage only in small group discussions [and, if applicable, online] with contributions that demonstrate understanding of the reading and the seminar questions. The quality of their oral expression may be limited. The student may be able to identify historiographical or methodological issues raised by the reading or seminar questions. The student provides answers in response to questions or source analysis that may be fact-based or descriptive rather than interpretive. In discussion with others, the student demonstrates a reasonable level of respectfulness and inclusivity. [If applicable, the student is able to accurately evaluate their seminar performance]
	Mid 2.2	55
	Low 2.2	52
Third	High 3rd	48	Work of limited quality, demonstrating some relevant knowledge and understanding.	The student may engage only partially in small group discussions [and, if applicable, online] with contributions that demonstrate some understanding of the reading or the seminar questions. The quality of their oral expression may lack coherence. The student provides answers in response to questions or source analysis that are fact-based or descriptive. In discussion with others, the student demonstrates limited respectfulness and inclusivity. [If applicable, the student is able to provide a limited evaluation of their seminar performance]
	Mid 3rd	45
	Low 3rd	42
Fail	High Fail (sub Honours)	38	Work does not meet standards required for the appropriate stage of an Honours degree. Evidence of study and demonstrates some knowledge and some basic understanding of relevant concepts and techniques, but subject to significant omissions and errors.	The student attends but does not engage in discussion [Online contributions, if applicable, are brief]. Contributions may demonstrate some understanding of the reading or the seminar questions. The student’s oral expression lacks coherence. Responses to questions may be inaccurate or incomplete. The student may be disrespectful of others. [If applicable, the student is unable to accurately evaluate their seminar performance]
	Fail	32	Work is significantly below the standard required for the appropriate stage of an Honours degree. Some evidence of study and some knowledge and evidence of understanding but subject to very serious omissions and errors.	The student attends but does not engage in discussion. [Online contributions, if applicable, are very brief, inaccurate, or incomplete.] Responses to questions, when prompted, are inaccurate or incomplete. The student may be disrespectful of others. [If applicable, the student is unable to accurately evaluate their seminar performance]
		25	Poor quality work well below the standards required for the appropriate stage of an Honours degree.	The student attends but does not engage in discussion or answer questions. [Online contributions, if applicable, are inaccurate or incomplete.] The student may be disrespectful of others. [If applicable, the student is unable to accurately evaluate their seminar performance]
	Low Fail	12
Zero	Zero	0	Work of no merit OR Absent, work not submitted, penalty in some misconduct cases	Absent without authorisation. [No contribution to online element, if applicable].